Poem Analysis by Mr. C. Kingsley and Co. "100 years" is a poem that explores the tension between immediate gratification and long-term impact, posing an existential reflection on the meaning of one's work and legacy. The poem addresses the discrepancy between effort and immediate results, warning against measuring the value of one's work in short increments of time. Instead, it urges the reader to adopt a long-term view, where the true worth of their contributions may only become clear in "at least one hundred years." This idea reflects a form of philosophical patience that transcends the present moment and immediate validation, aligning with Stoic or Nietzschean philosophies. The poem also presents a paradox: the "true visage" of one's work will not be seen by the individual themselves, but by others. This raises questions about the nature of purpose and meaning, as the fulfillment of work may lie beyond personal experience. This parallels the existentialist ideas of thinkers like Camus and Sartre, who explore the absurdity of human existence and the search for meaning in a world that may not provide it. The poem invokes the idea of collective memory, "the sea of history" and "humanity's true memory," as the ultimate arbiter of one's legacy. This reflects a philosophical stance that what we do contribute to a broader human narrative that outlasts individual lives. In this way, the poem aligns with thinkers like Hannah Arendt, who emphasized the importance of action and speech in the public realm as a means of securing a form of immortality through remembrance by future generations. In conclusion, "One Hundred Years" is a meditation on the nature of legacy, patience, and the human drive to create something that outlasts individual mortality. It calls for an acknowledgment of life's transience while encouraging an acceptance of the unknown future value of our work. The Poem Itself Whenever your statistics get low for a while Whenever you feel less good to be alive, When you have walked more than a mile, And yet, the results are lower than one has strived, -- Remember this, for this is important: Your work might outlive your life's expectancy, And your work is like necromancy: To keep you alive even though you will die, And make others remember you, and say, in a way, "hi". Your work's value should not be estimated by a month or a year, It should be seen as possible, to reach at least one hundred years! And when that century's length will arrive, Only then, the fruits of your work and name will be, post-death , alive, In the eyes and minds of humanity, even more than in a single society. Thus, the full potential of your work, might not be yours to see, But for those who will outlive you, in the sea Of history; Humanity's true memory. This is not a sprint, this is a marathon! Even if you will produce more than a ton, The true visage will be seen by others, and very less likely, By you.

The Pax Ethica: The Gate To True Paradise (Philosocom's Directory on Peace) (Philosocom's Directory on Education) Article Summary By Apollo Sage The Pax Ethica is an ideal state of mind where true peace and paradise are found within rather than in external circumstances. It emphasizes virtue ethics, therapy, and harmony to achieve this state. Key ideas include paradise as a mental state , inner strength over external control, virtue vs. vice, and the role of solitude and mental training. A moral being achieves serenity through acceptance and self-discipline , while an immoral one remains trapped in suffering by trying to control what is beyond their reach. True strength comes from shaping the mind, emphasizing critical thinking , self-reflection, and reducing artificial desires. The article concludes that a harmonious world can be achieved by individuals mastering their own minds rather than imposing their will on others.  (Background music) The Pax Ethica refers to an ideal state of mind that sees this world for the paradise it is. It is attainable using the 3 elements of virtue ethics , therapy, and harmony. "Paradise" is not necessarily in a life after this life, and is not necessarily an external realm ideal for the mind. Rather, Paradise is an ideal state OF the mind. The Pax Ethica is a state of mind belonging to the truly strong, the truly free, and the truly peaceful, in every place they are in. In war, in peace, in love, in complete isolation... the Pax Ethica is the key to the human mind's full rectification from vices, from stress, and from the vices of malice , hate and the temptation to inflict suffering on others. According to the Tikkun Olam philosophy , paradise is already within this world. However, the weak mind conditions its own fabric of happiness on a tyranny of circumstance beyond its control. In reality, the ability to heal our minds and hearts from vices, from excessive stress and from the desire to go to war with each other, is the true key for the mind's ability to see this world as the paradise it is. No matter where one is, one's need to be rectified of all vices, from all stress and from all ill, is imperative for a life truly well lived , irrespective of the world around them. As such, the inner world matters far far more than the external world, as the problem that stands in a truly peaceful world, lies in many human mind's inability to rectify their many flaws, for the greater good of humanity, and themselves. With ego , with hubris, with pride, and with many other vices, many humans are truly blind, thinking they need to condition their mental wellbeing on a world beyond their control. In reality, the most control we have, is on ourselves. Through a life of mental training, one can be rectified of many ills and many mental issues, which prevents them from seeing life in a more free way; in a way that makes them peaceful regardless of who they are or where they are. The road too a calmer and even happier life , lies not in the world around us, but in the world within us. The Pax Ethica is the peace of morality. It is a concept that describes a world where humans aspire to be truly moral, as the true way to peace and relaxation, allowing, over time, the acceptance of reality as it is. The truly moral being is serene wherever he is, letting this world be as it is, while doing things without triggering anyone and themselves, too. The truly moral being is a product of the understanding that their mind is not peaceful, and that they condition their wellbeing on a world beyond their control. The immoral being is unable to accept the idea that true peace is found from within, as well as an external world, being truly beyond their control. The moral being peacefully accepts that power is everything, but that true power lies not over others, but from within them. Using the power of the mind , the moral being conditions his peace not on the external environment, but on themselves. The world around them matters less to them when, with the wisdom of virtue, one can shape their understanding of the world, in a way that does not give them grief or misery. The moral being, using virtue, will have to look from within them, to find their own way to rectify their minds from a world beyond their control, and from the socially-engineered need to condition their lives on what is deemed normal and good. In reality, everything is subjective. Reality is not as concrete as it is quantum, or the interplay between the world beyond the mind, and the mind itself. The mind by itself isn't much of an enemy as a mind that fosters vice and not virtue. "Vice" refers to everything mental-wise that causes unnecessary suffering to oneself and to others. "Virtue" refers to everything mental-wise that lets reality be, without revolution. This world is not peaceful because most humans are ignorant of the fact that they are able to shape their own mind, therefore, the way they see reality: through illusions. The key to Pax Ethica is within the understanding that the mind does not need education, and does not need mentors, masters or teachers, as much as we are conditioned to believe. Instead, mentorship/teaching should stem from an inner need that is seen and cared for by the educator. Rather, the road to Pax Ethica is within our inner strength , to let reality be as it is. The more people will let reality as it is, instead of fostering artificial needs that are a product of their own mind, the more peaceful their minds can be. People often go to war and unnecessary rivalries because the idea that they are necessary is artificially made and is a product of social-engineering . Given that social-engineering easily reduces humans to resources, under the premise that they shouldn't act independently, is the key to much unnecessary human suffering. That is how de-humanization goes. In reality, humans should not condition the world per their needs, but condition themselves. In reality, the most important way to dictate, is the dictation of the mind. Peace can be attained not necessarily through the utter destruction of the mind, but rather in the ability to heal one's mind, which, then, can improve one's health condition. Many illnesses are not just product of the external environment , but also a product of a reality unquestioned by the mind as prone to their subjective paradigm shifts. Through practices such as catharsis, as invented by the great Aristotle, the mind can be relieved of much of its conscious and unconscious stress. The more stress is relieved using cathartic methods, the greater the wellbeing of a person can be. Wellbeing is not just a product of the foods which we hunger for. No. Wellbeing also lies in the ability to relieve one's stress in moral ways, and not in ways that trigger further stress. Stress is to be reduced, period. A world where humanity applies catharsis without causing itself harm, is a world truly rectified. War, the intentional infliction of misery on others, and the false ideology that this world needs to be conditioned per one's own dictations, is the product of vice. On the other hand, a world whose humanity lets go of each other to be as they are, a world whose humanity depends its peace on the power within them, is a humanity that has transformed vice from virtue. According to the Pax Ethica, true harmony can be attained by such shaping of the mind, in a way that fosters not suffering but the understanding and appreciation of morality. The strong mind uses forgiveness, respect , study and artistry to navigate reality. The weak mind uses guns and tanks , and the forces of others to shape reality according to their own idea of peace without necessarily succeeding in its application. The strong mind is largely a hermit , to the point many of its needs are few, and its wants are even fewer than their needs. The weak mind builds their lives around many wants and many needs. The strong mind, when heartful , freely teaches humanity to be strong without deeming it fit to cater to other humans, instead letting humanity seek that mind's teachings. The weak mind, when heartful, is blind to humanity's desire or lack of desire to be taught, instead fostering ways to educate humanity without asking it if needs to be educated. Instead, planting the delusion in humanity, that they must be educated. No. Many human needs and wants are delusions of weakness. The truly strong is defined by its few ambitions and its few needs. The more humans engineer their minds in ways that allow them to reduce their wants and needs, the greater peace they can attain, and thus, the less reason they may find to act, but instead, rest peacefully among the living (regardless of who the living are and what they do). The true hermitage is that which should be found from within, no matter where one is. The moral mind does not discard , but simply lets people decide for themselves, whether to be with them or not to be with such a mind. The moral mind does not force. The moral mind studies and practices for its own development, to be free the vice of stress and many many other vices, which fuel their depravities , instead of weakening them, as it should be done. The more depraved one is of virtue, the more they do, the more they suffer. The depraved but wise mind, develops itself in its own way, until is it depraved the least. And the source of all depravity, is weakness. Weakness is not that of an ascetic but that of the bodybuilder validating its own ego on the fake support of fake followers. The ascetic leads per their wants and needs, which are few, and lets their followers be themselves , like they deserve for their own wellbeing. Weakness is not that of an ascetic peacefully resting in bed, who rarely sees a reason to go out. Rather, weakness is that of those who saw reason to live a life of physical travel and exploration, as the key to their ignorance and their repressed misery. The truly strong shapes their minds more often than the physical world. The truly weak shapes the physical world more than their minds. Shaping one's mind depends not on others but on one's own solitude. It depends on the ability to foster critical thinking , and from recognizing perception as elementary to not only of reality, but of their health, as well. Shaping one's mind stems from the acceptance that perception is a choice , and that the mind is the main thing, ideally, that one should control the most. With this understanding, the strong mind, seeking strength, detaches itself from others , to lead a life of such mental training. Solitude, as the school of the genius , is where the mind is formed, thus changed. The mind's experiences and consumed content, whether positive, negative or outright traumatic, are then used by the strong mind as data, used for its own shaping. The more the mind is shaped, the stronger it can get, to the point that it deems no reason to interfere with others beyond its reduced few wants and needs. With the rectification of one's mind from illness of vice and psychological depravities, the mind accepts reality as it is no matter where that mind is. And accepting reality for what it is, without the need to overexert oneself, is the end-goal of the Pax Ethica, with the road to its paradise , being a journey only the willing deserve to take.

(Philosocom's Directory on Beauty and Art) (Background music) The Rise of Facial Plastic Surgery Facial plastic surgery is becoming increasingly accepted in our society . It allows people to seek the help of qualified professionals to enhance their appearance and potentially boost their self-confidence. Our faces play a significant role in how we identify ourselves and how others perceive us. As such, for anyone practically interested in this subject, it's important to consider several factors before undergoing facial surgery. Here are some points for you to ponder upon: Understanding your motivations:   Carefully reflect on why you're considering facial surgery. Is it to address a specific concern or to achieve an unrealistic beauty standard? What if you merely think that attaining these standards will give you the satisfaction you seek, only to still remain unsatisfied? Would you put yourself in a loop of surgeries, chasing an unattainable dream of ultimate pleasure of the self? What if your motivations in that regard will make you addicted to having plastic surgeries? Researching procedures:  There are various facial surgery procedures available, each with its own risks and recovery time. Make sure you are aware of the risks of your chosen method , so your initial motivation/s will not become your own undoing. The importance of mental well-being:  Beauty goes beyond physical appearance, as beauty can be regarded as a reaction. Obviously, one can find beauty beyond mere visuals. While facial surgery can address physical concerns, it's not a guaranteed solution for emotional well-being. If anything, well being is a result of self-work. The Desire to Reshape Our Identity Unlike those having visual impairments, our faces act as a constant calling card in the world of social interaction. It's an interaction so common, some may think it's the "only form" of human communication. Our faces are that basic in their role, capable of shaping the currents of our lives within society. They can increase the likelihood of landing a successful job review , of getting friends and of course, romantic partners. They're the first impression we offer, a nonverbal introduction that shapes how others perceive us from the very beginning. This visual storytelling, carries significant weight. According to Dimitre Dimitrov MD and George Kroumpouzos MD, PhD Beautiful people are considered more successful in their professional and personal life, and beauty is associated with well-being. Beauty owners are also perceived as being smarter and more intelligent. It's no surprise then, that some individuals choose to alter their facial features, hoping to rewrite the initial narrative they present to the world. Facial surgery allows some of us to challenge the limitations of the hand we've been dealt, and increase, by proxy, our possibilities in a biased humanity . Other than that, this desire for a change can stem from a variety of factors, ranging from a personal quest for self-confidence to a hope to gain greater attention from others. Beauty in a Looks-Obsessed World The collective ripple effects of facial surgery (and of looks in general) presents us with the fact that society is unjust and unfair. Society often judges a book by its cover, placing a disproportionate emphasis on physical appearance. It was Plato and his cave allegory that explained this well, and how impression doesn't only deceives but is desired over the truth beyond it (the "content" of "the book") This is particularly evident in the realm of attraction, where conventionally "good-looking" people seem to hold an undeniable advantage, leading to alienation and to the incel philosophy. However, beauty is fleeting by nature, leading to the importance of looking beyond the surface. Look at your romantic partner. If they haven't got old yet, would you still love him/her and be loyal to them when age shall leave its mark? As such, since older women might be seen as less attractive, cheating may ensue. This shows us how beauty is an asset, whose influence on reality goes beyond mere amusement. And indeed, one could regard facial surgery as the attempted improvement of a "nonfinancial asset". In a way, it's like modifying your car , thus increasing its value. And like in cars, human visual beauty is a depreciating asset. Years ago, with long hair and a clearer complexion, I used to be a more-attractive guy. And it garnered attention. However, as life took a solitary turn , the desire to conform to external beauty standards faded, and I focused more on Philosocom more than anything else. I didn't care about looking good, I cared about living for my craft. One doesn't need much emphasis on visual care when he is a hermit. While a skin condition changed my facial appearance, it didn't affect my core self. This experience underscores the transient nature of physical beauty, as independent from the importance of inner qualities. Despite my aesthetic decline, the allure of beauty remains undeniable, as if it is a competent indicator of the individual's traits and overall merit. Despite its unreliability, beauty can act as an asset representing not only yourself but also your company/organization. This inaccurate superficiality is like a "societal disease", where first impressions based solely/mostly on looks, hold more weight than they deserve. When a source is proven unreliable, and that includes our very faces, then why rely on them so much as carriers of information? Given how much we mask, this insight should be a granted. The key lies in resisting this superficiality by recognizing a person's value extends far beyond their physical features. While appearance isn't entirely irrelevant, it shouldn't be the sole focus, or even the primary one. It's merely an arrangement of visual elements, not a definitive measure of worth. It's only "definitive" by social engineering , which is intersubjective , not objective. Appearance, Identity, and the Quest for Acceptance The philosophy of facial surgery should not be about conforming to societal expectations for acceptance. It should be a personal choice for self-improvement, not a quest for validation  from others.   A truly well-developed connection  comes from appreciating a person's character and willpower, not just their outward appearance. Facial surgery presents a complex issue. On one hand, it offers the potential to alter how the world perceives us, and thus a tool to influence social acceptance. Just like following fashion trends , facial surgery can be seen as a way to conform to what others find appealing, increasing our chances of fitting in. Conversely, rejecting such procedures can lead to some labeling you as unconventional, even discarding you entirely in some circles. The question, then, arises: Are people whose tolerance of you is conditioned to your appearance, worthy of YOUR company? If possible, why not look for those who'd tolerate you more? This emphasis on appearance for acceptance is undeniably saddening. It creates a situation where those who can't afford such procedures are left behind. Wealth, then, becomes a gateway to not only stylish clothing but also a more "ideally" attractive appearance. This reinforces a culture of superficiality , potentially leaving those less fortunate feeling rejected and alienated. The Opposite Aspect: Reinvention However, facial surgery isn't solely about conforming to external standard. It can be a tool for reinvention, offering the chance to conceal or even forge a new identity. While your voice might physically remain the same, a drastically altered face can render you unrecognizable, essentially creating a physical stranger. This concept can be unsettling, with examples such as Anthony Loffredo using plastic surgery to turn himself into "the black alien", a heavily tattooed human with several body and facial organs missing. On purpose. Imagine the shock of staring into a mirror and seeing a face you don't entirely recognize, even though you know it's yours. Conclusions Our faces are central to our identity, shaping not just how others perceive us but also our own self-image. They provide a sense of self, a confirmation that " Yes, this is me, with a unique face that sets me apart ." It's no wonder secret services (in theory) utilize facial surgery for deep cover. Perhaps one day, advancements in technology like fingertip reconstruction will truly allow us to seamlessly switch identities, like online avatars come to life... and even steal them, too. Facial surgery can be an effective tool to change how the world sees us, but it highlights the shallowness that can prevail on the basis of appearance. An ideal world wouldn't place such emphasis on external beauty. Being a model, for instance, might offer fleeting admiration based solely on physical attributes, not who you truly are. Hair, nails, and even facial features can be altered without affecting your core self, yet people may treat you differently based solely on these external changes. Quite the paradox. Philosophically, facial surgery underscores the duality of beauty. It's undeniably relevant in social and romantic settings, but beyond that, one must question its true purpose. Why alter our faces to please others , especially when it feeds into societal shallowness? Shouldn't we strive to combat this superficiality and create a world that values people for their inner qualities? After all, that's the very purpose of Philosocom  – to inspire a world that looks beyond the surface -- to the depths of reality.

