The Search Bar

(Subcategory on Flaws) (Background music) The Illusory Objectivity of Color Colors are traits of perception that we often mistake for objective facts. We take it for granted that apples are red or green, oranges are... well, orange. But what if our perception of these colors is as subjective as a single person's opinion on a video game? The answer lies in the uniformity of human vision. Most of us perceive the same wavelengths of light as the same colors, although in different variations, depending on how our brains uniquely filters information. This common ground creates the illusion of objectivity. Think of it like a shared language. And languages should also be known as capable of biasing our understanding, and deter ourselves from looking both ways. We all agree that the word "red" describes a specific range of light. This is highly practical because of color psychology, which associates the color "red" with different, yet shared values. However, the actual experience of that redness - the electrical signals firing in our brains - is unique to each individual. It's just that most people's brains interpret those signals in a similar way. What creates loneliness in certain people is the fact that their understanding of the world is not understood/recognized by others. Bridging the gap betwen perceptions is how empathy can be nurtured between individuals, by being able to relate to their unique ways of perceiving reality. By willing to study the perceptions of those who are dear to us, we can reduce their overall suffering. This extends far beyond color. Music, art, entertainment, even the meaning of words themselves -- their value is subjective because it's filtered through the lens of human experience. Much of the human experience and behavior is unique to each individual, although to different extents. Both are subject to genetic variations. However, it's difficult to imagine these things existing outside of our perception, leading to the undoubted delusion that other people experience reality the same way we do. So, how do we know if an orange is truly orange? If humanity vanished in a cosmic puff of dust, would it still be orange? Here's the "hypocrisy" of shared subjectivity: the concept of "orange" wouldn't exist. Objectively, the orange color would be a specific combination of light wavelengths. But without a conscious observer to interpret those wavelengths, there would be no "orange" to perceive. If we all or most of us had the "Alice in Wonderland Syndrome", which alters our perception of bodies and other objects, then our perception wouldn't be canceled out as "incorrect" or even as a "syndrome". In other words, much of what we deem as objective is a product of the ad-populum fallacy. We assume something has certain characteristics, but it's only because many others perceive it the same or similar sa we do. Therefore, much of our understanding is fallacious by default. This correlates with the fact that humans are designed to be logical, but social, in order to survive. To quote David McElroy: As long as you believe that formal logic is all you need to understand about the world, you’re going to miss the fact that understanding human psychology will give you a base of understanding that will change how you interpret what people do and why they do those things. Until you understand human nature, the only people you’re going to understand (and approve of) are those who happen to share your values and who are pursuing goals that make sense to you. A World Without Color Imagine a world filled with shades of grey. Not because of a lack of light, but because this is the full spectrum of human vision in this thought experiment. In this reality, the concept of "color blindness" wouldn't exist. Everyone would see the world the same way, their limited vision being the unquestionable norm. Now, introduce a rare mutation. A single individual, or perhaps a small group, who possess the ability to see the vibrant colors we experience. To them, the world would be a breathtaking revelation, a vibrant orchestra of light unseen by the majority. They wouldn't be "colorblind" – that term wouldn't exist in a world without the concept of color itself. Instead, they would be these unique, outstanding people, the outliers experiencing a reality beyond the common understanding. This thought experiment highlights the limitations of "objectivity", and also how we collectively choose to see those who are more unique than ourselves despite their virtues or shortcomings. What? You thought seeing colors is exceptional in this case? It's only in relation to those who are colorblind. Not in of itself. The Duality of Perception We base our perception of the world on our own limited senses and cognitive abilities. True objectivity, completely independent of human experience, may be an impossible ideal. Sure, we strive for neutrality in some situations, but even that attempt is colored by our biases, and our unawareness of their existence. We are prisoners of our own perspective, unable to fully escape the subjective lens through which we interpret the world. The only way of reducing it is to be prepared for two actions, whether done by us or by someone else: To be prepared to be proven wrong, and to be lambasted for being wrong. Otherwise, we wouldn't necessarily enjoy being right. We would enjoy the mere thought of being right, and the emotion that stems from that thought. Does this render subjectivity superior to the facts that exist beyond it? Not necessarily. Subjectivity can be isolating, leading to misunderstandings when experiences differ vastly. However, it also allows for rich diversity in interpretation and appreciation. The example of an orange illustrates this. We all agree it's "orange" because most of us perceive that specific