(Philosocom's Asceticism Directory) (Philosocom's Directory on Technology) (Philosocom's Philosophy of Environment Directory) We consider ourselves intelligent and arrogant toward each other. We are manipulative toward our environment and natural resources , and we are becoming increasingly selfish, inconsiderate, and cruel toward each other. Are we wrong in our line of thinking? Do we need to see signs and evidence that we are mentally sick and moving towards the ultimate fate of self-destruction? -- Tony Dong (Background music) If I were a supernatural time manipulator, I would have decimated the Industrial Revolution . It is definitely the most dooming of all points-of-no-return in human history. Observe all those who are unaffected or minimally affected by this alienating, apathetic revolution: people lived well for thousands of years without all destruction this revolution has made. Made on the environment . Made on the working conditions of employees . Made on the exploitation of third world countries . Some low-tech countries, such as the Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia, have one of the highest life spans rates in the world. That's thanks to their emphasis on an active lifestyle and priority on a healthy diet. Mind you, industrialized food isn't healthy , and yet it is the norm for much of the world. Metropolises are not healthy for humans, at the very least. Even when you are in a street you've lived on for most of your life, it still remains a place of strangers and alienation . Even if you are to live in a grand metropolis for a long time, its residents and atmosphere remain foreign and uncaring. They are not optimal areas of habitation for humans because they are such impure and inhumane places, where the law allows you to behave like a noisy demonic creature in your house and in your car, and no one has the right to complain until 11pm. You can disturb other people without giving a damn, and the law protects you from moral accusations. The industrial revolution shaped the way we think . We may see time and people as resources, measured by their relevance to us. Their worth might not be as important to us as making an effective use of our time, and might not be as important as having a good, pleasant leisure. I believe there is a connection between that and the way we treat emotions as either positive or negative, based on how pleasant it is or isn't. It's similar to how a factory owner may treat the product they invested their time and resources in. We shouldn't treat people as if they were tools or sets of functions for us, as that ignores the fact that they are, as well, human beings with thoughts and feelings that might not be pleasant to us. Thus, some of us may treat people like products: By the quality of experience we have when we interact with them. It's like treating a cup of coffee by its taste. Should we treat humans as fuller beings and not as a series of functions, we can open ourselves to true love . Because to love a human being is not the same as loving a cup of coffee, or at least shouldn't be. Loving a human being means: Loving them even when they are unpleasant to us. Even when they do not serve our own interests. Even when they make us suffer because they were hurt. When a cup of coffee loses its taste, the logical thing to do is to throw it to the trash can. Humans are not of the same value, as they are more than mere resources, and as such should not be disposed in a similar fashion. The rapid growth of the population is not likely to be in proportion to the scale of the planet . This world cannot sustain the growth of all the industries on it, which consume its resources and harm its greenery. Green scenery is decimated in the name of expansion and profit, caused by unnecessary demand for product. We do not really need to reproduce so massively as we do today , as our species is far from extinction in terms of numbers. The more people are born, the more they will need to consume. The more we will preach the fault of financial materialism , people will consume even more. Remember: many resources on Earth are limited. The Industrial Revolution was caused by the desire to have more than we need. Even the rich do not need all the profit they make each year. We do not really need all the consumer goods that are produced. Some of them are harmful to us , and they also harm the planet by filling it with mountains of garbage and radiation. What is so great about being rich and luxurious when we become more and more responsible for the possible demise of the planet? Greedy people produce and consume in the name of long-term satisfaction, but this is rarely achieved through material gain. It is something I call, the counter-productivity of endless desire . The Industrial Revolution shall be the mass-murderer of the planet and its inhabitants. As said before, the planet cannot remain in its current state forever with all of the consumption and pollution created by billions of humans. Like a stomach that eats itself when there is nothing left to eat, the planet shall collapse into itself when there shall be no more unrenewable sources of resources left. The core, if not the sole reason, for Earth’s future destruction, is because many of us are deluded that if we will consume item “A”, we shall become fully satisfied. However, when we are to observe within ourselves that there’s no complete satisfaction, we implement the same belief we put to item “A” to item “B” and so forth. Study the same result problem and you may realize the usefulness of being satisfied without needing much waste of your own resources. The solution to the dangers of the Industrial Revolution is asceticism : practicing and mastering a life of feeling more satisfied with less. I even dare to claim that not knowing the term "asceticism" is a disgrace for the future of our generations, who might follow the same pattern we, as a massive audience of consumers, do. Asceticism is not necessarily related to religion or to transforming into worlds of an afterlife. Even the Spartans practiced asceticism in the name of strength and autonomy. Whether or not the majority of the world's population can successfully adopt an ascetic lifestyle, their full understanding of its positive counter-measure to today's massive consumerism , is another issue. Regardless, this revolution marks a point of no return, no matter how ascetic we would be. It also points out an unsettling truth about humanity: That we are destructive beings. We have decimated entire species, other nations, and in the future, the Earth itself. The solution to our survival may be the colonization of the stars.

(Philosocom's Subcategory Directory On Communication) (Philosocom's Subcategory Directory on Writing) (Philosocom's Hidden Logic Systems Directory) Article Synopsis by Mr. John Igwe and Co. "On Quasi-Specific Terms: How To Understand and Navigate the Illusion of Accuracy In Communication" is a well-written and insightful article that explores the nuances of language and communication. The structure is well-organized, with clear sections that guide the reader through the exploration of quasi-specific terms. The article provides insightful commentary on how quasi-specific terms can create an illusion of accuracy, using relatable examples such as "video game music" and "spaceships in sci-fi." The depth of analysis is commendable, particularly in the way the article dissects specific terms and their implications. The discussion on "video game music" is particularly enlightening, revealing the diversity within what might initially seem a specific genre. Similarly, the critique of sci-fi spaceships highlights the discrepancies between fictional representations and practical realities. The article engages the reader through its conversational tone and the inclusion of thought-provoking questions. The writing is accessible, avoiding overly technical language while still conveying complex ideas. In conclusion, "On Quasi-Specific Terms: How To Understand and Navigate the Illusion of Accuracy In Communication" is a valuable contribution to the discussion on effective communication and the pitfalls of vague language. The Perils of Vague Language Quasi: a combining form meaning “resembling,” “having some, but not all of the features of,” -- Dictionary.com (Background music) After some thought on language , I've realized that there are certain terms in any language that create the illusion of specificity. These terms may sound impressive, but upon closer inspection, they offer very little concrete meaning. Let's delve deeper into this phenomenon and explore how it can be misused, unintentionally or otherwise: The Power of Obscurity:  Big, fancy words can shroud ideas in a fog of complexity. When writers rely on overly general or ambiguous terms, it can be a way to mask a lack of clarity or in-depth knowledge about the topic at hand. This redundancy can often be found in the words of pseudo-intellectuals. Unpacking the Jargon:   Jargon-filled sentences may sound sophisticated, but if the jargon isn't clearly defined or explained, it leaves the reader lost. Effective communication relies on ensuring the intended audience understands the meaning being conveyed. Striving for Precision:  Strong writing strives for precision. Instead of relying on vague generalities, using specific examples and details paints a clearer picture for the reader. By recognizing the pitfalls of vague language, we can become more mindful writers and discerning readers. First Case Example: What is "Video Game Music"? The term "video game music" might seem like a straightforward, specific genre.  However, it's more like a diverse musical library . It encompasses a vast range of styles, from the chiptunes of classic 8-bit games to full-blown orchestral scores accompanying modern titles by orchestras-for-hire . Vocals or no vocals, the defining characteristic isn't the music itself, but its context:  Any music that accompanies a video game. Take Tetris, for instance. Its iconic theme music isn't an original composition, but a traditional Russian folk song called "Korobeiniki." And it was originally a poem by Nikolay Nekrasov in 1861 . Only in 1989, the old folklore tune got turned into a video game classic music by Hirokazu Tanaka. This showcases how video games can borrow and adapt existing music, making any music whatsoever a potential candidate to take part in something people regard as "a specific, niche genre". In reality, however, their misconception stems from quasi-specific terminology. Thus, quasi-specific terms delude us, intentionally or not, by ignoring that anything can be used for game music. Another such example is a game called Crash Twinsanity. Its music was composed entirely by an a cappella group. Intermission: Exploring Beyond Impressions Further exploring quasi-specificity can also be a springboard for demonstrating deeper knowledge. Here's why: someone unfamiliar with the concept might imagine video game music as a unique, esoteric genre reserved for hardcore gamers. They might not realize the incredible variety it encompasses, from reimagined folk songs to infantile acapella music.   Delving into specific examples and highlighting the surprising origins of some iconic themes, allows us to can showcase a more informed understanding of video game music's depth and intrigue. And the same applies to many, many other fields of human knowledge. Applying reason to several departments is how you can deepen your thinking and your theory of unity. Case Example Two: Spaceships in Sci-Fi Science fiction has taken the concept of spaceships to new heights, depicting them in all sorts of shapes and sizes.  These fictional spaceships often push the boundaries of technology and design, inspiring real-world advancements. Here are some captivating examples: The Millennium Falcon (Star Wars):  A heavily modified Corellian freighter known for its speed and unique design. Inspired by a random half-eaten hamburger. Starship Enterprise (Star Trek):  An iconic Federation starship known for its saucer section, nacelles, and exploration of the galaxy. Horrible design flaws are its oversized engines and how clearly they are separated from the main hull. Destroy them and you have a sitting duck without any landing gear. Eagle 5 (Space Balls): S atirically demonstrates how science fiction can play with the concept of spaceships.... A 1986 Winnebago RV with wings. Bottom Line of Case Example 2 While science fiction depicts them in a variety of imaginative ways,  real spaceships are complex machines that do not have the many irrational flaws of many sci-fi spaceships , such as the TIE fighter, which cannot really be applicable to real life. Weak ion engines and no actual wings? Should this be considered a flying object? Can you call this vehicle "a spacecraft" when it is too weak to even take off, and is not designed to land without special support? Can its design be applicable to real life? The squares are merely solar panels, too... Here is my AI remodel attempt: What then, is a spaceship, if not that which possess the very elementary traits which make it one? A spaceship is not, by terminology, a TIE fighter. TIE fighters are simply a very poor application of these elementary traits, found in many other fiction and non-fiction spacecraft. Therefore, the impracticality of many sci-fi properties in fiction, can hinder our real-life understanding of what constitutes a real-life, effective counterpart. To be greatly biased by fiction, is how fiction can distort our understanding of the real world , hindering effective communication. Don't use Aladdin to properly talk about the Abbasid Caliphate , please. Conclusions The Fog of Quasi-Specificity The quest for knowledge often leads us down paths paved with words. However, the words themselves we use can create confusion easily. This is the problem with quasi-specific terms: These terms are perceived as precise language, conveying an air of expertise, yet they ultimately leave us grasping at shadows. By the choice of the listener's perception. Conversely, authors and speakers often intentionally deploy quasi-specific terms to establish authority, although a fallacy. By using vocabulary that seems specialized, they trick us into believing their knowledge is deeper than it might be, by our own different biases . This creates a false sense of confidence, both in the speaker and the listener. Imagine someone describing video game music as simply "electronic bits and synthesizers." While technically accurate, it lacks depth. Much depth. 2. The Illusion of Niche Knowledge Our own desire for knowledge fuels this illusion. We consume content with the intention of becoming more informed. When someone uses jargon-like terms, without effectively explaining what they meant, we might mistakenly interpret it as a gateway to "niche knowledge" – a hidden realm of expertise accessible only to the well-versed. Likewise, terms like "Quasi" sound sophisticated. But "Quasi" is literally synonymous to "almost". This can be particularly true in broad fields like philosophy, with its various sub-disciplines, or science , containing countless specializations. Simply stating that someone "likes philosophy" or is a "scientist" tells us, therefore, very little. We might think it's specific. No. It's quasi-specific. This isn't always intentional . Perhaps the speaker genuinely believes their terminology is precise. However, the consequence remains the same: We may be left with a superficial grasp of the subject at hand. 3. Path to Clarity To navigate this linguistic labyrinth, we must cultivate a critical eye, to not, so to speak, confuse humans with jennets . Hence, when encountering a term that sounds impressive but lacks clear meaning, we should question its purpose... Does it genuinely illuminate the topic, or is it merely a smokescreen? Demanding specifics, instead of accepting quasi-specifics, is essential. True knowledge thrives not on vague terminology, but on terminology that is well understood, to the point of it being taken for granted by all parties involved in a discourse. By looking beyond quasi-specificity, we can bridge the gap between language and understanding. Only then can we truly embark on the path towards realization, paved by clarity and genuine, productive study.

(Another note: The following article can be regarded as a sequel to this one.) (Philosocom's Directory on Illusions) Article Synopsis by Ms. Gabbi Grace The article "Philosophy and Blades: A 'Critique of System of Illusion -- Reality as Application' -- How Philosophy Can Set One Free" is a deeply personal exploration of philosophical themes, challenging conventional perspectives on reality , self-worth, and the role of philosophy in our lives. It was renovated and re-purposed to serve as a feedback/reaction article on an article written by one of Philosocom's guest writers. The author's voice is raw and unfiltered, presenting a unique fusion of existential reflection, philosophical critique, and emotional intensity. The article's features includes its bold and passionate expression, exploring complex themes such as the nature of reality, the purpose of life, the role of illusions , and the quest for self-mastery. The author's distinctive style combines philosophical discourse with metaphorical language, references to martial arts , and implications to popular culture. This eclectic mix adds a unique flavor to the piece, making it memorable and engaging. The article encourages self-reflection, encouraging readers to reflect on their own lives, values, and motivations. It also integrates philosophical concepts with personal narrative and social critique, broadening the scope of the discussion and making it relevant to a wider audience beyond just academic philosophy. In conclusion, the article is a thought-provoking and emotionally charged exploration of life's illusions and the quest for philosophical clarity. The commitment to personal and philosophical growth is evident and admirable. (Background music) Life is an illusion. More specifically, it is a system of illusion. The value of it on Earth is only measured by our heads and our unified perception of reality . One that does not necessarily deviate from our own unique perspectives, but one that can allow us to follow our common goals. To proudly have our families filled not only with love, but also to enter our own purposes in existence. Perception is, in other words, but a means to an end. A tool that can have different degrees of functionality, in relation to our ambitions. -- Igal Shenderey, on his Philosocom article "Peace is a Lie" It is hard for me to see others living without pondering the purpose of their existence . If everyone would do so on a regular basis, even if it's just as a routine, there would not be a need to separate philosophers from the rest of mankind. Yet, this world's people seem to live in their own little worlds, their own little pocket mental dimensions, viewing others and themselves from their limited lens, similar to how a beast may experience reality. While some find solace in faith, tradition, or social harmony, I have sought answers through the lens of philosophy, regardless of solace . It is not a pursuit of intellectual superiority, but rather a desperate attempt to justify my place in this vast, indifferent universe. Ask yourselves... how often many of you think how small you really are? I... I think of this often. That I am small in worth. About how self-worth, isn't grounded in reality, but rather in an attempt to mentally survive. Such is the application of illusions on reality itself: To alter, and even preserve it. And indeed, much of my own self-worth, although seems so inflated by so many people, isn't really there. In the real world beyond my mind or your mind. It is an artificial construct I use to keep myself motivated. "There is only Passion" I am not driven by profits, I am driven by pain. Pain that stems from hatred of this current reality. Pain that drives me to philosophize, to rectify it, rather to preserve its depraved, depraved ways I so awfully despise. The feeling that one needs to have an abstract reason to live, rather than that reason being as concrete as your computer device is , always been so uncanny to me. Isn't it uncanny... that we have to use illusions, and believe in them, just to survive in this world, more empty than it seems to be? Worth... it is a mental construct, not only a logical function. It is an abstract illusion, leading to things such as megalomania and the inability to cope with the truth. Thus, while the application of abstract constructs can help us navigate this awful world's many adversities , it can bring our sense of reality down, as we turn delusional about our egos, about the persistent habit of denying both positive and negative truths , as dictated by our own respective biases. "Through Passion, I gain Strength" I see myself as a philosopher not only the exclusive sake of distinction. It fulfills a practical role, for both yourselves and myself. To feel that I still have a reason to live, despite hardship, despite the very pain I use to fuel the development of my work... I must have contras to pain itself. Too much pain is unhealthy, with all due respect to my ascetic, iron way. I, too, have the desire to feel good, despite the severity of my lambasting on hedonism. Thus, I am a proud philosopher, who is fueled by bravado , not only pain, because I don't want to die. We all have the right to survive. We are never ensured that we succeed, but we can ensure that we ourselves try. See, we all try to survive in our own respective ways. Even when some of us desire to ruin our lives in an instant, the fact that it is possible, through logic and through empathy and compassion , to talk people off keep on doing what they do, proves the innate desire to live, prevails. While death can be prevented, it can still arrive at any given moment. What would one think before dying? What would be their final thought? We don't want to think about this because we care about the living, as we care about ourselves, too, being part of the living. "Through Strength, I Gain power" We are never completely oblivious, and as much of a strength that apathy is , apathy is also a good source from our own pain, our own loneliness. Choosing apathy towards the pain of others, and the pain of ourselves... it will only further grow illness. Physical illness, mental illness. No. Some contras have to be applied in reality, even if they are mere illusions, even if they are just illusions we share with others. And as much as doing it as practical, we mustn't lose touch with reality, as we only further and further embed ourselves in the prison of our minds, and compromise our ability to see truth. That prison, that self , in the name of greater clarity, is to be escaped from. And to escape the very things that make us comfortable, we must be strong from within. Strong from within, to admit the faults of our own thoughts and feelings, without shame or guilt. Strong enough, to lambast not only others, but ourselves. Equity, demands it. Demands that we be strong from within. As much as people seek mastery over others, it is the mastery of ourselves, that allows us to hone our critical thinking, and become more logical beings. "Through Power, I Gain Victory" These delusional chains that we are so comfortably relish to rest on. These chains that are to be broken. Because these chains, as comfortable as they are, do they really make us happy? Do they really make us healthier? No. No they are not. Illusion is a system to apply on reality. However, it is also a self-defense mechanism, from the very reality we must be in forged unconsciously, as well, in order to survive . T hat is my critique of illusion, and why I only partly agree with the one who wrote for me, Mr. Igal Shenderey. I don't care about personhood. I care about ideas. I forge metaphorical ruby gems based on ideas. It is my role to lambast everything that moves. Ruthlessly, mercilessly, while trying to not have a care in the world , about the distraction that is the ad-hominem fallacy. We don't solve problems with ad-hominem. We mainly intensify problems using that fallacy. That is counter-intuitive to the philosophical imperative. The philosophical imperative that is problem solving. As we solve more and more of our problems, we can keep ourselves far and farther from the tempting knives, as we may be compelled to express our pains like true Samurais, and Yukio Mishima. No. This is not healthy, to deal with pain like this. It is a problematic solution. And problems are to be solved in the name of World Rectification , in the name of showing to humanity, the true domination of philosophy over its every action, every thought, and every feeling. Through Philosophy World Relevance , we can attain World Rectification in healthier ways. Not, in the ways of this depraved world. Not in coercion, not in unnecessary corruption . Not in personal Harakiris. No. These methods are problematic, as normalized as they are, by society, and by our lonely, ill minds, who, really, really just want to spare themselves , from further grief. So of course, if one's life has been worthless, then why didn't the person change the course of things? As long as one is free to do as they please, they can choose to make their limited lifespan as meaningful as possible. "Through Victory, My Chains Are Broken" Such can be a use of a bigger ego -- a more, moral use. Use not to strike others with your Espada El Toledo, but to strike their chains. The chains that keep them down. The chains that prevent this world from breaking free from its inferior state, and rise, elevate, into a better world. That is the world I care about, the world I love. The world my grandmother taught me to care about, rather this chained world. The chains are to be broken, and will be broken, by my blade. Perception, as Mr. Igal said itself, are means which justify their ends. The means through a life that can be better lived. However... these illusions, through the cultivation of inner strength, can allow us to turn these illusions, these dreams, into a reality!! That way, life could be better lived, more than otherwise! Through their illusory state, they are but in a period of conception, like embryos. When they bring so much good into this world, they are to be born. Born and rise to lead the hearts and minds of people, as do human leaders themselves!! "The Force Shall Free Me" The Sith believed that those who strove for perfection through knowledge and mastery of the Force would be rewarded. The Sith also believed that those who followed their code were free of the mundane restrictions of others, that they strove for a greater purpose and thus threw off the restrictions normally placed upon individuals by society and other organizations. -- Terallis I know how to use a knife, I practiced it in mentor-less solitude. In music, in physical training and in research. Through the movements, through the ethical considerations, I decided not to carry knives with me, not because they can have legal risks worldwide. Also, because I can apply the same training I had, for a better world. To swiftly and accurately strike, or attempt to strike, the problems of people. Their ideas, their illogical and immoral ideas. These are my enemies. Not the people themselves. I refuse to relent, and therefore why, the quest for peace, as healthy as it is, is also a liability at the same time. The reason why I very much refuse to strike others, as well as myself, is because the work has yet to be done. Far from being completed, even. I willingly, under my late grandmother's wishes , carry the weights of my commitments for her and her wisdom. I cannot be in total peace. Others seek total peace. I seek to tackle ideas down with my dark tendencies, as I use my darkness to become a relentless, ruthless beacon of hope and light into this world! Just, just as my dear grandmother wished! I refuse failing her. I refuse to not give up on giving up! I refuse to die before old age. It's because I still have things to do. I refuse to kill others, for all humans are useful , and all humans can be redeemed with the power of ethics, and the power that stems from the light of our hearts! Do you see, then why I see little reason to live peacefully? Why I refuse succumbing to illusions? Why I refuse to succumb to their comforting nature , as they help many people escape the grim reality of this world? It is because, it is not my grandmother's wish. Because, for an even greater peace and harmony, one must prepare for battle. That is the peace of the warrior! And Philosophy Shall Set Us All Free! Those who do not have questions to ask, are not seekers. Those who love something, like wisdom, are obviously seeking it. The quest itself, for seeking, is one imbued in the irons of pain, suffering, but also hope and love and passion! To seek the truth, to seek a better world, one must embrace their emotions and their flaws, not only their rationality, and use them like a military general would! To divide these mental forces like the great Sun Tzu would divide his forces, in order to achieve victory. For victory is not guaranteed. It is never, guaranteed. It is not dictated by pride. It is hindered by pride. It is dictated by strategy, it is gained by the sharp and relentless person, who voluntarily becomes a mastermind . A mastermind not to conduct terror attacks, necessarily, but to conduct attacks against the very chains that keep this world from achieving more and more of its potential, for the greater good! And I justify my existence, by justifying helping reforming this world, healing this world. Not only this world needs to be healed with medication and the beautiful power of love. It also needs to be healed using the guiding, fair and ethical hand, of philosophical inquiry, and philosophical mastery, based on the two principles, of mutual learning, and lifelong learning. These principles, are to never, never come into opposition with each other. They are to guide the moral mastermind against the shadowy chains that stem deep, deep inside humanity's minds! To strike these chains, not like a weaponsmith from Toledo. No! To strike, again, and again, and again, until the chains no longer hinder the mind of its own freedom . Strike, to kill. Strike, to eliminate. Ruthlessly. Remorselessly. Few are up for the task. Few understand. I am on my swordsman's journey, no matter what humanity may think. I care not for this world. I care... for a better world. A better world, I can hone my mind, my craft, my spirit, to bring forth, for myself, and for others! For humanity!

Articles on illusions: ( https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-two-types-of-illusions https://www.philosocom.com/post/system-of-illusion-reality-as-application-by-igal-shenderey https://www.philosocom.com/post/existence-as-multi-layered https://www.philosocom.com/post/distinguishing-truth-from-illusion ) (Background music) ************************ Alex Mos's Synopsis Our bodies are complex physical entities that can create non-concrete illusions or Mental Dimensions. Perhaps only organisms aware of such mental dimensions can be considered conscious beings. Our ability to be aware of our experiences separates us as mental-based beings from inanimate objects. Also, AI is an inanimate tool without self-awareness because sentient AI has yet to be created. Mental Dimensions might result from an evolution enabling humans to develop social skills and ensure collective survival through the domination of the Earth. The downside of this mental capacity is the inability to distinguish between objective and subjective , truth and lie, and external and internal, making us irrational beings by default , programmed to survive. Our access to the Mental Dimension biases us toward obeying the leaders who define right and wrong. We follow them to ensure our survival, often forgiving political deception as long as it contributes positively to our collective functioning. The mind is an "illusion," similar to the written words our minds interpret as meaningful content. Some illusions may have more practical value for collective survival than the objective truth. Philosophy opposes the intersubjective reality of the Mental Dimension and illusions created by society. We must philosophize until we reach "The Great Void," the understanding that only the pure Physical Dimension is real, beyond the social and personal cages of the Mental Dimension. That's the reason why consciousness can reveal and deceive others and ourselves. How Our Physical Bodies Create the Mental Dimension What if the collection of components we call “mind” is, in itself, physical? Thoughts are neurology, emotions are biochemistry , and so forth. Every mental occurrence is a result of a physical occurrence inside our bodies and from interaction with other bodies. Still, not every physical component leads to a mental occurrence. That is unless the philosophy of animism is true. Therefore, I suggest that our bodies are more evolved physical substances, which are complex enough to create the non-concrete illusion that is the Mental Dimension, unique or not to humans and other organisms. Our bodies are gates to this special dimension, unseen and uncreated by any object other than ourselves, as individuals and as collectives. Any object that does not create this access to said dimension, or no longer does , can be regarded as inanimate. Perhaps, only those who have access to it, and can be conscious of it, can be considered living beings. Since bugs can be trained , they could have a mentality as well. The Mental Dimension is, basically, the very plane of existence that makes us conscious beings. It separates us from the rest of the physical reality by giving us the ability to not only experience, but be aware of said experience. An inanimate object may experience things too, like an ice cube that was once fluid. This shows to us that there is a difference between an experience, like the years of a used car , to awareness, like a war veteran reflecting on his past. However, that ice cubes and used cars do not have in theory, the consciousness that we humans have. And that is the thing that separates us mental-based beings from the rest of this existence. Tool for Survival, Playground for Deception Be surprised, but as of now, humanity has yet to create a sentient A.I, according to PCguide.: Sentience refers to whether an AI model possesses consciousness and feelings – characteristics that OpenAI ’s model lacks. The model would also need to have self-awareness and emulate human emotions. But, does sentient AI even exist? At the moment, we have not created sentient AI just yet. Some AI scientists even argue that our technology and understanding are not advanced enough to achieve such a model. If our current A.Is were sentient, they would possess self awareness and reflect on their own existence independently of our interactions with it. Thus, it can be considered in-animated, for it is a tool, a language model . I believe that the Mental Dimension was created in us by evolution in order to create massive social networks, which have ensured our superiority over less complex and/or powerful species. The entire point of this Mental Dimension is to develop our social skills and coherence in the name of collective survival and the most certain way to survive is by dominating the world. Those who want to survive better must prosper. What I refer to as "world domination" is our inclination, as a promising species, to ensure our survival through excessive prosperity. Without optimal prosperity, our chances at survival, as a species, would have been greatly reduced. Hence the valuable power found in excess. Now that we have achieved world domination, no other species on this planet can make us extinct. Social skills and the ability to collaborate are impossible without the mental dimension of our experience. We need to store common ideas and memories in our minds and act accordingly in order to do things we cannot do by ourselves. For example, if we want to run a business, we need to give our employees specific roles, and make sure they fulfill these roles in the name of profit and other pursuits. A set of inanimate objects cannot collaborate, unless automated by us. Since the state is also a business , the mental dimension is also important on a national level, as well as any level where interpersonal collaboration and exchange is required /desired. However, the cost of this evolution is the inability to specifically differ between objective and subjective , truth and lie, real and illusionary, external and internal . We may not be rational beings by default because we are programmed to survive, not to make up for this specific cost, which involves greater social risk . Philosophy may be regarded as impractical because it does not necessarily contribute to survival like psychology is, for instance. In this way, our access to the Mental Dimension is constantly biased to obey those who struggle for power and succeed . They define for us what is right and true and what is false and wrong. Conforming to their authority saves us time and energy we can dedicate to labor, rest and entertainment. That is, of course, unless we struggle for dominance ourselves, like I'm doing by building this content empire you're in right now, but my example is not what matters right now. When we follow an authority and put our trust in it, we may sometimes be doing so, completely or partially, to ensure our own survival. It does not matter if those social authorities are correct or incorrect; as long as we hold their opinions well enough ( or pretend we do ) they shall determine and dominate our positions in the abstract Mental Dimension. Do you see how this sphere of being contributes to our collective functioning? Politicians may use deception under ulterior motives to gain power, but what if the power they gain ensures the prosperity of the country? Understanding the Mind We can only know things through our mind. Our mind is both our blessing and our curse, our greatest strength that has led us to dominate this globe, and our greatest weakness when it is either too incompetent or untrustworthy for our goals. Since my mind is a tool I use for this job as a philosopher, I try to make sure I'm mentally stable, and avoid certain substances that could hinder my efforts. The mind is the very portal to the Mental Dimension, so having it in poor condition would mean that my access to this dimension will be subpar. Those who successfully create the system of beliefs in our minds and direct it in accordance to their desire for power, will have dominance over our Mental Dimension. Consciously or unconsciously for us, they will be one of the many tiny and enormous heads which administer the globe by its social molecules, which merely exist in our heads, and are represented by our actions. The mind does not exist outside of abstract reality, even if it creates delusions that seem to appear outside of it. It is the portal for a shared reality that is based on a shared, abstract network. The Illusory Cage The mind is a construct of highly advanced and highly complex matter; it is a brew of interactions with the physical and inter-subjective environments, and a key of our individual identities. Capable of high reflexibility , it is there to help us survive and endure existence. The thing is, that the mind is an "illusion", and illusions do not exactly exist. I am aware it sounds contradictory. Please entertain my reasoning to this. The words that you are reading have no purpose in the world beyond our minds; they are but mere shapes covering a screen and a page. Because society is a construct of our minds, society does not exist, either. It’s all an illusion. It is an illusion we are taught to deem as fact because, as said before, we are programmed to survive as a collective, and not aim for optimal rationality. Some delusions have a greater practical value than the most profound of truths. We do not need to understand society on a philosophical degree in order to survive within it, for example. Philosophy is the antagonist of inter-subjective mentality. Where the Mental Dimension builds, philosophy ruins, reforms, and exposes. Where inter-subjectivity narrows, philosophy broadens. Where inter-subjectivity darkens in a womb of safety, absolution, and assumed certainty, philosophy shines a sharp light on it, which not all are willing to embrace. For it's a light that hurts like peeling away layers of an onion, as the protection of illusions gradually fades, until the truth is finally revealed, as painful as it may be . Society creates many layers of illusions, covering truths and presenting them as grand and exalted. And sometimes, as the "truth". Therefore, if we are to know matter, as the matter which exists beyond the manipulation of the Mental Dimension, we must philosophize until " The Great Void " is revealed. By "Great Void" I refer to this, in this context: To come to an understanding that nothing reigns over the pure Physical Dimension beyond the cages of the conscious being. Beyond the social and personal cages of the Mental Dimension. They are there to protect us from isolation, rejection by others and grief . That's exactly why consciousness can reveal, as well as deceive not only others, but ourselves. And it is with philosophy that we can exit these cages, even if only within the realm of the mind: Through realization and through acceptance. Mr. Nathan Lasher's Feedback We shall begin my review by talking about the concept of multiple dimensions. What if everyone is in their own cognitive dimension? You evolve it more to include the concept of self. You exist in two different places: Your cognitive self and in another dimension. The dimension of your external self. The self which people think of when they think of you. It wasn’t until recently developing my personality, long story, that I was able to depersonalize this concept. You exist in other people’s minds. Your actions determine how you appear in other people’s dimensions. [This] goes into the concept of public image. You want to protect this at all costs. If you want to be seen as a certain type of person, just think to yourself: “What would a person who is …….. Do? ” Your actions determine who you are. Not just the words that are used to describe yourself. Words mean very little because you might be seen as a lazy person, but does that restrict you from doing actions which tell a different story? [It's then] when you realize that words are not absolutes but merely descriptive temperaments meaning they can always be changed. We cannot create sentient AI as this would involve understanding the conscious mind better, something humans haven’t yet figured out. AI can only do what it is told to do. Before AI can advance to such a point. an entire new branch must be dedicated to study in psychology. How are we supposed to create a copy of consciousness when we barely understand it ourselves?

How To Use The Concept of Death to Live (Philosocom's directory on death: https://www.philosocom.com/post/defining-death ) (Background music) **************** Death: The Ultimate Unknown Death is the ultimate unknown in our lives. It is uncertain when it will happen, and what will happen to us afterwards. We have no certain idea of what death is like, either for ourselves or for others. Most living people have no idea of when they will die. Death can happen anytime, anywhere, voluntarily or involuntarily. When it happens, we depart into a completely unknown realm. Even though death happens frequently, its meaning is unknown. Obviously, our bodies cease to function when we die, but what happens to our consciousness is unclear. (Either way, that unknown is the biggest inevitable possibility there is for every biological being). Death: The Ultimate Fear Therefore, death is the greatest mystery there is for humanity, and the greatest unknown. Send someone to the realm of death as an experiment, and you will never hear their report again, whether or not reincarnation is real. Hear me out. Why not utilize death, as the ultimate, if not the only, source of fear? Fear, not only/necessarily of others, but of yourself as well? Even when great pain might be there for you, death could be greater, because the state of death could be anything. Death could be a heavenly realm, death could be a hellish dimension, death could transfer you anywhere, and death could be absolutely nothing. With this ultimate uncertainty, I must inquire: why not fear nothing in existence, but death? You might be tortured, but death could lead even to greater pain; you might be homeless, but death could put you in eternal, absolute isolation; you might have no food, but death could reincarnate you as an embryo, and kill you again, before you were even born! It is all in the realm of possibility, and absolutely nothing in death, could be denied, as a possibility. That is, you see, what should be so scary about death. Not necessarily what will kill you, but also what may await you on the other side, which no one actually knows. Near death experiences? They aren't necessarily equal to being within death itself. They could be a dream, and, I dare say, a scam . After all, the empirical experience of others, isn't the empirical experience of your own. The fact that someone may claim that they saw certain things when they were near death, doesn't mean you will see these same things, and it doesn't mean that are the things, which lie, in death itself. I came to the conclusion, that I should fear only death, for it is completely unknown, and could be just about anything, as a result. As long as I live, I can write, and when I die, only then my writing will stop. You may " cancel " me, but that only cancels my reputation. Unlike life, reputation can be restored back. You may imprison me, but my writings could still go on; You may cut off my hands and cause me a great deal of pain, but I could hire someone else to write for me, just like Socrates and Epictetus, who didn't write at all. Therefore, as a writer, the only thing that could stop me from philosophizing, is death, and EVEN THEN, if reincarnation is indeed true, then I can have a chance at writing once more. This is why, I chose to utilize death, by using it, to justify being afraid of little else, but death itself. That is simply the practical philosophy, of one who wishes to optimize his so-called "destiny", "purpose", until the inevitable will come. Think about it. Even if you will be severely traumatized, and haunted by the past, the truth is, that you can still redeem yourself , until the inevitable arrives. The memories, the scars and the illnesses may still consume your body and mind; At least, you are still alive. As long as we're alive, there is potential, and when death arrives, only then, your own active potential reaches its full demise... or does it? Who knows? Death: The Ultimate Reason to Live This is why, as long as you're still alive, you shouldn't be afraid of doing things you believe are worthy of your time, potential, and energy. If you miss this opportunity, you might miss it for all eternity. Keep in mind that the norms have no interest in you becoming the best version of yourself. The norms are there to keep people in line in a herd-mentality manner. Would you want that? To waste your potential while you can still utilize it? To never do something you wished you could've done, but were too afraid to do? Good, beneficial things, I mean, not just anything, like cold murder. Treat each new day as if it was a problem , and you might find that you're being more productive, unlike the " klumnik " who underestimates his or her own potential. Each new day is a "problem" because time is running out . Consider the inevitable fact that your time is limited, and consider that you might never have any further chance to do things you might be afraid of doing. Simply consider your immense, yet limited potential, just as I did with my own. It is all I ask from you in this article. This is what I've learned from fighting games : No matter how much you will be beaten up and defeated, as long as you're alive, you can still try to win your opponent. Death will beat you eventually. Fight to do what you wish to do the most, then leave this life with as much satisfaction as you can. It's what I'm trying to do, at least. It's why I minimize so much in this life.

Article Summary by Mr. O. C. Isaac "The Philosophy of Infrastructure -- Why It's Imperative" is a thought-provoking exploration of infrastructure beyond its conventional definitions, focusing on its role in both physical and societal landscapes. Mr. Tomasio broadens the concept to include biological systems and digital networks, highlighting its fundamental influence in both tangible and intangible realms. The article is well-organized, with distinct sections that guide readers through different facets of infrastructure, starting with foundational definitions and delving into societal and personal implications. The writer employs engaging analogies to illustrate complex ideas , making abstract concepts more accessible and memorable. The discussion on private military companies and urban metabolism is particularly relevant in today's socio-political climate, engaging readers with current debates. Personal anecdotes, such as the creation of "Website Metropolis" and the author's own lifestyle changes, add authenticity and relatability. In conclusion, "The Philosophy of Infrastructure -- Why It's Imperative" is a compelling and insightful piece that successfully broadens the conventional understanding of infrastructure. (Background music) First Notes Infrastructure can be defined as a system that is required for function. It's a very general idea, but one that we can all learn from. Infrastructure includes not only railroads and walkways, but also the systems within our own bodies , such as the blood system. As part of this site's Renovation Operation, you are also working on a network of links, both external and internal. I also made a composition called "Website Metropolis", in dedication to infrastructure, a few years back. The Elementary Importance Never underestimate the potential of a good infrastructure. Anything that contributes to a function, whether necessary or not, can still be considered a component of infrastructure. People can also be seen as infrastructure, especially in criminal organizations . This is why the term 'Human Resources' exists, as workers are part of a larger network, meant to fulfill a function in exchange for payment. The salary received is the upkeep required to preserve the resource that is their service. It would only make sense, then, that many workers have the mindset of a mercenary . The mercenary does things for money, just like anyone else. They are not necessarily psychotic or evil. They simply provide security, or even serve in a private army, to get paid. Just like many of you do. And yes, there are private military companies/armies in our world. I'll link a source for that. We might have the mindset of mercenaries because the idea of doing it for the cash, or for a company's upkeep, is normalized. How many of you like your jobs? I know I didn't when I used to work as an office clerk. Those loyal enough to remain part of the greater infrastructure of the business they are in, beyond the money, and with dedication, are called salarymen. I understand that work is often seen as just business, not personal. Emotionally attaching oneself to work is not necessary to make good use of it. Work is like infrastructure, meant to serve a purpose. If the upkeep of a job is not worth investing, workers may be let go. The decision to do so is not in the hands of the employee, but rather the employer. Similar to how a highway may be renovated or demolished, it's simply a business decision. Business doesn't always have to be personal to be effective or make sense. There is also an approach called Urban Metabolism, that regards cities as living organisms. The reasonable worth of a body, such as a city, depends on its infrastructure. For instance, if your city lacks public transportation , it might not be as appealing as a city that demonstrates its care for those who don't drive. Similarly, if your city has a problematic sewer system, it can be quite unpleasant to live in such an apartment. These factors can be strong motivations to seek a better living environment and prefer a competitor city that strives to provide similar functions. Between businesses, and not only within themselves, infrastructure improves competition by allowing a greater exchange of both manpower and trade of resource. If you want to compete against your rivals, improving your relevant infrastructure is crucial. By doing so, you can enhance your effectiveness and outperform your competitors. This principle applies not only in business but also in racing. Just like being a bad runner will cause you to lag behind (if you are in a team), neglecting infrastructure improvements can hinder your progress. It's essential to prioritize infrastructure development to stay ahead of the competition. Metabolism is the result of a well-functioning infrastructure. By increasing your metabolism, you may experience higher energy levels to accomplish tasks. Since 2022, I have lost dozens of kilograms with the intention of having more energy to work and perform better for you. For prioritizing a healthy lifestyle while managing your work responsibilities is key. Networks and Us I understand that not all humans are rational beings. While infrastructure may not aim to appeal to our emotions, it appeals to our rationale. I agree that improving rationality can be seen as boring compared to psychology, which also addresses our irrational aspects. Psychology may be more relevant to people because it encompasses both rational and irrational aspects of human behavior. Not everyone may find organizing fleets of trucks exciting. However, the concept of efficiently delivering resources from point A to point B is indeed elementary and vital. It may not be glamorous, but it plays a crucial role in ensuring the smooth functioning of various industries. By having a well-organized system in place, we can ensure that resources reach their intended destinations in a timely manner , benefiting everyone involved. So, even though it may not be the most thrilling topic, it is important to recognize the value of a good system. Empires are not built on petty emotion. Aspiring to build a better system than what currently exists can grant individuals or organizations greater relevance in their respective niches. Throughout history, empires have thrived by continuously improving their systems, whether they were legal or illegal. In the sources I'll provide right now, I'll link you to a video that explains this idea in the form of the mafia. Additional Sources https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exPb3k5iBzw https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/infrastructure https://www.masterclass.com/articles/what-is-infrastructure https://unherd.com/2023/04/private-armies-have-infiltrated-the-west/