wavelength of light the same way. But what if someone with a different visual experience claimed it was "green"? Objectivity, in this case, provides no definitive answer, because we cannot view reality outside the prison of the mind. Nonetheless, reality is not a democratic vote, and majority opinion doesn't guarantee truth. Furthermore, opinion, publicly held or not, often contradicts the truth. The key takeaway lies in acknowledging the limitations of both objectivity and subjectivity. They are not opposing forces, but rather two sides of the same coin. While objectivity could arguably exist without subjectivity, subjectivity necessarily stems from objective reality. Similarly to how A.I works today, subjectivity must base itself on something other than what it perceives. Nothing exists in a vacuum. That includes free will. Why Philosophy Embraces Uncertainty Philosophy, at its core, thrives on disagreement, done in harmony. It's a field where ideas clash, perspectives collide, and "basic truths" are constantly questioned. This might seem hopeless and even useless, as a never-ending discourse with no definitive answers. However, this very relentlessness, and willing to hear and synthisize the thoughts of others, is what fuels philosophical inquiry, towards greater depths of understanding. Imagine a world where everyone saw eye-to-eye. Where everyone saw and experienced color, and generally reality, the very identical way. Philosophy, then, would be a rather dull, rendering the need to learn from others' experiences, useless. It's the very existence of opposing viewpoints that compels us to refine our arguments, challenge assumptions, and deepen our understanding. Terms like "pretentious" often mask a discomfort with disagreement, and a poor excuse to not understand other perceptions better, to refine that of our own. As such, our own ad-hominem and strawman's fallacy can dismiss an actually-refreshing, unique experience, to that of belonging to an alleged pseudo-intellectual. And it's all because some of us may refuse to understand reality can be better understood by the research of additional perceptions. Philosophy isn't about promoting our perception as the most superior one. That would be the purpose of many ideologues, not of philosophers. Rather, it's about relentless examination, even if it means questioning long-held beliefs, of either ourselves or others. This discomfort of entertaining several and contradicting viewpoints, extends to the nature of truth itself. Is the orange truly orange, or is it simply perceived that way by our limited senses? As we saw with color perception, "objectivity" can be elusive, as well as uncomfortable when we realize much of our own perception is false. How Paradoxes Exist Despite Our Sense of Logic Logic, the cornerstone of philosophy, is there as a tool for navigating uncertainty, for identifying fallacies and constructing sound arguments beyond our tendency to commit skewed falsehoods. Logic acknowledges paradoxes, like the bitter-sweetness of dark chocolate. How come furthermore? Some paradoxes are in fact true, despite our usually-unchecked logic, which we use to dimiss all paradoxes as non-existent. A paradox allows for the possibility that two seemingly contradictory statements can coexist. Think of Osho's notion of truth being intrinsically paradoxical. Think of what I called in an another article, the "Grey Problem" in the human mind. An orange might appear different to someone with colorblindness, yet both experiences hold validity within their respective frameworks, thus rendering all subjectivity, objectively equal. Reality is experienced in different layers, filtered through the lens of our individual consciousness. We can't escape our own minds, and our logic is inherently human, and therefore, limited, flawed, and imperfect necessarily. The key in traversing this paradoxical and seemingly absurd world, lies inin embracing flexibility. Recognizing, for example that another person's argument, however different, could still hold a component of truth. In conclusion, philosophy doesn't necessarily seeks a singular, universally accepted truth. Instead, it delves into the complexities of human experience, acknowledging the limitations of both pure objectivity and subjective perception. It's a continuous exploration of the worlds within and around us, and how these these worlds interact, despite their distinctions. Within this universe, there's room for a multitude of perspectives, even if some, like the precise height of a tower, are demonstrably more accurate than others. Synthesis is key to improve our perception of reality, using the perception of others. Mr. Nathan Lasher's Feedback Aren’t all things a matter of opinion until enough people have the same kind so that it is considered fact? Before the color orange was invented I wonder what their words to describe it were. “I shall describe the color of this banana as sunny delight!” Makes one curious. How many people have to agree on something for it to become a matter of social knowledge? Taking into account the education system. How much agreement is needed for it to be deemed worthy to be taught to the young of the world? What points in history did people decide that it was worth documenting as a part of history? It leaves me curious what problems are faced by a modern day historian. Are they nothing more than recorders of actions? Summarizing the news of the day so that 100 years from now they will understand exactly what humans have been through. Objective facts are those which are in response to actual matter, the material object of all things. Point in case. Go into a room, put a blindfold on and walk around. To a wall doesn’t exist. Objective reality is understanding just how real it is if you were to walk into [an actual wall]. .