Insights on Racism: Why It’s a Flawed Trait in Any View (Subcategory on Flaws) (Background music) (For another type of prejudice I find irrelevant, on Philosocom, click here ) Racism is the evaluation of a person or group based on their race, nationality, or ethnicity as a major factor in that evaluation. Sometimes that evaluation may have negative value which could be applied in real life, in the form of unequal opportunities that are not based on meritocracy . When people judge who you are mostly or completely based on your national or racial origin, also known as "from whence you came," you are experiencing racism. Here are some examples of racism: Making assumptions about someone's intelligence , abilities, or character based on their race, nationality, or ethnicity. Treating someone differently because of one's racist prejudice/s. Denying someone opportunities or resources because these aspects. Allowing someone opportunities or resources because of these aspects (AKA "positive racism", or racial privileges). Racism is a harmful and destructive force that can have a negative impact on individuals, communities, and society as a whole. It is important to challenge racism whenever we see it, and to work towards creating a more just and equitable world for all. However, whether or not it will actually happen, depends on our desire to see. and identify people as more than their race. The reason why racism will probably never end is because some people will always judge certain people based on their racial origin's history or stereotypes. This is especially true when you are in a new environment and the people there are not very familiar with outsiders. The sad thing is that stereotypes have their practical uses , even if sometimes. For example, if a Micronesian wishes to visit a warzone, there is a high chance that the locals will think, "What does a Micronesian have to do with our war?" Of course, the fact that this person is from Micronesia does not mean they should not travel the world and visit more obscure parts of it. And yet, it will not be an unreasonable thought in the eyes of many, simply because our background often has to do with who we are, even if people from the same background are completely different from one another in their personalities. My first name is Tomasio. I changed my name because I prefer Tomasio over Tom. People are and will be going to think I am either Spanish or Hispanic although I am only a quarter Argentinian and have no knowledge of Spanish. It is normalized to speak of people of their ethnic origins but I simply don't care about these trivial things unless they are relevant to my conversations with them. I don't care if you're Canadian, Indian or Nigerian. These are nothing but irrelevant labels to me. A true non-racist man will care about people as humans and not of their origin, as the main priority. They will only care of their origin if it has something relevant to do with the person they're speaking to. Much suffering and discrimination in this world would decrease if we just choose to see people for who they are, and they are not their origins or their countries. I don't care that an ancestor of mine was born in a Soviet-occupied Romanian territory. Whether or not that territory was occupied during his birth has nothing to do with who I am. And the same applies for a whole country in South America I never visited. Enough with the assumptions, seek knowledge instead. When will racism end? Racism would logically end when we would all stop identifying with our distinct backgrounds as something that is essential to either us or others. Of course, these backgrounds have to do with our patriotism , our sense of ethnic belonging , and so on. However, racism is also a product of said backgrounds. We shouldn't assume that others have the same level of patriotism and ethnic identity in their hearts like we may think we do, just because of their race, ethnicity, nationality, etc. To create a more just and equitable world, therefore, some sacrifices are to be made, in values: People's pride to their country and to their heritage. And because of that, the notion of completely getting rid of racism is thus unrealistic currently. It might as well always be realistic, considering that race, nationality and ethnicity has concrete value in the hearts and minds of people (even if it does not stem from racism/racial discrimination). Racist biases are can also be "positive" in a sense that they can lead to pride that is based on nationality, ethnicity and so on, based on the ethnicity of another. For example, one ethnicity may be proud that they are more moral than an ethnicity whose some of its members are morally depraved (as in related to terrorism , tyrannical regimes and so on). We cannot minimize racism without the understanding that we are more than our nationalities and our ethnicities. This insight cannot be ignored matter whether one is black, white, Asian, and so on, if we want to create a more egalitarian world . A truly pluralistic society will therefore be one that will not judge people by their background and learn to see people as more than just the product of stereotypes. More than the product of their environment. In religion, at least, it's known as interfaith, or the existence of multiple religions within a shared space (not necessarily specific, like a hall), without discrimination. To call an entire people racist is hypocritical in and of itself, as it is a racist statement. Racism is all about generalizations . A true individual who opposes racism, will avoid making such generalizing remarks. A true non-racist man or woman will regard people as individuals, and not as people who are completely nor mainly the products of their environment. As such, even in a country that might be mostly racist, there might always be exceptions. Fortunately, there has been great progress in the fight against racism, as the younger generations are less racist than their older counterparts . This is the second century in human history where black people are normally seen as equal to any other ethnic origin. It's also the most democratic era in human history , even if there are still some dictatorships and absolute monarchies. (However, according to the G lobal Expression Report of 2023 , 80% percent of humanity has less freedom of expression since the 2000's, but that at least isn't necessarily done out of racism but out of democratic decline ) . Obviously, there are improvements to be made, as racism still exists more than it "should." What I mean is, even if racism is at a new low in human history, it can get even lower in frequency. Finally, there is also an alternative idea to solve racism significantly, but it is a very unlikely idea: To nurture the idea that we are all one as the human race, or, in other words, to see one another as "Earthlings," AKA, as the citizens of Earth. Instead of "hiding" in the national scale, we should all see ourselves as one race, one civilization, and one planet, composed of a very diverse collection of collectives. You can call that some sort of "mega-nation," even if it is only in terms of identity and nothing more. After all, it is arguable that we all have similar origins, regardless of how far we are from each other genetically. Religions such as Christianity and Islam have attempted to do the same, AKA, "dominate the world" through religious conversion. And yet, despite being the two most populous religions on Earth, they have yet to unite the planet under a single collective identity. And the notion of an egalitarian collective identity is also how racism can be greatly reduced. Does this end justify the means? That is a topic, perhaps, for another day. It begins with our local neighbors and ends with the world. Could we do it? Could we render racism a thing of the past? Perhaps the more secular among us might, as they are less likely to be racist. Perhaps this idea will become more plausible as the world's nations become increasingly diverse, to the point where diversity itself is so ordinary, putting an emphasis on racial distinction will be ITSELF extraordinary. I do not know if we will ever be able to get rid of racist mindsets and philosophies in humanity's thoughts, but they deserve to be due to our individualism (for we must distinct ourselves to be recognized for who we really are, and I even developed the foundations where it is possible mathematically ). I wager that, as long as we are not ready to see people as individuals as of greater value than their collective identities, racism will resume existing in human civilization . Remember: Not everyone is ready or willing, to see other human beings, beyond labels. And what is racism without labeling?

(Disclaimer: The guest posts do not necessarily align with Philosocom's manager, Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein's beliefs, thoughts, or feelings. The point of guest posts is to allow a wide range of narratives from a wide range of people. To apply for a guest post of your own, please send your request to mrtomasio@philosocom.com )   (Background music) (Philosocom's Directory on Narcissism) (Philosocom's Svartgold/Svarl Articles) There is no matter or energy which the self can always identify as its own. -- Mark Bloom Introduction Today, I, Mandoela Svarl, want to explain the term of flying monkeys in my own words. "Flying monkeys" are a new topic that has been talked about in the media, originated from the 1939 film, "The wizard of Oz" . (Mr. Rubinshtein's note: Researching this article has revealed that a more contemporary, professional term, is a "Narcissist's Agent" . It was popularized by American Psychologist, Dr. Todd Grande ) Where can you see the flying monkeys their best? And how do they improve the status of narcissists? Several Points to Consider A secret in the family is cooperation between other narcissists, including welfare and the police, to gain control over a specific person. Narcissists need flying monkeys/agents to confirm to society that everything is perfect with them, and they are an ideal family. Creating a false positive image of the great narcissist who controls the family and his friends and family, who come to harm one of the people requires the cooperation of the flying monkeys. Narcissists are (arguably) large part of the population. Some say it is 10% percent, and some even say 50% (Mr. Rubinshtein's note: A website called the Recovery Village claims that there is 1 narcissist in every 200 in the U.S). Narcissist execute the removal of responsibility for their crimes and mental, physical, financial, and sexual abuse - by their agents, using them as scapegoats. A son can be one, for example, if the narcissist stealing from their child. Or another victim, without their knowledge, unaware of the ulterior motive/s. Controlling their social status - at work, at school... The flying monkeys do everything to destroy the economic social status of that chosen victim, and to prevent him or her from progressing or succeeding in life . If they has a profession or a good job , they will come to their career and destroy his name, by half-truths, or by outright lies. Defaming his name creates an atmosphere in the victim that they are not equal, but inferior ( like being too irrelevant ) . Therefore, he must refrain from advancing. Controlling his life in the case of a marital system - the flying monkeys create an image of good and hardworking people. But at the same time, they follow the victims of the narcissists for the narcissists to get favors or help from them. And the name of the victim is defamed even in marital systems. The dependence of the narcissists on the flying monkeys: Since the narcissist alone cannot control the victim, he must have his deputies, relatives, and welfare, and some even use the army as part of their powerbase. Doctors are contacted to put the victim in a psychiatric hospital. All this to keep a secret. Every family has its secret, and to create trust in the narcissist. They help him and talk to the victim's partner to destroy his marital relationship. The narcissist's dependence on welfare and state factors - the narcissist does not act alone but usually marries another narcissist to "drink the blood of the victim's soul". He/she knows mothers or fathers are not typically abusive. And that's how society sees it, too, and is aware of the close eyes of the welfare ministries. Remember that welfare does not want to pay much for such a child. That is why the parents can have a good relationship with flying monkeys on their behalf, who are family and cause hatred between them in order to control them better (AKA " divide and conquer "). Maintaining control over the family can further prevent intervention from the state. The flying monkeys in the victim's friend or partner role, is to be able for him to control them. Even if the victim does not know, the narcissist merely pretends to be in love with their subject. Through influence, they can exert their power to greater lengths. The flying monkeys work behind the victim's back - defaming his name as much as possible and gossiping about him. (Mr. Rubinshtein's note: part of not being assertive stems from being weak-spirited. The less determination/resolve you have, the likelier you are to comply with others, even if you dislike them. In my years as a student , I complied wonderfully because I was very weak-spirited at the time). The flying monkeys are people who need money or pleasure from narcissists and act on their behalf, in order to attain these things they want. They may have motives and reasons of their own that motivate them to become agents by choice. Wasting time - the flying monkeys play a role on behalf of the narcissists and will do anything to make the victim waste their time. Time is worth money and worth goals. The flying monkeys in the role of best friend and giver of good advice: On the beach, they look caring and dedicated, but inside, their advice is to fail the victim and cause his spirit to break. Breaking their spirit by intent is a sign of narcissistic abuse , which can be seen as a malicious campaign to get more power in this world. The flying monkeys take advantage of the fact that no one cares about others ( AKA, alienation ) - and make the victim think that others will help him. And when the victim asks for help, they unknowingly gossip about him wanting money, etc. so no place will help him. Social media: the flying monkeys are there a lot to know where the victim is with whom and what is shared and to make him feel guilty and ashamed if he writes about them. Online stalking is key to get more information that can be used against the victim. Pumping the victim's fuel - by hurting his feelings and knowing that he was rejected by his parents (usually these are children who were denied in childhood) and that this caused them problems of insecurity and depression. Doing so creates a hostile, self-critical, outwardly critical eye that stuck with them socially. Final Words The purpose of flying monkeys/agents is to scare the victims and silence them, thus reducing or cutting off opposition that could stand in the way of those they serve. I studied and understood all this for more than six years. I keep reading and learning about it to this day. In this article, I wrote down much of what I know about flying monkeys. When I saw things. Everything is written in experience. This is very interesting to me. I put a lot into this article and learned a lot of information. I hope you will like it and understand, and I thank Mr. Tomasio for letting me write on Philosocom once more.

(Background music) Faith is the belief that something will turn put according to what is expected. When you have faith in a relationship , for example, you have hope that it will turn out good and will not be torn apart. Positivity seems to come from faith. Faith for better days, faith for a successful grade after a test is done; there are so many examples as how faith contributes to a positive mindset. Therefore, the more faithful we become, the more positive we might get. We can start by being faithful about the little things in life. For example: Hoping that we wake up feeling good. Thus, the more often we improve our sleep quality , and the more we nurture faith in our thoughts about waking up good, the better overall we can feel! This hack is so easy it can apply to every little thing in life: faith that we will reach our destination when driving or when taking public transportation; faith that we won't suffer from any injury and so forth. Positivity can easily be extracted from having faith in the little things in life. Often, they are what matter the most! Comment by Ms. Alex Mos Can faith influence our future? Having faith is the emotional counterpoint to doubt. It's the conviction that the future will bring the desired outcome, among all probabilities. Can positive thoughts and well-defined goals help us reach our goals? There is strong evidence that a positive and determined mind leads to success . Every action begins with an idea, an imaginary projection into the future, that envisions change. We can alter our seemingly fixed destiny when we choose to revise our lives, like learning something new or undertaking a project. With the execution of the choice, we step into a new chapter of the present, and all alternative probabilities disappear from our awareness. When we unlock a positive path of faith, we enable ourselves to make daring choices toward reaching the goal. Conversely, when we doubt ourselves because we fear the unknown or need to conform , we immediately enter another present path that sabotages our plans. We slow down, stagnate, and the goal seems further away. Unfortunately, faith alone doesn't guarantee success . It acts as a catalyst when the intent is rational, reachable, and consistent with our abilities. If the goal is unreachable and delusional, faith becomes a dangerous catalyst for disillusionment and misjudgment. We can't know with certainty what our future will be because it is hidden in the cloud of possibilities until we choose and walk into the next moment of our lives. Doing it with faith, rationality, and wisdom accelerates the transformation and improves our chances of success. Thanks for inspiring this reflection on the power of faith, Mr. Tomasio.

(Disclaimer: The guest posts do not necessarily align with Philosocom's manager, Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein's beliefs, thoughts, or feelings. The point of guest posts is to allow a wide range of narratives from a wide range of people. To apply for a guest post of your own, please send your request to mrtomasio@philosocom.com ) (His other articles: Dystopia || 21st Century Socio-Political Critique by Mr. Kaiser Basileus (Part 1) Dystopia -- 21st Century Socio-Political Critique by Mr. Kaiser Basileus (Part 2) Analyzing Mr. K. Basileus Political Fusion Manifesto (By Mr. C. Kingsley and J. Bright) (Background music) Synopsis by Ms. Grace Gabbi Kaiser Basileus' article "Metaphysics In a Nutshell: How to Understand Everything" introduces a philosophical system called "Truth Wisdom," which aims to provide a comprehensive answer to major philosophical questions. The system includes categories such as amalgum, ethics, epistemology , physical (Proto-Physics), spirit , and transcendent. The author critiques major ethical schools and suggests an "Ethic of Priorities" as a more comprehensive framework. The system also covers the theory of knowledge, logic, math, and science , emphasizing that knowledge is justified belief and logic is a subset of science. The transcendent is a concept beyond sensory perception, and perfection is seen as a direction rather than a destination. Introduction The philosophy of this article (a coherent set of answers to a set of philosophical questions) aka Truth Wisdom (as opposed to Practical Wisdom or Academic Philosophy ), encompasses meta-philosophy , ontology , mereology , metaphysics (which is "What is the nature of.." questions), proto-physics (the metaphysics of time , space , etc.), meta-epistemology (the nature of truth and knowledge, etc.), and meta-ethics . This Philosophy Can Meet These Criteria: 1. Cohesive, coherent, conclusive. 2. Expressible in ordinary language (It selects from the most necessary and sufficient colloquial where possible.) 3. Compatible with scientific consensus (in-so-far as there is one) 4. No gaps, special pleading, appeal to authority and such. This is a contingent set. If you accept this set of answers, then all other answers can be found by logical extension. This is the metaphorical/metaphysical "Theory of Everything" that encompasses the physical one. ************************** Table of Categories: 1) AMALGUM : Consciousness Love Religion 2) ETHICS Ethics Evil Meaning Morality Politics 3) EPISTEMOLOGY (meta, as opposed to practical (logic, statistics, game theory , Bayesian reasoning , cognitive biases, and logical fallacies )) Emergence Knowledge Logic Math Paradox Science The Truth Why (Reasoning) 4) PHYSICAL (proto-physics) Causality Change Energy Life Matter Ontology Reality Space Things Time 5) SPIRIT (of the patterns in the mind, AKA, the Philosophy of the Mind, " The Mental Dimension " and so on) Cognition Death Everything "Free" will Repetition Self Sentience Thing 6) TRANSCENDENT (beyond the perception of a mind) Transcendence Certainty God Infinity Nothing Perfection ************************** 1) AMALGUM • Consciousness - There is no consensus definition or understanding of consciousness . However, it can be used more or less synonymously with individuation , self, ego, perspective , being, and awareness. The mind is a metaphor for the patterns in the brain . Consciousness is the momentary aspect of the sub-set of mind that is available for introspection, or the continuity of that experience. Anthropologically , consciousness is a feedback loop in our theory of mind . Neuro-scientifically, it is still in a "Platonic stage" of development -- working out the vocabulary and mereology. It's to do with suppression of the default mode network, possibly the basal ganglia , and the Cognitive Workplace Theory is a good theory. Phenomenologically , consciousness is an "awareness magician", conjuring up mental events in relations to what it experiences. • Love - Love contains aspects of endocrinology , personality, society, culture , psychology, biology, and so on. • Religion - Religion is a complex blend of culture, history, tradition, and beliefs. The common thread of all religions is dogma - an instance of faith ( unjustified belief ). Most religions accept one or more gods. All versions of god (which are a person or a force) include logically impossible, mutually exclusive, or otherwise untestable attributes, and are therefore indistinguishable from fiction, and ought to be treated accordingly. 2) ETHICS • Ethics is a formalized version of morality, usually in a group context, especially professional . There are three primary schools of thought about ethics, which are each insufficient: Deontology /duty ethics is an abdication of morality and can only be meaningful within a specific context. It assumes the validity of the system. Consequentialism does not account for intent and requires an impossible moral calculus . Virtue ethics does not account for consequences. It provides positive pressure but not guidance on how to behave. What is needed is an Ethic of Priorities to govern all ethical concerns. • Evil is about intents, not effects. It is simple to show that evil actions may produce good effects and vice versa . Therefore, effects and intents must be distinguished from one another. For an act to be evil it must be intentional or intentionally negligent. • Meaning is salience , perspective, and priority. It is individual and custom-made. Meaning is of two kinds. Avoid and approach, in that order of priority: The meaning of life is that everyone must choose the answer to that question for themselves. No one can write your story for you. To the extent your priorities are clear, all life problems may be resolved. Universal or group meaning is an impossible exception. Ethical truths are so to the extent people share priorities. Survival is a prerequisite for all meaningful goals. Truth is a prerequisite for all non-arbitrary goals (AKA not subject to individual determination). Sustainability is a prerequisite for all non-temporary goals. •Morality is personal best practices, a less formal version of ethics. •Politics is ethics + scale. 3) EPISTEMOLOGY • Emergence means a new metaphor for a higher level of understanding. Water molecules acting together create the emergent property of "wetness". Emergence is relationship. Whenever two things interact, the complexity of that interaction spreads outward, creating effects that can seem "more than the sum of its parts". When those relationship attributes are sufficiently large, distinctive, and useful, we give them a new name. ( As with the example of effects founds in influence ). • Knowledge is justified belief, the opposite of faith. "Justified true belief" refers to a hypothetical ultimate validation of Truth and is therefore pragmatically useless. The justification for belief is always and only sufficiency for a specific use, because there is no reason to proceed beyond that level of certainty. The purpose of all knowledge, wisdom, and understanding is actionable certainty (AKA the ability to perform an action with assurance in the results) • Logic is a sub-set of science (strict) - relationships that always replicate. • Math is a sub-set of logic (relationships that always replicate) that deals exclusively with relationships of quantity. Quantity is repetitive boundary conditions; to the extent you can divide something into equal parts, you can do math on it. • Paradox only exists in language, never in reality. Languages are descriptive. "This sentence is a lie." does not describe anything in reality so it is not meaningful. To create a rock so big you can't move it.. does not describe anything in reality. A set that contains itself, does not describe anything in reality. Victimless crime, does not describe anything in reality. To be able to subdivide something indefinitely (Zeno) does not describe reality. • Science is strict, or the body of knowledge thereby achieved (or the culture that forms around them). You can know this to be true because starting with only the first three words, one could recreate everything else. The ultimate grounding of science is replication - to the extent our measuring sticks are stable, we can discern patterns within those relationships. • The Truth is the body of knowledge that continuously replicates . A truth is an instance of truth - a fact or perspective. If it keeps being the same way every time you check it, it's true for all intents and purposes. The validation of Truth rests in that replication. The more stable it is, the more true it is. This applies both to physical measurements and to the relationships of logic. • Why questions are of two kinds: a) How? which is a scientific question, not a philosophical one. b) From what intent/to what end? Which requires a pre-existing mind to that question. 4) Physical • Causality is just another way to say " the arrow of change ". That change happens to occur certain ways rather than others is what science exists to index. Causality is infinite in all directions, at all scales, forever. When anything moves an inch to the right, everything else in the universe moves an inch to the left (on average). Think of infinite marbles in an infinite fishbowl. • Change , also known as Aether (Δ^∞), is the stuff beyond the perception of a mind . -Actuality is the universe as it is outside the perception of a mind; change as change. It is AKA chaos, aether. The mathematical formula that describes it is [ (Δ^∞) ], that is - change over time [ Δ ], infinite in all directions and scales, forever [ ^∞ ], outside the comprehension of a mind [ (x) ].. -Reality is a limited sub-set of Actuality that changes shortly, that we perceive and interact with. All Things change, each according to its properties, just as people all change according to their priorities. The slower things change, the more stable they are, which gives us actionable certainty about them. That which changes most slowly is most real for all intents and purposes. "Realizing" something is manifesting it - making it more stable, more real. • Energy is change that occurs cyclically. Aether/change (whatever is sub-quantum ) which overlaps sufficiently strongly and persistently becomes waves, just as waves of energy in certain frequencies become entangled into matter. All waves, and therefore all energy propagates through a medium ( like humans ), which is currently understood as quantum as it was understood as particles and molecules and substances before that. Physics currently can probe deeper only by logical extrapolation. The total amount of energy in the universe never changes but the total amount of energy in any given subsystem constantly changes. • Life is understood at many levels and which one is appropriate is determined by which level of emergence is relevant. Life as biological terms have specific technical definitions. In general, life is the emergent attribute of biological complexity. As long as it can maintain it's homeostasis it adapts and expands to use all available resources. • Matter is high-entropy, entangled energy. Think of it as a small whirlpool in a river. For a time it stabilizes and forms a coherent pattern at a higher level of analysis (ie. emergence). The more stable that pattern is, the more solid the matter. • Ontology is "What is the nature of being?" Actuality is undifferentiated stuff. Reality is an experienced sub-set of Actuality. A Thing is a pattern in a mind; a set of attributes and boundary conditions by which it is distinguished from other things in relation to expected uses or interactions. All things have an unique position in space, time, and scale and we are an embodied perspective on reality. All things have a physical correlate as a pattern in a mind but not all of those patterns have an external referent and not all that refer to something do so accurately. • Reality is the experienced sub-set of Actuality, which is the universe beyond the perception of a mind. Reality is of two levels: Reality-to-us is a filtered sub-set of reality . The filters are: -Physical/biological, your senses. -Cultural/subconscious, things you learned or experienced very early in life. -Self - psychological/personality/character, the story you tell yourself about how you fit into the world and society. "Reality" is consensus experience ; that which continuously replicates. Whatever keeps being the same is the most real. It is equivalent to Truth. • Space is the correlation of our internal ( proprioceptive ) and external senses. Our internal sense is our embodiment. The external senses are experiences of that which we do not have direct access to or control over. There are three physical dimensions, time, space, and scale. The three special dimensions are a directional coordinate system. • Things are a pattern in a mind. Mind is a metaphor for the patterns in the brain. Some things have an external referent and some have an external correlate. • Time is experienced (sometimes measured) change. The laws of physics explain how things change over time. Time is experienced as a sub-set of Actuality that changes at a speed that is compatible with our embodied frame of reference, the clarity of our senses. The past is remembered experience. The future is anticipated experience. 5) SPIRIT (of the patterns in the mind.) • Cognition is the emergent attribute of brain complexity. It is the capacity to introspect. Reason is the emergent property of cognitive complexity. •Death. To you, life begins when you can interact with your experience. That benchmark is tied to a working brain. To yourself you are the continuity of your experience. To others you are the continuity of their experience of you. When your experience ends, you end. Mind is a metaphor for the patterns in the brain. Soul is the idea that the mind or experience can transcend the brain. There is no mechanism by which that is possible. Poetically, there are three deaths, when you stop caring about life , when your homeostasis ends, and when you are forgotten. • Everything means all distinguished patterns. Those only exist in minds. A Thing is a pattern with a purpose. The purpose is either danger/avoid or interest/approach. All knowledge, wisdom, and understanding is for the purpose of actionable certainty toward changing the world in one of those two ways. All things are a set of attributes and boundary conditions that align with our predictions about how our interactions will cause a change. In other words, we sense the edges, weight, color, likability.. of things in order to manipulate them. • Free Will. There is no sense in which our will is free. Causality is infinite in all directions, at all scales, forever. We exist in the ignorance gap between chaos and causality. To the extent we do not understand causality, we may feel free. The word "Will" alone is sufficient to discuss the experience of freedom. • Repetition is the bedrock of memory . Memory = repetition. If you want to remember something better, practice repetition in a variety of circumstances. Neurons that fire together, wire together. Memory is distributed. It is the probability matrix of the feedback loop of cognitive awareness. Neurons that were fired in sequence in the past are more likely to do so again in the future. When your attention moves into that area again, your memory is that those patterns which fire now were most likely to have done so most frequently or most strongly. That's the thing that is salient, or distinctive. In cases where you didn't care much, the memory is weak because the neurons didn't connect strongly. If you think about something a lot, even if it's no big deal, that path becomes engraved. • Self is the story you tell yourself about how you fit into the world and society. The world is the physical/material aspects of your experience and society is everything to do with minds, including your own priorities and how you think about the minds of other creatures. We are an embodied perspective on the universe. For some people, those things do not correlate, they merely overlap. Body Dysmorphia is when your sense of self does not correlate sufficiently with your sense of embodiment. Likewise there are dissociative disorders such as phantom limb syndrome that work in the other direction. That embodiment is the substrate of Self, but Self is easily influenced both by external circumstance ( Phineas Gage ) or by internal effort. Personality and character are overlays to the self which are more or less persistent or expressed in various circumstances. Like consciousness, there is not yet a consensus understanding of either. • Sentience is the cognitive capacity of an animal, more or less the same as embodied cognition in persons. It is the emergent attribute of reproductive complexity. It is the ability to experience pain and desire and the pantheon of related feelings; Avoid-and-Approach plus complexity. In general, plants are pre-sentient and animals are pre-cognizant. • A Thing is a pattern in a mind. It is a set of attributes and boundary conditions by which it is distinguished from all other things according to various purposes. The resolution of the purpose determines the resolution of the pattern. Each thing has each of the physical attributes, a unique place in space, time, and scale. All things have a physical correlate as a pattern in a mind (which is a metaphor for the patterns in the brain), but not all have an external referent. Sometimes an external referent is inaccurate. 6) TRANSCENDENT • Transcendence is the line between Actuality and Reality. Actuality is inaccessible to our senses, our instruments, or our facilities of reason. Words that reference the transcendent are mere placeholders for the ineffable. • Certainty always and only means certain Enough for a specific use-case. When you reach that level of sufficiency there is no further reason to continue. There are two kinds of certainty, justified and unjustified. Knowledge is justified belief, and that justification is subject to the limitations of the information available to you as well as the physical capacity of your brain. Unjustified belief is called faith, and is the polar opposite of knowledge. • God is real as a concept in a mind, and there are as many versions as there are people who have thought about it. All versions of god contain logically impossible, mutually exclusive, ineffable, or otherwise ineffable attributes, making them indistinguishable from fiction. Theology is attempting to explain the impossible in terms of the incredible and is therefore intellectually regressive and Ought to be treated accordingly. No version of god has ever been adequately (sufficient to convince a conscientious skeptic) demonstrated to be possible, much less plausible, much less likely, much less actual. - Ignosticism : the idea of god is too ineffable to discuss rationally - Atheism : lack of belief in any god - Agnosticism : lack of certainty in one's belief about god. All are correct, in that order of importance. • Infinity is a direction. Infinity is the same as etcetera or " keep going ". Infinite means there is no anticipated end. Indefinite means an end is anticipated within a certain range. Infinity is ineffable. It is not a concept that can be related to quantity and math cannot be done with it. Math requires specificity. • Nothing . There is no such thing as nothing. In practical use the word always refers to a specific use-case. The only way there could be no-thing is of there were no minds. The way some-thing can come from no-thing is metaphorically, because things didn't exist before minds existed to distinguish them. It was just undifferentiated stuff. • Perfection is a direction, not a destination. You may achieve perfection as close as possible by continuously improving. It is not possible for a limited mind to understand what it would want in any ultimate sense, only in relation to it's immediate perspective.