(Philosocom's directory on death: https://www.philosocom.com/post/defining-death) (Philosocom's Subcategory on Suikoden Content) Article Summary by Mr. Roland Leblanc Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein speaks to us here about death, but he also talks about the work that must be done to discover one's purpose in existence, to finally know what to do in order to rectify this world!H e also talks about the normality of dying eventually; it's in the natural order of things! Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein learned English through video games; the goal was achieved and allowed him to reach more people online about the subject that is dear to him… Philosophy... There are many ways to learn about our unique and essential role in this world! This reflection on death can only encourage us to find our path or way of discovering the purpose of our existence or "made to do"… Which is no small feat! (Background music) The Rubinshteinic Philosophy of Accepting Death As you've probably read thus far, I have a large affinity with death, not because I'm suffering, but because I view death from the point of view of a "soldier" or a monk," as one who discards the worldly in favor of "higher" pursuits. As someone who used to believe that everything existent is physical, I let myself be more open to the arcane; the same set of fields I was taught by my Western roots to be but mumbo-jumbo. However, as I've dug deeper into it, most notably the field of numerology, I've found things that were mostly true about me, which got me wondering how such things are decided. And what trivial things, such as my birthdate and name, say about me as a person. Digging further, while trying to combat my cursed chronic fatigue, I have found out this revolutionary paragraph, when referring to the number 9 -- my "Life-Path" number: "A basic understanding of reincarnation is desirable because this lifetime is likely to be your last. 9s are old souls who have lived many lifetimes. Haven’t you ever wondered why nothing really shocks you? It is because you have seen and done it all before. You have existed in every form, color, race, creed, gender, and circumstance. You have traveled in every walk of life. Of course, this does not mean that you have learned all you need to learn, and your experiences in this lifetime will make that very clear. Be prepared to LET GO of previous beliefs and learn something new." If it is true, and if reincarnation is especially true, then... I always wondered what happens after death, even before I became a philosopher. It was one of the basic questions I constantly asked myself before I knew the concept of philosophizing. Back then, and to this day, I tend to think that, when you die, the "whole world" becomes black and that's it; something like a blind man or woman lives. Perhaps I have unconsciously adopted this from the video games I played. Because when your character died there, the screen would turn black and you would "respawn", a.k.a., return to the game from an earlier point. To this day, I think that my own "screen" will turn black when I die. Of course, respawning doesn't make sense in the real world, as life is not a video game, and vice versa. But what if I too will die, and I'll find myself in an infinite "black," where I could not run away from, where I would stay forever, with no chance of anything happening whatsoever? What if death is but an eternal, solitary confinement, where you can't even move or generate thoughts? Reincarnation or not, that thing could be a possibility once one dies or when one is "out" of "extra lives". None of us really know what's in there after the moment we die, or at least that's what I believe. I believed in reincarnation as a kid, as I did in the Abrahamic god, but that was before I was far more rational and skeptical. I even thought I had my own past lives, whom, for some reason, I knew. I recall believing I was a bear who died after getting trapped by a hunter; a singer who got lynched; there were more "memories", but I do not remember them any longer. My childhood "hero", the fictional character Razro from Suikoden IV, can die at the end of anyone's playthrough, especially when you're playing without knowing how to fully recruit all your army members, known as the "Stars of Destiny". Suikoden, you see, cannot be completed fully without a guide, because if you're playing blindly, without knowing even the thinnest of details, then you're going to get the BAD ENDING, or at least its equivalent, the lesser ending. Watching, as a kid, my childhood hero's corpse drift away in a boat at sea, was probably the catalyst for my own, solitary obsession with death. There was a recruit in that game, someone you can miss extremely easily, and because of them, you'll see your player character floating dead at sea, no matter how much you play. It took me a few years to realize that there is an alternative ending; the one where the hero actually gets to live. For some reason, I wanted my hero to die. It was a rational ending for me. It was a worthy conclusion to a game where your main "superpower" damages you. The whole game was about how certain people die, due to having a rune on their hands that consumes their lives over time and in general. Now, as I write this, I realize that's the thing I wanted all along for him, not because I hate him, but because his finite death, his sacrifice, justifies his destiny, his function in the world he operated in... His "Tikkun". It is just, from a literary perspective, that he will not return! The reason is because he suffered so much. Sacrificed so much of his life and himself. It is truly a saddening tale of a former knight who regained the things he lost.... at the price of his independence from that burdensome, Rune of Punishment. His very gift, that saved a group of islands from an evil empire, was his own personal curse. Giftedness is a liability of its own. Even in the sequel to that game (a spin-off), Razro will not return unless you get the best ending in the previous game, saved in this physical object-- the Memory Card. Should he return, it would be, but for being an extra character, an additional unnecessity. And the thing is, I always liked to think that Razro was me; A silent "soldier" doing his assignments. Everything he does, is determined by the game, and there is no escape from it. Even when you have certain choices, they eventually return you to the main plot, or literary CANCEL themselves upon selection, for some reason, even though they are still "options". Many people may think that "mechanic" is stupid, but for me, it's like the game saying to you: "You are confined to your current existence; you cannot escape from what you are confined to". Hehehehe... The illusion of choice. This reminds me of my own life, because I too have this intuitive feeling that my life's destiny is sealed. Of course, I have the power to change my own life by making unusual choices, such as turning to crime, religion, or politics..... but there is this very, very heavy feeling that "confines" me to "the ground," as if I do not have free will, but instead am a slave to my own desires and needs. I am a believer in freedom, but I myself don't feel free, when I think of my own potential. Yes. I see myself but a puppet to philosophy. I always philosophized, hence my mastery in this craft. You might be witnessing something that could've been destined by my own existence. It saved my life once... It restored me from a temporary physical disability. It helped me kill off my extreme sensitivity... I am a slave to my own giftedness. Why do you think I write? It is a duty that I literally feel like doing, like homework, as a student. The more I write, the more something inside of me is satisfied, to the point that I had the actual power to get up from the bed I lie in, during my Reaping Fatigue Era. It was an extremely sensual thing. Not a fetish, mind you, but something I have from an "authority"; a heavy, fat "figure" that lies within me and confines me to this bed to write. So... perhaps, even if reincarnation is revealed as truly existent, my own time on Earth may be my last, not exclusively due to the paragraph I quoted, but because I too am tired of this world; of the things that make many excited by it. Excited about the things that make many happy. They all seem to me like casual Tuesdays. An endless rain of Tuesdays. When I hear on the news that someone has been murdered, all I feel is apathy, simply because many people die every day anyway. When I hear someone is born to people I know, I automatically remind myself that many people are born every day. When I saw that damn road in London, the one that a family member was excited about because it is iconic to the Beatles, all I could think of was how it was similar to the scenery in my own country. Even in celebratory events, all I could think about was what will be next -- the next lesson, the next assignment at work, and so on. The refreshments from the functions to be fulfilled are either a distraction or a function of themselves as a rejuvenation. Nonetheless, each task has a beginning and an end, and life is but a series of tasks, is it not? Is it not? Nothing truly excites me, even when I am, in a way, "excited." I will not scream in happiness; I will not sink in celebration at nightclubs. A student from my past has told the class, that he "can't even imagine him [me] doing these things." I slowly became emotionless. I am prepared for the inevitable possibility