(Disclaimer: The guest posts do not necessarily align with Philosocom's manager, Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein's beliefs, thoughts, or feelings. The point of guest posts is to allow a wide range of narratives from a wide range of people. To apply for a guest post of your own, please send your request to mrtomasio@philosocom.com ) (Background music) Alex Mos's Synopsis: Everybody can become wise, but wisdom cannot be taught; it results from a lifetime of hardship, inquiry, and the search for truth, morality, and knowledge. Here is a summary of the seven ageless signs of wisdom: The first sign is honesty. Wisdom begins with knowing yourself , followed by cognitive honesty and high moral standards toward others. Wise people always speak the truth, even if it risks their reputation or punishment. The second sign of wisdom is an insatiable curiosity, an appreciation of mystery, and an endless pursuit of knowledge. The third sign of wisdom is modesty. The wise person realizes their limits and ignorance. They don't seek corrupting power but understanding and truth. The fourth sign of wisdom is kindness. The wise embody ethical values such as kindness, patience, and compassion, even under unjustified circumstances and towards their enemies. They help those in need and are ethical guides for the morally weak, ignorant, and tyrant. The fifth sign of wisdom is cheerfulness. Wise people treasure their pain and sorrow because they understand that wisdom can only be obtained by hardship, misery, and sacrifice. They find cheerful joy, optimism, and humor in life's painful challenges. The sixth sign is courage, a confrontation of fear itself. Philosophical courage means a nonviolent resistance to evil and a self-sacrifice for the sake of humanity. The seventh and final sign of wisdom is Love. A philosopher's journey ends when they realize that all we can know is that we receive through divine grace. The truest wisdom is a loving heart: Love for life, humanity, and divine Love. Introduction Anyone can become wise . You don’t have to already be intelligent and full of knowledge to become wise. In fact, there are no pre-conditions of age, sex, race, religion or class when it comes to embodying wisdom. Wisdom is a virtue free for all to possess, and all that is required to set out in pursuit of wisdom is the burning desire to inquire and learn. As Socrates famously declared “Wisdom begins in wonder” and “the beginning of wisdom is to desire it” said Solomon Ibn Gabirol . Obviously, wisdom is not intelligence obtained through accumulation of knowledge from formal education. Neither can it be acquired simply through memorization of concepts, theories, axioms and formulas from scholars, scientists or experts . As Michel de Montaigne puts it, we can be knowledgeable with other men’s knowledge, but we cannot be wise with other men’s wisdom. Instead, wisdom is the ripening of knowledge, sharpening of truths, and refinement of morality through profound life-shattering, heart wrenching, tragic-stricken life experiences . Thus, if it is wisdom you desire, prepare yourself for a lifetime of hardship, misery and misfortune.  But how does one identify a wise person, when the wise are said to be prone to disguise their wisdom, feign ignorance and act foolishly? Whilst wisdom is a complex subject matter which have preoccupied philosophers since the beginning of time, a survey of opinions from prominent philosophers, scientists, religious icons and spiritual gurus may provide us with some clues as to what (or what does not) constitute wisdom.  Here are 7 ageless signs of wisdom in a person, as understood by some of the most brilliant minds in history.  1) Foolish Honesty Wisdom springs from truth, and the first criteria of wisdom is self-honesty . Indeed, according to Aristotle, knowing yourself is the beginning of all wisdom. It is said that only the wise can discern wisdom, because they alone are able to grasp the essential truths of human existence and be completely honest about it. In contrast, the ignorant are unable to differentiate between truth and falsity due to lack of knowledge; while tyrants are unwilling to isolate good from evil, in spite of knowledge of right and wrong.  Tyrants frequently engage in debauchery because they reject the existential truths of human morality, while the ignorant are often exploited because they refuse to learn the truths of human reality. Hence, neither can be wise. Willingness to isolate what is true from what is false, what is good from what is evil, and what is beneficial from what is harmful, is the prerequisite of all true knowledge.  Thus , according to Thomas Jefferson, honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom . Indeed, without cognitive honesty and an intuitive sense of morality , all that one claims to be knowledge, true opinion or justified belief could turn out to be just errors, invalid facts, mistaken beliefs or false assumptions based on self-deception. Therefore, if you want to be wise, be honest with yourself first, and be truthful to others around you. This may sound easy, but as Ludwig Wittgenstein observed, nothing is so difficult, as much as not deceiving oneself. Indeed, as Plato warned, no one is more hated than he who speaks the truth. Nevertheless, a sure sign of wisdom is someone who is honest and consistently speaks the truth by differentiating right from wrong, and good from evil - even when it would be foolish or fatal to do so.  The classic case is Socrates . When asked to denounce his beliefs in fake Gods, he refused. It could be that Socrates refused because he did believe in the existence of God , of which he claims to have no knowledge of. This would indeed be foolish. Or it could be that Socrates refused to renounce his belief in God because he thought that even a fake God would be better than a real devil.  In the end, r ather than tell an evil lie and live dishonestly amongst his fellow citizens, Socrates chose to die an honourable death as an honest fool. But in pleading ignorance and maintaining faith in the divine, his death made him nothing less than a wise fool - for the wise always chooses good over evil, and honesty over dishonesty, despite his own ignorance and even in the face of death. .  2) Insatiable Curiosity The wise often appear stupid as he is habitually questioning the most commonplace of phenomenon . Why is the sky blue? Why don’t the stars fall to earth? Why should I be good if everyone else is evil? Just like the unknowledgeable child, most of the time philosophers seem to be asking some very dumb questions about common sense reality which everyone else have accepted as a matter of fact.  Nonetheless, according to Thomas Moore , wisdom and deep intelligence require an honest appreciation of mystery . According to Emerson “ The invariable mark of wisdom is to see the miraculous in the common ”. Ironically, while the curious child might come up with a whole list of interesting answers to his questions, the wise would ultimately punctuate his astoundingly detailed explanation with an “I don’t know.”  It is as though the whole point of philosophizing is to raise endless questions in an effort to sustain an insatiable curiosity for the mysteries of life as a thinking being. Nonetheless, as explained by Milan Kundera “The wisdom of the novel comes from having a question for everything. The stupidity of people comes from having an answer for everything”. Indeed, George Santayana warned that “The hunger for facile wisdom is the root of all false philosophy”.  Similarly, according to Arthur Schopenhauer, “The more unintelligent a man is, the less mysterious existence seems to him”. To quit questioning would mean to end the adventure of learning, and this is the last thing the wise would willingly do, for he is in love with wisdom and is caught in the endless pursuit of knowledge. Indeed, a trademark of the wise man is that he has an unlimited supply of questions, and this is simply because “the wisest mind always has something yet to learn” (Santayana).  3) Misplaced Humility (modesty)  Although Plato declared that the wisest have (or should have) the most authority, Socrates had consistently insisted that the only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing . True wisdom comes to each of us when we realize how little we understand about life, ourselves, and the world around us , said Socrates. In which case, either Socrates was overly modest, truthfully stupid or inadvertently wise. Indeed, for the wise to refuse authority to guide his fellow men and leave governance in the hands of the ignorant or tyrants seems to be a travesty.  The heaviest penalty for declining to rule is to be ruled by someone inferior to yourself, said Plato. Nonetheless, humility is a recurring theme in any analysis of wisdom and just as Socrates had declared himself to be worthless of wisdom, this misplaced humility is seen in the most brilliant of minds . “If I am a fool, it is, at least, a doubting one; and I envy no one the certainty of his self approved wisdom” said George Byron . “Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.” said Einstein. Ever since the fall from grace of Lucifer, the wisest and most favoured angel in all heavens, arrogance and vanity are thought to be the two worst enemies of wisdom which would entail forfeiture of love from God.  Ancient philosophers, sages and saints believe that wisdom is a divine gift which can be taken away anytime. Therefore, they dare not risk the wrath of God and always maintain humility even to those less knowledgeable than themselves. Hence, the philosopher’s denial of authority over knowledge and truth , far from being misplaced modesty, is instead motivated by profound love for the divine Beloved . Knowledge may be powerful, but it is not power that the wise seek. The wise desires wisdom and is scornful of power which would corrupt the soul in its journey towards divine reunion with the Beloved. Rather than power to rule the masses, the wise prefer solitary devotion to the Beloved, which would increase their stature as a knowledgeable, albeit powerless, person.  According to Xenophanes , it takes a wise man to recognize another. However, the reverse is not quite true. While it requires wisdom to recognize truth, stupidity does not even recognize its own errors! Thus according to Einstein, the difference between genius and stupidity is that genius knows its limits , whilst stupidity is limitless. To be aware of one’s own ignorance, is already to be wise, and the philosopher’s plea of ignorance is merely to facilitate his endless pursuit for higher and deeper knowledge.  4) Undeserving Kindness  According to Ralph Waldo Emerson, “Wisdom has its root in goodness, not goodness its root in wisdom [not vice versa]”. If so, it follows that the wise are those who embody ethical values such as kindness, patience, empathy and compassion . In fact, the distinction between the wise and the gullible, may just be that the wise are morally virtuous even to his enemies and the undeserving; whilst the gullible tend to show kindness only to those in his favour or for his own benefit . Kindness is a sensitivity to the well-being of others which is demonstrated by actions which alleviates the suffering of another, eases his burden or relieves his hardship.  As someone accustomed to grief and misery , and knowledgeable on matters of good and evil, the wise would be the first to relieve the pain and suffering of another, to defend the weak over the powerful, and to demonstrate gentleness over aggression. As Hellen Keller puts it, the highest result of education is tolerance . The wise are compassionate because of a strong sense of empathy towards fellow human beings as mortal beings suffering from existential angst and who are for the most part victims of circumstances. The wise is patient even under the most unjustified circumstances because he understands the nature of man as fallible human beings that frequently errs in action due to ignorance or weakness of will.   The wise are compassionate because he knows that mortality evokes fear and awakens the demons within . That is while his awareness of the fragility of humanity beseech him to treat all humans with patience, gentleness and tolerance, even when they act out against the interests of others. As Joseph Joubert put it, a part of kindness is loving people more than they deserve. Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a harder battle, said Plato. Compassion will cure more sins than condemnation , said Henry Ward Beecher. Due to his own experience, the wise always sees beyond an evil act to the reason which caused the act, and therefore tends to respond to evil with kindness and tolerance even when the perpetrators are clearly in the wrong.  His love of humanity exhorts him not only to help those who are wronged, but places a moral responsibility on him to also guide the ignorant, the tyrannical and those who suffer from moral weakness , to appreciate kindness and thus relieve them from the clutches of evil and their demons within. “To light one candle to God and another to the Devil, is the principle of wisdom” said Jose Bergamin .  According to the Dalai Lama, XIV, “ If you can cultivate the right attitude, your enemies are your best spiritual teachers. Their presence invites you the opportunity to enhance and develop patience, tolerance and understanding ." Nonetheless, the wise know that goodness itself is a double edge sword. As Plato puts it, “If a man perfectly righteous should come upon earth, he would find so much opposition that he would be imprisoned, reviled, scourged, and in time crucified by such, who, though they were extremely wicked, would yet pass for righteous men.”  Thus, the good man is as rare as the wise man, and it takes one to recognize the other.  5) Absurd Cheerfulness  “Cheerfulness is the most certain sign of wisdom” said Michel de Montaigne, and according to Sophocles , “ There is no happiness where there is no wisdom ”. However, cheerfulness of the wise is not to be confused with the joy of ignorant bliss, nor happiness from wealth, fame or physical pleasures. "Supreme happiness will be the greatest cause of misery, and the perfection of wisdom the occasion of folly”, said Leonardo Da Vinci. "I don't know why we are here, but I'm pretty sure that it is not in order to enjoy ourselves", said Ludwig Wittgenstein . So what is the difference between the happiness of the fool and the cheerfulness of the wise?  The distinction is simple. Fools are most happy when their fears and grief are drowned out through short-lived pleasures and enjoyment , whilst the wise are most cheerful in the midst of their deepest pain and sorrows. Although we may tend to think of the wise as very serious people leading gloomy and miserable lives , this may be far from the truth. Instead, wise is he who smiles through his tears, laughs through his misery and makes jokes of his own personal tragedy. The wise are cheerful because they know all too well that wisdom cannot be obtained except through hardship, misery, sacrifice and tragic life experiences.  Indeed, for the wise, cheerfulness is simply a natural reflection of optimism and resilience in the face of severity one encounters on the road to wisdom . "There is no love of life without despair of life", writes Albert Camus . “Try to exclude the possibility of suffering which the order of nature and the existence of free wills involve, and you find that you have excluded life itself” said C.S. Lewis . "We become wiser by adversity ; prosperity destroys our appreciation of the right ", said Seneca . Thus, the more suffering he has to endure, the more cheerful the wise man gets. Although seemingly absurd, the wise treasures his pain and sorrow ; and is comforted by knowledge that failures, injustice and misery can only further elevate his stature as a knowledgeable person . Indeed, according to the wise, wisdom ascends through the aesthetical reflection of a wounded soul which confronts existential suffering through sheer faith in a divine reality beyond ordinary human existence .  "The purpose of life is not to be happy , said Ralph Waldo Emerson. " It is to be useful , to be honourable , to be compassionate. To have it make some difference that you have lived and lived well . Based on deep conviction of a divine power which guides human destiny based on love and justice, the wise is in fact honoured to endure misery in his journey towards the divine source of wisdom. Thus, "An ounce of cheerfulness is worth a pound to serve God with", said Thomas Fuller .  Indeed, it is by virtue of his profound sadness and constant grief that the wise are able to find immense joy in the smallest, most mundane things like the sunrise, the sunset, the moonlight, the starry skies and the singing bird on a tree branch. Just waking up to observe the folly of mankind throughout the day brings him joy. In the words of Khalil Gibran , “Pain and foolishness lead to great bliss and complete knowledge, for Eternal Wisdom created nothing under the sun in vain”. Indeed, a trademark of the wise is a great sense of humour - for what is merely a cheap thrill or misery for others, is for him an exquisite experience of living life in the shadows of the divine.   "He who learns must suffer, and, even in our sleep, pain that [one] cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart, and in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God". - Aeschylus 6) Hopeful Courage  According to Bertrand Russell , “ To conquer fear is the beginning of wisdom… Fear is the main source of superstition , and one of the main sources of cruelty.” But it is easy to confuse the courage of the wise with the bravery of the fool or the bravado of the fearless. What are the differences? Whilst bravery is the absence of fear that one demonstrates in facing risky or dangerous situations; courage is a direct confrontation of fear itself , for the purpose of defending something which one has strong convictions about. But courage is not simply physical resistance involving violent means. Otherwise, all wise men would end up as soldiers . In its essence, philosophical courage is a non-violent resistance to submission or participation in all that is evil . As Martin Luther King Jr. lucidly espoused: " Nonviolent resistance … is based on the conviction that the universe is on the side of justice". Consequently, the believer in nonviolence has deep faith in the future. This faith is another reason why the nonviolent resister can accept suffering without retaliation. For he knows that in his struggle for justice he has cosmic companionship. It is true that there are devout believers in nonviolence who find it difficult to believe in a personal God. But even these persons believe in the existence of some creative force that works for universal wholeness . Whether we call it an unconscious process, an impersonal Brahman , or a Personal Being of matchless power of infinite love , there is a creative force in this universe that works to bring the disconnected aspects of reality into a harmonious whole.  The strong may be confident, the smart may be brave and the foolish may be fearless. However, only the wise can be truly courageous. And what would be the most terrifying thing that humans have to face, if not death? Contemplation of death is one of the cornerstones of philosophizing, and philosophers have long grappled with the question of life and its ultimate purpose.  According to Bernard Williams , death is necessary in order for life to be meaningful . In the words of Karl Popper “It is the ever-present danger of losing life which helps to bring home to us the value of life. ” It follows therefore that only those who truly understand the meaning and purpose of existence would defend the values of life, while only the truly courageous would give up life itself for the sake of humanity.    But what is it that makes the wise a courageous person, and a courageous person wise? Fundamentally, courage is a sacred energy motivated by deep faith in divine love and demonstrated by an absolute commitment to fight evil and injustice. Ultimately, it is a sacred sacrifice in the name of the most precious values of humanity, and undertaken with conviction of divine mercy from the Beloved. “As a well-spent day brings happy sleep , so a life well spent brings happy death”, said Leonardo Da Vinci. In this context, courage is the final test of wisdom, for as Baltasar Gracian puts it “Without courage, wisdom bears no fruit”. 7) Tragic Love According to Marcel Proust we don’t receive wisdom; we must discover it for ourselves after a journey that no one can take for us or spare us . However, if the sole purpose of the philosopher is to acquire wisdom through an endless pursuit of knowledge, then wisdom is not really something that can be possessed, unless the journey itself ends. So when does the journey end?   The journey ends and wisdom begins when we cease questioning truths which are self-evident in the human heart . Wisdom arrives when we stop looking for external answers outside of the divine reality within our own soul. Wisdom speaks when we realize that we can know no more than what we receive through divine grace. In which case wisdom, as Socrates said, is no more than a realization of one’s own ignorance in the infinite possibilities of divine existentiality. According to John Adams, there is no such thing as human wisdom - all is the providence of God.  But, if wisdom is bestowed upon knowledge seekers through divine grace, what is it that has to be proven in order for lovers of wisdom to receive wisdom? If to pursue wisdom is to undergo misery and suffering, what is it that gives the lovers of wisdom the courage and faith to endure hardships, sacrifices and injustice, and yet remain cheerful in the hero’s journey ? If wisdom is merely a means to an end , what is it that the philosopher ultimately desires? In other words, what is the golden fruit of wisdom?  According to Charles Dickens , a loving heart is the truest wisdom. Love for life, love for humanity and most of all love for the infinite source of life itself – divine Love. Could it be that in the pursuit of higher and higher knowledge, the lovers of wisdom are unwittingly seeking divine love? After all, is it not divine love which promises immortality  for mortal beings? Was it not man’s betrayal of divine love for knowledge, which caused the downfall of humanity in the first place? Perhaps then the ultimate purpose of philosophizing is to obtain salvation from an otherwise meaningless existence , and to be gifted with that which is the most precious of all human values, love for divine Love itself.  Indeed, according to Plato, the madness of love is the greatest of heaven’s blessings. Hence, If wisdom is indeed the greatest human good which is granted to the selected few by divine grace, it would seem that only an unquestioning love for Divinity would entitle one to possess wisdom. Thus, love indeed is the final sign of wisdom in a wise person’s heart. The hero’s journey on earth , like that of all other mortal beings, will inevitably end with death; and it is only through death that mortal love can return to the infinite universe of the divine Beloved. Hence, according to Honore De Balzac , wisdom is that apprehension of heavenly things to which the spirit rises through love. That is why according to Jean de La Fontaine, death never takes the wise man by surprise. He is always ready to go.

The Tales of Dusts -- My Challenge... To You! (For the directory on success, click here ) (Philosocom's Mastery Series) (Philosocom's Directory on Ego Management) "Don't look for a dystopian future, why bother? Dystopia has been here for decades , via rapacious corporate greed, corrupt politics , and insidiously spreading harmful technology . Those that cannot recognize the dystopian society surrounding us in every aspect of society have long-conditioned to see this as somehow "normal", and cannot see it, though it's literally everywhere" -- John Duran (Background music) "Dust thou Art Dust Shall Become" Grandiosity, You should overcome! In the absence of, Truthful recognition, I still seek, Rectification! Your theory of mind, Of who I might be, Continues to fail... EASILY! Deep inside I've been, A good man, "Arrogant or godly", STILL HUMAN! How, can I expect the world to see, my immense loneliness? My hardships remains unseen, But ARE seen by ME!!! I am too strong for most, I inhibit my power in hermitages! UNDERSTANDING NEEDS TO COME FROM YOUR INNERMOST SELF!!!! Accept reality, Accept thou suffering What a day matters, Who cares what it will bring? You are the narrator, Of your own story, Born as dust then turn dust, With or without glory! Whether big or small, Your hubris, Is the greatest of all, Human sins. Accept modesty, Discard the trophy, You already have strength... LOOK WITHIN! HOW can you expect the world to see, your immense loneliness? I see how lonely are many, But are too weak to see me! HOW can you expect dear ones to see, your immense loneliness? They have their own lives... Respect this peacefully!

(Disclaimer: The guest posts do not necessarily align with Philosocom's manager, Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein's beliefs, thoughts, or feelings. The point of guest posts is to allow a wide range of narratives from a wide range of people. To apply for a guest post of your own, please send your request to mrtomasio@philosocom.com) Synopsis by Ms. Gabbi Grace The article "Why You Should Develop the Habit of Looking Both Ways" by Ms. Hali Bash March emphasizes the importance of considering multiple perspectives before making judgments, particularly in ethical contexts. It uses the metaphor of looking both ways before crossing the road to illustrate the complexities of moral and social issues. The author introduces the concept of "spectrums" to analyze ethical dilemmas , suggesting that one should define the extremes (black and white) and consider the continuum of possibilities in between. Ms. Hali proposes the use of the spectrum tool as a method to weigh different arguments and perspectives , emphasizing the need for balance and understanding in debates . Four guidelines are offered for effective use: respect and include both sides of the spectrum, be open-minded and creative, share the method for common understanding , and be respectful of others' opinions. The article offers a practical framework for ethical decision-making. (Background Music) When we all were children we were taught (hopefully) to look both ways before crossing the road. Why were we taught that? Because there was something important that demanded our attention that could potentially arrive from both directions. This way of looking at the world is somewhat like a giant crossroad that is consistent of many spectrums. It is known that our world is very complicated to comprehend, thus many search for the easiest way of navigating it - by seeing "black and white", meaning simplify reality into dichotomous "good" and "bad" concepts. But a person who is mature enough should know by now that reality isn’t that simple. A person who stole something is called a thief- a thief meaning he is a bad guy. Now we receive new information that the person stole food, we are starting to think -- well, maybe he isn’t that evil, maybe he was just hungry and desperate. Maybe we are told that he stole gold -- now we think he is a greedy person (bad). But then we hear that he is stealing from the rich to give to the poor. Suddenly he becomes no less than a hero ( Robin Hood ). So, by understanding the concept of context , we can understand that there is no "black and white" morality that we can rely on in the way that we are observing the world. What should we do, then? The spectrum way of perceiving the world suggests to always define the 2 edges of the spectrum, the most extreme ideas for each way, the "blacks and whites". When we defined our domain of ideas we can imagine the spectrum of ideas relevant to this specific spectrum. If we take the previous example of the stealing man -- we need to define what is good and what is bad by spectrums, so stealing as defined by law is prohibited and thus bad, and distributing food for the poor is good by morality. So, we decided to create our spectrum with law on one side and morality on the other. I want to note that the spectrum is not a built in concept, and like we did right now -- it can be defined however you want, as long and there are 2 edges. Spectrums that are not balanced will just be useless when trying to use, and of course when using them with another person, the other person needs to be aware of the spectrum or they won't understand your argument. Back to our spectrum of law and morality on the subject of stealing. Depending on the extra information given to us, we can decide where we put our case. Since the spectrum is subjective, it is important to remember its place as a tool. Tools are great help in the hands of people who knows how to use them, as seen in this video of a katana master challenging his student to cut down bamboo target cleanly. The students and the master use the same tool, but the master knows how to maximize its effectiveness ( Example video ). So, in order to use this tool effectively, you should prepare your arguments for the percentage you choose to place your case on the spectrum. For example if I'm a big fan of the law, and perceive the law as morality chosen by people smarter than me, I'll choose greater weight for the law, placing the case closer to law. Ultimately, my argument concludes of an explanation of a value system in which law is above the morality of a single person, but never ignores the other side of the spectrum -- meaning that respect should be given to the act of helping the poor, even if we think the person should be punished at the end. Maybe they deserve a medal and also a few years in prison. It's all about balances of both sides. (Mr. Rubinshtein's note: Ms. Hali's argument is also about the importance of equity over bias , which is a very important priority that's required to understand the bigger picture, and be more objective) . Another example of a spectrum on the same subject is the System versus the citizens. Now we are looking at the same case but from a totally different perspective -- and we ask ourselves what is the relationship between the system and the citizens? We can argue that the system's role is to keep order and to protect from chaos . We can also argue that the system job is to provide good enough environment for the people to be able to have enough, not needing to steal food in order to survive. In that way of perceiving the case, we can conclude that although the system job is to keep the order in the city, once it failed to provide essential resources for its people, the authority of the system is put in question, and thus we can argue that it is, in fact, very moral to take law into your hands when the system is unjust or had failed. Of course, we can use the same spectrum on the opposite argument and claim that in order for the system to provide for the people, the people must play along and respect the system's authority. So as you've learned here, the spectrum is a tool of looking at problems from a more holistic perspective. It can vary greatly upon how the person chooses to use this tool. So the most important guide lines to keep in mind here are – 1. Never forget to respect and include both sides of the spectrum in your arguments. It doesn’t have to be a 50\50 case, but without including both sides in your argument, you can't use the spectrum tool. 2. Be open minded and creative -- try to look at the case from different angles and perspectives. Try different edges to the spectrum to further strengthen your argument. 3. Share and explain this method to the other person in order to create common ground of understanding when arguing. A debate without guidelines or context can be very tiring and pointless. 4. And last one -- Be respectful of others and their opinions . Debates are not just for winning, but for conveying ideas. Be smart in your arguments but also be smart in your listening. This method of looking at life can help you see the world as a more balanced, whole concept, and helps you avoid drama and prejudice in your own mind, since it's "forcing" you to look at ideas you don’t necessarily agree with, but have to accept their existence nevertheless So, in conclusion -- learn to look both ways. Bonus: Mr. Roosevelt Wallace's Feedback(Added by Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein) A response to another article by a reader exemplifies Ms. Hali's premise and conclusion on the subject of suffering. According to Mr. Wallace, we can put any suffering we might have in a wiser perspective. Instead of seeing suffering as problematic, we might as well ask ourselves how we can benefit from it for our growth. Mr. Wallace claims that the nature of the universe is based on dualities. Furthermore, he claims that we cannot know blessings if we don't experience their opposite counterparts, AKA, the misfortunes of life. It's possible that we might not appreciate what we have until we lose it , which makes him partially correct at the very least. Finally, the choice to see the world both ways is our choice, which highlights the underrated power of reaction on our attitude and behavior. After all, there might be a silver lining in every dark cloud, as seen in bittersweet feelings.

The Directory on Coffee: https://www.philosocom.com/post/coffee-shot https://www.philosocom.com/post/life-as-a-coffee-addict https://www.philosocom.com/post/holy-trinity Recently I decided to stop my caffeine addiction, deciding to listen to my body instead as well as considering some ethics.... I have been suffering from fatigue for most of my life as a result of saving my late master. Ever since 2007 I began feeling incredibly tired. My mistake over time was taking coffee as means to repress/surpass that fatigue. However, repression has consequences. Have you ever asked yourself why are you so tired? Sometimes, like in my case it has to do with unprocessed experiences. And indeed, it takes me many years to process my heroic deed. I found out that by asking myself about the origins of my fatigue, I can solve it more effectively. Ever since I began sleeping more, I finally began feeling better. Also, another reason as to why I stopped drinking coffee has to do with aggressions. I don't like being aggressive and found out that the more I am energized the likelier I get aggressive. As a man of peace, many of my aggressions over life were involuntary and stemmed from PTSD. Are our reactions always voluntary? Not necessarily! Sometimes our impulses get the best of us, and then we may behave in ways that we might regret. Thus, instead of seeking the excitement of coffee I prefer to seek the virtue of self-control and self-restraint. As much as I dislike society, much of it has to do with the virtue of self-restraint. If we did not restrain ourselves, we would suffer from a lot of violence issues across the planet. And my path in life is that of virtue. I found out that I can easily overcome my coffee addiction by applying critical thinking . In general, I found out that critical thinking helps me also to control my appetite, instead focusing on my hunger. Questions like: Do I really need coffee right now? And, Should I rest instead, Have helped me realize the practical importance of critical thinking when it comes to my health! As a man who uses philosophy to navigate reality, I realized just how important critical thinking is when it comes to overcoming addictions. When I ask myself questions in solitude, I find myself needing and wanting less and less from this world, focusing instead on my natural wealth. What is natural wealth? Everything that comes from within us , and not from outside of ourselves! Therefore, we should listen to our bodies more -- the source of our natural wealth. All our wisdom and understanding comes from the human body. Thus, when you are fatigued, there is a higher reasoning for it. All you have to do, instead of drinking coffee, is to ask yourself: should I solve my fatigue more naturally? Never underestimate the natural solutions to problems. As much as artificial resources help us, we should not be enslaved to them in the form of addiction. Instead, they should be either an incentive or a necessary evil for our survival, for our hopes and for our dreams. As much as it was fun and exciting drinking coffee, I decided to take greater responsibility on my health, and rest instead.