of death. I guess that's why writing philosophy is the only thing that makes me feel proud, and accomplished. It's not arrogance, or a sense of entitlement; it could be the possibility that I might die one day, and all I will see, sense, and experience, is complete, eternal darkness, all because there are no more tasks left to complete; or articles left to write. It will be when I will be discharged from the duties I've been assigned in this world. If everything that exists is rational and/or necessary, then I might, one day, be too irrational, too unnecessary, to live, even to the point of not returning. I do not fear it, for it will come regardless of my efforts. We choose to resume living, thus we choose grief.

Article Summary by Anonymous Trigger warnings, while helpful for those with PTSD, can be a double-edged sword. They can foster a culture of excessive sensitivity and censorship, limiting free speech and academic freedom. It's impossible to know what triggers everyone, making widespread use of trigger warnings impractical. Mr. Tomasio argues for resilience and the ability to cope with discomfort. They recommend CBT to manage negative thoughts. While empathy for those easily offended is acknowledged, the ultimate responsibility for managing one's emotional state lies with the individual. Philosophy often deals with disturbing topics. Mr. Tomasio might use trigger warnings sparingly but stresses that readers are responsible for their own mental well-being. Trigger Warnings: A Double-Edged Sword Trigger warnings are perhaps the finest attempt by people to try to avoid the inevitability of eventually becoming upset whenever they are exposed to the external world. That excludes people who suffer from PTSD, as they are a very important exception. The disturbance of their past haunts them even in the form of words. So, I intend to purify Philosocom from common triggers, just for that demographic alone. The word "R***" has either ceonsored or removed completely. For any other such common words, please let me know at mrtomasio@philosocom.com. Anyways, outside of PTSD victims, as we become more and more sensitive, we might also become afraid of being offended by people and their statements, as we prioritize comfort over discomfort, easiness over difficulty, and so on. In other words, one could say for sure that trigger warnings usually come from two fears: The fear of the reader to be upset over something beyond their control, and.. The fear of the content provider to have their reputation damaged by their audience's dissatisfaction with the lack of sensitivity within the consumed content (AKA, being "cancelled"). However, I believe that trigger warnings are problematic, outside special occasions that lead to regression and very unusual emotional behaviors. For example, the real name of a person I call Chen, used to make me vomit for a few years. My physician told me it was only mental, not medical. I wouldn't say that people actively search for a reason to be offended, but rather they are too uncomfortable dealing with being upset for whatever reason they had found to be offended. If someone offers us to "grow up", it does not have to be taken as an insult, and we don't have, usually, to react intensively to it. Another example, people can be offended by compliments, even though the original intention was sincerely good. Does this mean that we have to put trigger warnings on everything, including positive things? That would be problematic to implement, because it would mean that trigger warnings are not as important as they are if we use them for everything we publish. That's because when it becomes too frequent, it becomes too granted as well, thus losing its original value. The Thin Line Between Sensitivity and Censorship Trigger warnings also create another problem, which is the threat to free speech and even academic freedom. Free speech, of course, goes beyond the right to express yourself, but also entails your right to choose how to express your words. It also allows you to not say anything at all, like when given the right to remain silent. If there were a state where you were required to use trigger warnings every time you said something mildly uncomfortable, you would be basically limiting your ability to communicate just because there are some people, who do not have PTSD or something similar, are not resilient enough to cope with their own discomfort. That's especially when your words had no intention whatsoever to be offensive towards anyone. We cannot always know what triggers the people we address or publish our work to. That would mean that the likelihood of using trigger warnings every time it deserves would be quite low. There may, however, be some words such as R*** that deserve trigger