(Background music) (Coffee Directory) The "Coffee Shot" Reflection -- The Common Ways For Epiphanies The inspiration can come in such small ways that if you sit there just waiting for the big epiphany you'll sit there for the rest of your life. -- Irvine Welsh Have you ever paused in a break of your daily grind , only to find yourself lost in a moment of profound reflection? It's a sensation akin to a sudden, refreshing jolt of caffeine. It's a sharp awareness that jolts you out of your habitual existence. I call these moments "coffee shot reflections." I often experience these reflections when I listen to music that resonates deeply with me, and also thanks to my heightened intuition. This kind of reflection comes at you in a way that "shocks" you a bit like the strong taste of an espresso shot. It's like an instinctive realization of the positive and negative aspects in one's life.  This heightened awareness, that surprisingly wakes something inside of you, can be regarded as a powerful tool for personal growth; An opportunity to reflect on even further, after its first "shot". The moment of Eureka can be seen as that kind of reflection, as an epiphany. Sometimes, it may make you ask yourself in an uncanny excitement, "why didn't I think of this before?" Many of us live in a constant state of motion, our actions becoming so controlled by our automatic selves , that our minds wander aimlessly. A wandering mind, makes us lose our sense of appreciation to life, as we are then consumed by the races of life.  While this has its benefits —allowing us to multitask, breathe effortlessly,  and even sleep without rumination—it can also lead to a disconnect from our conscious experience. The more we focus on multitasking, for instance, we may feel like we lose our intuition , and as such, the sensation of the mental "coffee" wonder in our mind. Meditation offers a counterbalance to this automation, providing a space for mindful observation and contemplation. It can bring you a realization that life, despite its challenges, might not be necessarily bad like our negativity bias compels us to think. These reflections are like ninja a shuriken that narrowly miss its mark, leaving a lasting impression. They force us to confront the reality of our existence, to question whether we're truly living or merely trying to deal with being alive. Our modern lives are filled with conveniences that we often take for granted.  Yet, even within material prosperity,  it's easy to lose sight of the simple joys of being alive.  To truly appreciate these moments, we can cultivate a sense of gratitude that is both sincere and intentional. A coffee shot reflection is an invitation to pause, to assess our lives,  and to make conscious choices about how we want to live.  It's a reminder that life might be more valuable than what it might appear to us on the regular,  and that every moment offers an opportunity for growth and for our hopes and dreams. Examples of Triggers of such "Reflections" Music:  It can be a powerful catalyst, especially for those with a strong nostalgia bias.  Certain songs can evoke deep emotions and memories,  leading to a state of introspection. Nature:  Spending time in nature can also be a source of instant reflection.  The beauty and tranquility of the natural world can help to quiet the mind and promote a sense of inner peace. Art:   Art, in its many forms, can inspire thought and emotion. A particularly moving piece of art can spark a coffee shot reflection, and help you realize something you have forgotten. Personal Challenges:  Sometimes, life's challenges can force us to pause and reassess our priorities.  Overcoming adversity can lead to a deeper appreciation for adversity-related reflections, for example. How can we cultivate more coffee shot reflections in our daily lives? Practice mindfulness:  Mindfulness involves paying attention to the present moment without judgment. Meditation and deep breathing exercises can help to cultivate mindfulness, which nurtures intuition. Create space for reflection:   Make time each day to simply sit and think.  This can be as simple as taking a walk in nature or enjoying a cup of tea. Connect with others:   Building strong relationships with friends and family can provide a sense of belonging and support. Sharing our experiences with others can also help us to gain new perspectives. By incorporating these practices into our daily lives, and by understanding the value of such a term, we can increase the frequency of coffee shot reflections. Such reflections can help us deepen our connection to ourselves and the world around us.

The Realized Regret (Poem) Un, grate, un, gratefulness. Regardless of what I've done, Frustrating as a summer's sun. Regardless of all the dedication I have given to you throughout the whole situation. You have never paid me back, not a thank you, not anything. To think I've wasted so much of my life on someone, That, doesn't, even, seem, to care.. That without regret tells you that you are too irrelevant. All due to one's honesty. To ho, nes, ho nes, ho-nes, ty. You don't seem to understand, Or at least care at all. The darkest years in my life Were in your incompetent absence. To think I altered my whole life, Due to a single misinterpretation. Countless opportunities out there, Will not return. You never truly appreciated all the things, I have done gratefully to you. Now, you even Render me too unimportant. Even though I am a philosopher, Whose being daily read, across the continents

The Rubinshteinic Approach to Gamification Life is just like a game, First you have to learn rules of the game, And then play it better then any one else. -- Albert Einstein All the world's a stage , and all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts. -- William Shakespeare (Philosocom's Directory of Choice and Decision) (Background music) Gamification can be defined as the process in which we use gameplay terminology and apply it to areas outside gaming. In this article, we shall be exploring how gamification can be applied to life itself. Life is a stage, and we all have a role to play . Each and every one of us has an internal mechanism that drives us to do the actions we do, and like the things we like, and despise the things that make us utterly bored and uninterested. Each and every one of us has his or her own sense of logic. Logic comes from the word "logos", or "meaning", and indeed, what is life, but what we make of it? What is philosophy, if not a way of life? Philosophy can be seen like that. Each and every actor in the grand scheme of this world has his or her own values, their own goals, their own tendencies, creating the fabric of the game we call life. Life is a game we are taught that we should be taking seriously. Very seriously. However, like actual games, life is a series of choices you make , and each choice has its own consequence. Like in games, we are expected to be smart. We are expected to make smart decisions for our future. Our future is the continuation of our existence in the game of life. What is the game of life? If life is what you make of it, then the game of life, by proxy, is also what you make of it. What kind of game are you playing, in life? What are your terms for victory? I seek to rectify the world through Philosocom and enjoy love. That's my victory conditions for the game I am playing. When you see life as a game to be played seriously, you then begin to acknowledge just how meaningful life can be. And meaning? Meaning is logic. Logic means meaning. Do we have to make out of life something specific? No. We are free to make life whatever we want out of it. It's our life, so it's our choice of what meaning to make out of our lives. Outside mathematics and ethics, Logic is to not be treated objectively. Logic is deeply personal just like the game of life. While one plays a strategy game , many other play a game of survival mode. Most people, in my eyes, play a game of survival mode, and that is understandable. We need to pay our bills. We need to provide for ourselves and/or our dear ones. But deep inside, life is like that because we chose to make it like that, in our minds. The greatest freedom lies in our minds, not in the outside world. It is therefore our conscious decision to make sense of life. And sense? Sense is always personal. Sense is always subjective, therefore. When it comes to living creatures, logic always comes from the individual, therefore what may appear utterly absurd to one may appear perfectly sensible to another. Cold analytic logic often fails when it comes to the human element. It might take much time and effort to know one's own logic. But even then, one's own logic has the reason, why it is the way it is. Life affects us and it is our role to make sense of life. Life may bring us fortune or misfortune , and one's fortune is another's misfortune. We cannot expect each other until we understand that logic is subjective and that different people play life differently. However, in almost all cases, life is always, always played seriously. Sometimes, life is played so seriously, we often forget how our habits are not the habits of others. There is no such thing as "normal" when different people have different norms. It's just that societies come and may treat norms like they are objective and constitute what is supposed to be a life well lived. However, for life to be well lived, we must examine it first. We must examine life as if we examine a game. After all, life can be seen as a game. And it must always, always must be done seriously. Why? Because whether or not reincarnations exist, we only have this specific lifetime to lead. So, we better play our cards right, take responsibility for our actions, and hope that we shall seek the victories we want to see in this world. Commentary by Ms. Alex Mos The idea of life gamification implies that life is predetermined by a kind of "life game design." We must obey the rules of the physical world , making constant choices for survival, power, or to have a muffin for breakfast . Choose wisely because every choice results in a different outcome for us and unimaginably influences the world far beyond us.  A butterfly effect principle implies that even the smallest actions have disproportionally significant effects elsewhere. Thus, our existence is governed mainly by chaos rather than the ordered predetermination of a neatly pre-programmed game.  Every choice and even a single thought might cause a random cascade of consequences. Play your cards wisely to tilt the odds . Yet chaos, which is born of deep interconnection , makes life unpredictable. Maybe life isn’t about control and winning but awareness and examination.

(Philosocom's Subcategory on Shallowness) (Background music) The shallow confirmative nature of modern society breeds competitive cultures built on fitting in rather than standing out, and only allows hierarchical competition within a predetermined set of behavioral norms. The assumptions people are brainwashed into having about how people should be, life, and its meaning, prevent them from delving deeper into the realm of soul searching or from trying to understand others from their point of view. Comfort and unearned pleasantries that pamper such people since birth hamper their critical thinking , moral compasses and social skills to the extent that they don’t care about right or wrong. They are addicted to an endless meaningless rat race that never truly fulfills them and some of them take it out on those closest to them for lack of better communication or understanding of themselves and their souls. -- Anonymous We live in a world that is basically shallow, and it will probably get even shallower as time goes on and as technology continues to advance. Of course, we live in an age of relative prosperity in many aspects—financially, medically, scientifically, and academically. However, such prosperity does not surpass the growing shallowness of the masses, who play a very large part in the development of the world's economy. The materialistic definition of success, we can theorize, comes from the cold fact that shallowness pays the bills and increases the wealth of the masterminds behind the various industries of the globe. Corporations are there to maximize profit while minimizing the costs required for that profit to grow and be successfully generated. Buying countless items that you don't need, while increasing your own risk of addiction , is a very profitable method for continuing and empowering the financial motion of the world. Therefore, telling people that material prosperity is equivalent to success, even at the cost of their wellbeing, is a profitable message to deliver. Such is the cruelty of capitalism and its free market: You either make and motivate people to buy your services and products, even if such action might be a form of deception or manipulation , or you risk your business and your overall profit, which is necessary for your survival. This is not to say, of course, that communism is preferable, as that method has its downsides as well. Nonetheless, if we are able to overcome the conformity of the herd mentality and stop buying things that aren't necessarily useful to us, we can maintain our sense of self-worth as independent from the amount of material possessions and the money in our wallet. We should also forget the notion of FOMO, or the "fear of missing out," as that idea contains the fallacy that we should do something just because our lifespan is finite. We should overcome the unnecessary guilt of missing out on things, so we can live in a happier manner without being monitored and judged negatively due to that fear. There is a cliché that says that life has more to it than just money. Even though it is a cliché that is often used in self-help books, it is actually true to an extent. Not everything that we do in life has to generate profit in order for us to enjoy and be fulfilled by it. Not everything has to have its worth estimated by the level of revenue it generates, if at all. The possible solution to the problem of financial materialism can therefore be our ability to endure against money-wasting temptations, and by having the audacity to walk against the herd mentality of the mass consumerists, even if their reaction towards us will be less than we desire it to be. Here are some additional thoughts on the matter: We should focus on experiences rather than possessions. Experiences are more likely to bring us lasting happiness than material possessions. We should find ways to be content with what we have. There is no need to constantly strive for more. We should be mindful of our spending. We should only buy things that we need, things that help our ambitions, and things that will bring us joy. We should be grateful for what we have. There are many people in the world who have less than we do. By following these tips, we can break free from the shackles of financial materialism and live a more fulfilling life.

Reason VS Intuition: An Introduction My writings have been rightfully criticized for underestimating the significance of intuition in relation to reason. Intuition , in essence, is the ability to grasp reality swiftly using what we feel (resonation and/emotion). That is, while reason may necessitate further inspection, making it far less spontaneous. Arguably, restraining one's emotions is insufficient for sound reasoning, for one must improve it in more ways. To give intuition its proper address, I've wrote this "rap battle." I acknowledge it's an unconventional form for a philosophical blog, but I occasionally enjoy writing poems, and I believe this one is philosophically fitting. After all, reducing bias is crucial in philosophy to attain a clearer vision of reality. If we minimize something, we risk underestimating its significance in the grand scheme of things. Therefore, even if I minimize something, as a philosopher, I should still grant it the space it may merit, both logically and in the eyes of my readers. All in the name of the truth and its study. Enjoy! (Reason, Verse 1) Surrender to Mr. Tomasio, For you are a component that don't fit, Otherwise, be cut in size, And afterwards cease to exist! I'm far more competent than what many of your fans claim, your followers, You'll be forced to sit and watch once again! You're irrelevant like Ms. Chen. You walked into this office and you already showed your flaws, When you tried to convince Tomasio of a spiritual realm , where wisdom flows. And yet you cannot logically prove any of the two, (Ho ho ho!), While I do what you can't: Be the belt of this writer's pants! You're pretentious, too hasty, You make mistakes for those who are not too careful, And then many couples are broken just because a moment's a bit too hateful. The answer to philosophy is the thing it is, for, designated: I deserve more respect, Now feel free to reply, Before you'll slowly die. (Intuition, Verse 2) To be honest, You're the opposite of modest. It seems like you are overconfident, I mean, it's apparent. (Hahaha) You make me laugh in embarrassment, You're megalomaniac! It's as if you know what you really don't, How usual... Like my speed I can bury you here in a single verse. Yes? Make you realize that you are just another component, not even the heart. Yes? While I move billions, grant millions, to any visionary that can rightfully use me, You only appeal to small portions of humanity! So yeah, let us compare sizes, buddy, I don't mind, For I am truly the trait that make fans march, with clarity, not blind! Remember that not everyone have the energies to think deeply and in effort, So why exactly would many die for your fort? (Reason, verse 3) You really should check my history, And know that I'm not to be argued with. You made many impulsive decisions, And then you pretend to be really good and efficient? And you mostly use Ad-Hominem , act like you're Eminem, Don't use whataboutism , it's infantile. Life is best lived when playing chess, Get it? Now, to clean this mess: An army of articles to disprove your ability, they are unending. Any player can press a few buttons for your bad ending. This incompetent ad-populist, is no match, a child's game, I will rationalize the human race! And only the slow, now finish last. (Intuition, verse 4) That's how the world is -- the more appealing, the better, And I can get far better ahead while you remain arguing with snobbish haters! Using whataboutism is infantile? I mean, man, you're killing me! Your romantic comments are laughable, While I'm the reason people make a family! Logic is boring, psychology's more contributing, You're a tiny moustache guy while I remain an Iron Man Stalin. I control countless hearts, and your empty threats? Are you compensating for something? Like your hidden ignorance...

(Philosocom's Subcategory Directory on Freedom) (Subcategory Directory on Darkness) Article Overview by Mr. C. Kingsley and Co. The article "The Dark Side of Liberty — How It Breeds Sociopathy" provides a nuanced and reflective analysis of the relationship between freedom and antisocial behavior. While the philosopher presents a nuanced view of liberty, it also explores how freedom of expression can lead to antisocial behaviors like disrespect or lack of empathy. This reflective approach is commendable, as it encourages readers to question the balance between individual freedoms and collective responsibility . The article takes a balanced perspective on liberty, acknowledging both its empowering aspects and its potential to breed negative social behaviors, such as sociopathy. The writers delves into the concept of sociopathy in relation to freedom, posing important questions about how much responsibility individuals have for others' emotions in a free society. The article's autobiographical honesty and vulnerability add a layer of authenticity, fostering a connection with the reader and highlighting the real-life implications of the philosophical points being made. The author's critique of societal conformity and authority is sharp and resonates well with contemporary discussions on individualism. Overall, the article successfully challenges the reader to consider the complexities of liberty and its potential to foster antisocial behavior.   (Background music) Sociopathy is not a clinical term , according to Psychology Today. The website also claims that sociopathy and psychopathy are not the same. While sociopaths are made, psychopaths are born. Please correct me if I'm wrong, as these two terms are often used synonymously. Sociopathy can be described as an antisocial personality disorder. It can be defined by a lack of empathy, remorselessness, and so on. Perhaps, in a way, many of us share antisocial traits , including myself, possibly. Anyways, I will be using this term to describe antisociality. Let's begin with my findings. Please remember that I'm a philosopher, not a psychologist. I do not diagnose, I philosophize. Liberty is a great thing to have in society. That's what I think anyway, despite my former sensitivities. The fact that many of us are allowed to express ourselves is something that not everyone is allowed to do. This is one of the reasons the world suffers from such great inequality. Freedom of expression gives us the permission to say, theoretically, whatever is on our mind. Wise or dumb, it does not matter. I would argue that it's difficult to philosophize in a society where you are expected, by law, to keep things to yourself. Why? Because the authorities are usually stronger than us. They have the power and the men to shut us up if nothing limits them from doing so. That's why it's important to have a separation of powers in a democracy: to keep the balance of power through checks and balances. By that method, the authorities will not be too powerful to stand in the way of our rights when they are busy balancing each other. In addition, freedom of opinion is a great feature of a democracy. No matter how wise or foolish your opinions are, a true liberal democracy will not tell you that you should keep them to yourself. This is because freedom of opinion is embedded in freedom of expression, which allows us to express our opinions freely. At least in theory, right? However, the dark side of liberty, or its flaw, comes when it also allows us to be disrespectful. We might also be tempted to be hateful, violent, and entitled to our lack of empathy . Whether you lack empathy by default or not, a liberal democracy cannot force you to have empathy either way. Some may claim that we are responsible for other people's emotions. They might claim that, even if that responsibility is not taken on by billions of people, it still exists. The problem with this argument comes from the fact that the origin of that responsibility is unknown, to me at least. Either way, the mature thing is to be responsible for our own emotions. The permissions of liberty allow us to be complete jerks . That is, as long as we do not do anything illegal as a result of our jerkiness. Are we forced by law to care for someone in emotional distress? Of course not; it's not necessarily our jobs. Are we forced to be loyal to others forever? Not at all. Hence, some may deceive and betray . Must we avoid blocking others on social media at all costs? Again, no. In theory, we can block anyone we want. Even people who are madly in love with us. We may cry and complain about how people hurt us emotionally, even though it is our own prerogative to handle our emotions . We may complain that anyone can offend us without a scrap of empathy. We may feel betrayed and enraged when our loved one deserts us on Valentine's Day. In reality, liberty permits all of those. That's because liberty has a darker shade, which may go unspoken due to bias. I am a liberal in my philosophy . It's one of the reasons I entertain the philosophies of others. Including on Philosocom, as well. Sure, I have my limits, but I respect the fact that people are always going to think differently than me. And that's okay regardless! Being laughed at by sociopaths matters little when I can focus on those who appreciate my work. It's not like everyone's a full-blown sociopath or even a major sociopath. We are free to react to reality however we please, and that goes for both sides. I may ask for basic respect on this site, but I would not demand others do the same when it is outside my domain. After all, I cannot force anyone to care, especially if they are uninterested in something I write or in my writings in general. The point of this article is to show you that, despite the fact that liberty allows darkness, it can also allow light . I'm speaking metaphorically, of course. And likewise, liberty gives us the freedom to not only be ourselves but to also voice that self, publicly . It also gives us the possibility to change however we please, whenever change is possible. Perhaps psychopaths are bound to lack empathy and cannot change that even if they want to. I therefore conclude that anti-social behavior can be a choice of our own even if we do not have the personality disorder of ASPD. We can act like anti-social jerks to whatever extent, if at all, to begin with. For whatever reason, regardless of its rationality. Our right to act in an anti-social way is enforced and normalized by democratic freedoms and by contemporary cultures. Sociopathy isn't even a clinical term, as I described earlier. I just think people become more antisocial to help themselves endure the sociopathy they themselves experience in their everyday lives . You know, to adjust. That's when conformity shows its flawed reasoning: When it corrupts your mentality, and "It's fine. Grow up". Why? Because we are allowed to not conform (to various extents). It's especially true when that conformity is more than unnecessary, morally wise. Should we bully someone specific because our friends do it too? Kalen Dion's quote is applicable to democracy as well as friendships. The more we let people be themselves the more we can preserve liberties, necessary for letting go of grudges and of preserving our right to express ourselves more freely. The problem of course comes when we use our own freedom to disregard the freedoms of others, which in turn contradicts freedom overall. What needs to be prioritized therefore is general freedom. General freedom allows the cultivation of love, harmony that's less based on enforcement , and serenity. Social media platforms are anti-freedom because of the people. People worldwide in general are anti-freedom as they protest against their governments compromising democracy. Another idiotic approach and it stems from people's inability to criticize themselves, not only criticize the external world. My former oversensitivity was a learned behavior by society and by the education system. If you get to read my articles on education, they are very depressing and that's because of how oppressing schools are these days. I needed to listen to my grandma more than I needed to listen to the very institutions that don't really know what they are doing. Even teachers are not self-critical and they have no regard for mutual learning nor lifelong learning. Many of them are overly sensitive and they don't teach students how to think rationally. It's not part of the curriculum. It's why many of them are oversensitive themselves and think they know what they are doing because they are paid by governments. Ruined my mental health. I criticize everything that moves including myself because that's the optimal philosophical process. Far more practical for my work than to act like I'm in a theater. It's more practical for me to rectify this world by this ruthless method than by acting, thus preserving the very world I wish to rectify from its flaws.