warnings. They also deserve being censored and have synonyms found to it. But what I'm talking about here is about words that you don't really have any idea about, that could trigger someone's unusual emotional reaction. There used to be a meme that goes "Sometimes, I dream about cheese" and in one video where this meme appeared, someone said they found it offensive because they were lactose-intolerant. See how an inoffensive meme on the internet could hurt at least one person. I guess we can agree that cheese and **** are not, objectively, at the same weight, correct? Discarding the objectivity in this would also discard the reason behind the straw man fallacy's existence. Does that mean we should censor the word "cheese"? This article was not intended to ridicule the sensitive. I used to be a very sensitive person, but I never needed a trigger warning simply because I accept the distinction between me and the world. Of course, also because I am not affected much by my traumas in terms of post-effects. I now understand better, regardless. I know the world is flawed by default regardless of my efforts, so I just accept it as it is. Whenever I see an anti-Semitic joke or an incorrect use of the word "autism", or even when I'm respectfully being criticized, I remind myself that the disliked distinction between me and others should not bother me, as that bothering would not yield any productive results. No. It would just make me offended and no more, which is far from preferred. I won't be surprised if people who were victims of anti-semitism will be triggered very severely by future expressions of it. But does that mean we should avoid discussing it entirely? Perhaps discussing this topic CAN help. Should we sacrifice debate for those with the relevant mental hardships? I'm asking these questions seriously by the way. Trigger warnings show something very problematic with the world today -- the fact that we are not prepared to live in coexistence with one another, because of how unprepared many of us are to be unsettled, even for a bit, by things we don't want to see, listen to, or read. If it wasn't the case, there wouldn't be such a dominant need to place trigger warnings. There might be a smaller need for it, yes, but not as big as nowadays. This is why there aren't really trigger warnings on this site. Since the reception of content is beyond my control, and because I seek to eradicate general words that cause a PTSD/mental health reactions, it is not my responsibility to unintentionally cause minor unease. Free Speech and Sensitivity in the Age of Trigger Warnings No content creator can necessarily choose for someone to be offended or not, as much of being offended is another's choice, not ours. That is especially true if no offense was intended in the first place. This is also why I highly recommend learning a method called CBT or cognitive behavior therapy, which is probably your best shot at tackling inner discomforts with the power of conscious thinking. I believe the more we will be able to alter uncomfortable thoughts, caused by things and beings beyond our control, the more we can function in coexistence as a global society. Thus there may be less of a need for the placements of trigger warnings in videos, articles, and other forms of communication and media. The need exists for any content creator who has the empathy to care for his or her more-troubled readers. But what if they sometimes like to write about cheese, and one happened to be triggered by dairy products? A Philosopher's Dilemma Remember, I don't really desire or intend to offend anyone. If you believe that I do, and even confront me with this imaginary intention of mine, then at least try to bring evidence. Why would it be proportionate for someone to send me an angry email because I wrote that I am addicted to coffee? It isn't proportionate, and there is no proportional reason to be triggered by my coffee addiction. Nonetheless, I might write trigger warnings, but keep them at minimum. This is a philosophy website. The truth is sometimes disturbing, so as a philosopher I am often conflicted between the insights I bring, and the comfort of my dear readers. Either way, taking care of your mental state will forever remain your own responsibility, even if you decide to share it with me. Mr. Nathan Lasher's Feedback Why are people so triggered by people’s words and actions? That concept is ridiculous in my own mind. People get triggered and their thoughts are illogical. The one constant on this earth is that people are always doing actions. Why take offense because you witnessed a person doing a particular action?. You can think about it this way: Next time it happens, take a moment to determine if what they did actually impacts you or not.