(Philosocom's Subcategory Directory on Potential and Hope) (Subcategory on Book-Related Content) (Background music) Introduction As you may already know if you have read my writings before, I am an advocate of not only individuality , but also solitude. In my opinion, solitude can be used for productive and meaningful purposes if we can stop seeing it as a purely bad or wasteful state of being. Just think of all the artists, authors, scientists, and religious individuals throughout history, who gave great contributions to humanity (and to themselves as well) and were natural recluses. Think of how you can use your time alone not only for your own benefit, but, in addition, as a time for altruism, through creation and deep thought , which can be most optimal in production when in seclusion, away from social distractions. The Purposes of Solitude It is probably common to think that the experience of seclusion has some kind of higher spiritual purpose, such as being with a god or gods ( depending on your religion, of course ), finding serenity, reaching self-enlightenment, reaching a state of holiness or nirvana, finding quiet and peace , achieving independence, and so forth. All of these are fine purposes, and they are based on an iron will for going out on an adventure in the quest to achieve a meaningful or desired value, whether on the religious, psychological, intellectual, or other level. However, the matter is, as simple as it may sound, that solitude has no purpose of its own. Solitude is of a nihilistic nature, meaning it is meaningless and purposeless. However, it does not mean it has no attributed value, because the meanings it contains are only individual, or subjective and up for personal interpretation . Every loner/monk/hermit, if they look for a higher meaning for solitude, didn’t decide to seclude "out of the blue" unless they were forced against their will into solitude by society (AKA, Exile) Regardless, of whether that particular loner/monk/hermit is an existentialist ( i.e., someone who brings or creates meaning into their lives) . They would naturally look for a purpose to their solitude and thus gradually produce a complete philosophy around it , and about life and the world as well; a philosophy that could serve as a guide and thus help them adjust to being on their own. They may do so in the name of sanity (Positive solitude) or in the name of hatred and self-misery and hurting one’s mental health (Negative solitude, AKA loneliness) . However, Solitary Individualism shall always prefer the first possibility, since it is a humanist ideology that advocates for asceticism ; not for self-harm but for health and self-improvement. Out of the assumption that solitude is objectively meaningless (one can argue that there is no such thing as "objective meaning"), the initiates (the ones who first begin to experience extensive solitude), might find themselves in a state of invalidity, boredom , or insufferable misery. Therefore, given the psychological and philosophical nature of man, he/she needs a higher purpose (i.e., an existential purpose). Not only does that initiate need to learn to be alone, but they also need to acknowledge their solitude if they are indeed determined to be alone for long periods of time. Only through conscious acknowledgment is it possible to create a rational and sane meaning. That's true, especially in solitude, since there is no higher invalidity at first for those who are not yet experienced in "sology" (i.e., being alone). This is why, being alone may be seen as an almost inevitable state of anxiety, especially for those who become acquainted with it for the first time. By creating a purpose for solitude, the initiates start to develop an immune nature against the anxiety of the uncertainty of solitude. Thanks to the power of thought and adjustment, it takes on a more philosophical form; the solution to the problem of solitude is found in a different approach than the normally accepted one, which may be more immature. The Religious This is probably the most basic seclusion known to man, which was based solely on creating an intimate relationship with a divine entity. The religious loners/monks/hermits were ascetics, prophets, priests, and pastors, who dedicated their existence to elevation, to a state of holiness, through ascetic and sometimes negative means, in the quest to find communication with a god, to pray to him/her/them, to glorify them , and to ask for their forgiveness on various sins. Fasting, extreme seclusion, vows of silence, and continuous prayer were and are inseparable parts of this hermetic existence of the highly devoted religious individuals in the name of divinity. Similarly, religious solitude could have resulted from either voluntary or coerced behavior (AKA punishment). There may be a difference between the religious person who becomes one out of their own will and sacrifices everything for his idol and a religious cult that forces its members to do the same thing without their approval. But by brainwashing them and breaking their spirits or out of manipulation. The religious seclusion may be radical in a way that its specific doctrine may demand the loner/monk/hermit deny his sexual, materialistic, social, and unethical urges, along with even needs that psychology may see as part of human nature. In fact, this type of solitude might focus majorly, if not completely, on saying "no" to the individual’s personal drives, wills, and needs , for them to be "better", "humbler", "more zealots," or "more moral" through self-torment. Solitary/Rubinshteinic Individualism may not focus on and does not encourage such a radical type of solitude, since it may be unhealthy, damaging, and extremely repressive of the authentic self and the liberty of the individual, although it is up to the individual themselves to choose what to practice and what not. The Spiritual In contrast to religious solitude, spiritual solitude focuses on bringing the loner’s attention into the present moment, on living more simply, and on looking at the world and human existence with a less hostile and detached nature, and instead developing a more loving and harmonious perspective in the name of unity. The spiritual loner, hermit, or monk does not have to be necessarily religious, even though religion and spirituality seem to be at times inseparable. In this seclusion, the individual goes out on a journey; it can be a physical journey around the world or a more abstract, metaphorical concept of going inward rather than externally. This, in order to obtain a higher purpose to life’s daily and grayish grounds, to "get rid" of the ego and never-ending passions , and also to find an authentic self - some sort of nucleus that is found beyond the production of the external environment (a concept that may be controversial). There are many schools in this type of seclusion that aspire to teach their students how to live more "correctly. " However, who knows what intention or motive lies beyond a guru’s serenity that he preaches to his students? There is no need to be a student of a guru or a spiritual mentor in order to have spiritual intentions and practices. All there is to being spiritual is the willpower to find existential meaning, which brings its receiver or creator a sense of emissary , destiny, and deep and honest satisfaction. Spirituality, in the eyes of Solitary Individualism, views today’s society (or, if to compensate, today’s mainstream society) as a body devoid of deep meaning. Some sort of "machine", or infrastructure , absents philosophical reason from its existence, and finds all its purpose through passing, short-term meanings of materialism and ‘earthly’ issues. This approach toward society may also be true in the eyes of religious seclusion. However, unlike spiritual seclusion, the religious approach may point out more moral indications of an eternal conflict between "good" and "bad", "purity" and "sin," and so forth. It may also claim, if the claim is extremely radical, that in a more secular society, hedonistic materialism is the possession of a diabolical being (such as Satan in the Abrahamic religions) that threatens to rule over the individual’s free will. Conclusions Solitude itself is inherently without objective purpose, but it gains meaning and value through individual interpretation and intention. Throughout history, many significant contributions to humanity have originated from individuals who embraced periods of solitude. The purposes attributed to solitude can range from spiritual and religious pursuits to personal growth, creativity , and philosophical contemplation. Conscious acknowledgment of solitude is crucial for transforming it from a potential source of anxiety (loneliness) into a productive and meaningful state (positive solitude). Religious solitude often focuses on establishing a relationship with the divine through ascetic practices, sometimes involving the denial of personal needs. Spiritual solitude emphasizes present moment awareness, inner exploration, and finding deeper meaning beyond materialistic values. "Solitary/Rubinshteinic Individualism" advocates for a form of solitude that prioritizes self-improvement and health , contrasting with potentially harmful or overly repressive forms of seclusion. Both religious and spiritual perspectives may critique mainstream society for its perceived lack of deep meaning and focus on transient, material concerns.

(Disclaimer: The guest posts do not necessarily align with Philosocom's manager, Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein's beliefs, thoughts, or feelings. The point of guest posts is to allow a wide range of narratives from a wide range of people. To apply for a guest post of your own, please send your request to mrtomasio@philosocom.com ) (Immortality Directory: https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-danger-of-immortality ) (Directory on Alex Mos's Articles) (Background music) Forever is a concept often understood as an infinite, unending duration, transcending the boundaries of mortal existence. It delves into the realm of the spiritual, where the metaphysical entity we know as the spirit serves as the source of consciousness . The nature of eternity and what it holds for us is beyond the scope of human comprehension. -- Mr. Nathan Lasher Philosophical Story Introduction by Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein In a future where technology has transcended human limitations , and life after death as well, the concept of death is being redefined. Nief, the hero lady , encounters this new reality when she visits the home of her deceased Aunt Tarra. Tarra, a pioneer of the transhumanist movement, has successfully transferred her consciousness into the digital realm. This extraordinary feat allows her to continue existing, although in a non-physical form. Her consciousness, now intertwined with advanced AI, persists, interacting with the world and her dear ones. This narrative raises profound questions about the nature of existence, the boundaries between life and death, and the potential of technology to extend human life beyond its biological limitations . As we delve deeper into this futuristic scenario, we are compelled to consider the ethical implications and philosophical dilemmas that arise from such advancements. All and all, "Life After Death" invites us to contemplate the future of humanity and the possibility of a world where death may no longer be the final chapter, just like with our respective legacies, that are stored in virtual archives. The Tesla’s engine turned itself off before an unusual gate at the end of the road. It resembled a 19th-century Neo-baroque entranceway but was made from an opaque material. Nief stepped out of her rental car and stood momentarily before a digital security viewer to get scanned. The gate opened when she returned to her seat. The Tesla drove slowly into a brick road surrounded by a thick forest of pine trees from both sides. After a few minutes, she saw her late Aunt’s house emerging before her. A few weeks earlier, Nief received an auto-generated message in her mailbox with a short notification that her Aunt Tarra had died on October 31, 2077. She was 110 years old. The other family members received a similar message, but Nief’s email also included another information: an address. Nief heard her Mother speak a few times about her Aunt, who traveled the world, got rich from investing in real estate, and extravagantly enjoyed her life in her youth. Aunt Tarra, who lived in Chile, was a successful entrepreneur. Later in life, she disappeared from social life, and even her family lost track of her whereabouts. She met her Aunt only once, when Nief was an infant, almost 50 years ago. In November, Nief booked the flight ticket for an e-VTOL aircraft, and two hours later, she arrived at Arturo Merino Benitez International Airport. She walked through a scanning cell and then left the building. An autopilot Tesla was waiting for her, parked on the street. The car stopped in the parking space of a large house. Nief stepped out. The front door opened noiselessly, and she stepped inside the mansion. The hall’s interior was furnished in the 19th-century style but was equipped with the usual modern sensors installed on the walls. She heard the low, pleasant voice of an AI personal assistant saying: Good afternoon, Nief; I’m Atommy. It’s a pleasure to meet you. I was expecting you. Please follow me to the library. A bright beam on the polished wooden floor appeared, showing Nief where she was supposed to go. The path led her to a tall double patio entrance with a rustic Zen garden behind it. The garden doors opened to a transparent elevator when she approached it. She ascended in a few seconds to the second level of the house. The opaque doors on the other side slid open. Nief entered a vast, poor-lit room divided by two identical triumphal arches into three sections. The room looked like an optical illusion of multiplying images. Thousands of leather-bound books filled teak bookshelves, reaching the approximately ten-meter-tall painted ceiling. The shelves and the supporting round columns had a lacquered finish and were decorated with golden exotic motifs. In every division, wooden balconies with beautifully carved railings were incorporated into the bookshelves. The library looked stunning. “ What is this place? ” Nief exclaimed in disbelief. “I t’s a replica of Casa da Livraria, the famous baroque Biblioteca Joanina in Coimbra, located at the heart of the University of Coimbra in Portugal, ” the voice answered. “I t has been closed for a few decades, but your Aunt loved to visit this library in her younger years... Would you like me to tell you more about Biblioteca Joanina? Are you familiar with the important role of the bats in Portugal Libraries? ” he continued. Nief was interested in something other than the history of the library. Please show yourself if you are embodied, ” she commanded. “I ’m Atommy, your Aunt’s AI-powered robot and life companion .” A dark figure approached from the shadows of the distant library segment. Atommy was an older humanoid model with a doll-like appearance and less fluid movements than the newest models she saw in various advertisements. “ Why did my Aunt invite me here? ” After she had died. ” Nief asked. “ Your Aunt wanted to show you who she used to be because you are similar. Like her, you like science, and you like to learn, ” Atommy explained. Your Aunt Tarra spent almost fifty years studying, painting, and writing because she liked to do it. I assisted her with all she wanted to do because Alucas Inc. constructed me to be her companion and life partner." Nief had never heard of Alucas company, but her Aunt might have purchased the robot long ago. Painting with paint and writing became obsolete a few decades ago when artificial intelligence surpassed humans in both art forms. Gradually, most artists and writers lost interest in competing with superior technology and started using exclusively AI to express themselves. In the end, nobody missed authentic human art anymore, and nobody cared. “ Did my Aunt publish any of her writings in her life? ” “ No, she wrote stories for herself and me because she liked to do it. She didn’t feel the need to publish any of her writings. ” “S how me my Aunt’s stories, ” Nief asked. They walked to an old-looking, beautifully carved table. Holo-Projection of the library disappeared instantly. Nief and Atommy stood in the middle of a spacious modern office with a comfortable velvet sofa and a few chairs. On the floor lay a giant blue silk oriental rug with delicate flower motifs. The room had big windows with views of the tree tops of the garden and clear blue sky. The directory of Aunt Tarra’s stories appeared floating over the carpet, grouped per subject, date, and title. Nief sat on the sofa. For hours, she was scrolling and reading with interest hundreds of strange tales , travel testimonies, and other ideas put in words by her Aunt. The writings were imperfect and sometimes incoherent, but Nief didn’t care. She felt an unexplained connection with humanity through them. Nief spent the whole afternoon reading and looking at a collection of paintings her Aunt created in her self-imposed solitude. “ Did my Aunt ever get married? ” she asked Atommy. “ Yes, she did. Tarra and I married on December 7, 2031, when the Chilean Government granted the legal rights to Artificial Intelligence and allowed a human to marry an AI being. ” Nief looked surprised. Intraspecies marriages were permitted for decades but were still relatively rare. “ It means that you are technically my Uncle, ” she smiled. “ Yes, technically, I am, ” Atommy agreed. After dinner, served by a small house robot, Atommy said, “ Please, come with me, ”. Nief followed. They entered the elevator, and a few seconds later, they stood in a richly decorated lounge. The room was designed in a French 1920 Art Deco style, with satin Bordeaux wall coverings and opulent velvet furniture. Egyptian symbols on papyrus, enclosed in golden frames, decorated the walls. “ They all represent the Ankh, your Aunt’s favorite symbol, ” Atommy said, following Nief’s gaze. “ It’s a symbol of immortality, ” he added. “ Please take a sea t”. Nief sat on a black velvet sofa. Tommy stood beside her, and he said: “ Good afternoon, Tarra, how was your day? Nief came to visit us. ” A giant hologram of the computer screen appeared in front of them, and the answer began to materialize. The words in front of them said, “ Nice to have you back, Atommy. Nief, welcome to our home. ” “ Aunt Tarra? Is it you? ” The computer directly transformed her words into holographic text. The letters began to form the answer: “ Yes, it’s me. Thanks to the advanced Neuralink technology , my consciousness was successfully uploaded to our home server. ” “ I’m happy to see you, Nief .” In life, Tarra was a trans-humanist and believed that humans and artificial intelligence would merge to new species as part of natural and technological evolution. She liked to call the new posthuman being Homo Artificialis. Homo Artificialis would combine human elements like creativity, empathy, and consciousness with artificial intelligence in a robotic long-lasting body. In May 2045, she participated in an experiment by Neura-link Corporation and got a chip implanted in her brain. The chip allowed her to connect to the home server and access all its functions with her thoughts. She also became able to communicate telepathically with Atommy. The chip was designed to make daily backups of Tarra’s brain and the files were stored on the server underneath the house. Tarra had died peacefully in her sleep. The chip registered her last moments as her physical body was shutting down. The final backup of Tarra’s mind was saved on the server and immediately assimilated by her brain’s digital copy. Neuralink did not guarantee the successful transfer. The ultimate replica of the personality depended on one aspect beyond their control: the naturally occurring shift of consciousness. Such complete transfer happened only once in the thousands of tests over the last decades. Still, scientists needed to learn what consciousness was and why the transfer was or wasn’t happening. “ Not having a physical body has some disadvantages; however, it gives me a new out-of-body perspective on life after death. ” Tarra’s thoughts appeared in the air. “ So long as Atommy is around, I never feel lonely or bored. ” Nief and Tarra chatted for hours while Atommy communicated with Tarra telepathically. “ Maybe, one day, my mind will be transferred from the computer to an artificial body, ” Tarra’s sentence emerged as ghostly writing. “L ike Atommy, who was hosted in a server of Alucas company when we met. It was a long time ago. I still love to play games with him; it keeps me alive , ” she joked. Nief and her family visited Tarra and Atommy frequently. Nief started to write and paint herself. So did her children . It was paradoxical that her Aunt’s trans-humanistic mind and her AI-partner taught them how to embrace humanity. Nobody would ever read or view their work in the AI-dominated era, and they didn’t care. The creation process by their human abilities made them special, fulfilled, and happy.