(Philosocom's Directory on Competency) Article Synopsis by Mr. O. C. Isaac and Co. "How to Think Like a Competent Villain" is an insightful exploration of the importance of long-term thinking and wisdom. The article uses the metaphor of a "villain" to emphasize the importance of foresight and strategic thinking, engaging readers through relatable and intriguing concepts. The central thesis emphasizes that focusing on long-term consequences leads to better decision-making and learning from past mistakes to avoid repeating them. The article uses examples like Scar from "The Lion King" and Professor Ratigan from "The Great Mouse Detective" to illustrate how overlooking small details can lead to significant failures. The philosophical depth of the piece delves into deeper discussions about wisdom, rationality, and the human condition, encouraging readers to engage in self-reflection and continuous self-improvement. In conclusion, "How to Think Like a Competent Villain" is a compelling article that offers valuable insights into the importance of long-term thinking and wisdom. (Background music) Part 1: Personal Reflections and Insights Cultivating Wisdom for a Fulfilling Life One has the ability to cultivate long-term thinking, as with any other skill in life. Every single step we take in life has its own consequences. The wisdom is to be able to detect these implications, so we will be far better at making decisions. Focusing solely on immediate gains traps us in a cycle of repeating avoidable mistakes. Without learning from our missteps, even long-term thinking becomes ineffective. The key lies in actively analyzing our experiences. By doing so, we enhance our decision-making, fostering wisdom and ultimately, becoming more competent thinkers. And the point of competent thinking is to increase our chances of getting our desired results, and less outcomes that we may regret of, unnecessarily. As such, the improvement of our intellect can bring much benefit to us and others, and reduce unnecessary suffering as well, that originates from avoidable mistakes. One of the primary reasons I engage in philosophical discourse is to enhance my rationality, not to display it in arrogance. When you lose much emotion as a result of traumatic experiences with the world, you might also lose certain filters that can only be restored through a strong intellect. Therefore, intellectual growth becomes essential, ensuring that neither myself nor others suffer needlessly. Preserving Sanity for the Greater Good No one needs to be my victim, because no one needs to suffer unnecessarily by my increased lack of emotion, and new-founded ruthlessness, against those who are too impulsive to think for the long-term. After all, I force myself to live in the name of my clan and in the name of working on Philosocom. There is little that is fully voluntary in anything I do, and none has any reason to stand in the way of someone who is dead inside. The point of working on Philosocom and maintaining my sanity is to remain alive, so others won't suffer in my absence from this world. I refuse to succumb to the hands of adversity if I can prevent such an occurrence, particularly if it threatens to traumatize my mental well-being. Why in the world would I want enemies that would purposefully oppose me? Perhaps some of you share this sentiment. I strive to learn from any source to enhance my wisdom and ensure the safety of my life and my plans. I philosophize as much as I learn because I know that without knowledge and without wisdom, I remain, by default, far more flawed. And it is illogical to want to be unnecessarily flawed in a world that can ruthlessly punish you for it. I aspire to become a wiser individual, so I won't commit actions I would regret making, and also, to make better choices. I seek wisdom not by blindly embracing day-to-day experiences but by adopting a strategic approach, like to a chess player planning their moves in a calculated manner. Long term-thinking increases likelihood of success. Every decision we make can be fortified by wisdom, achieved through careful consideration and planning. This principle applies universally. Every piece of information, no matter how seemingly insignificant, holds the potential to securable the decision-maker and their assets, from self-inflicted, regrettable outcomes. I do permit myself to make minor mistakes, as they serve as valuable lessons in understanding how to prevent them and why avoidance is required. It's called testing, experimentation. Empiricism. The Concealed Path to Wisdom You will never fully know these mistakes. I will not let you. I remain in mystery for a reason. And only I know what goes on in my subconscious, which I visited during my meditations. Part 2: Distilling Wisdom From External Case Examples Lessons from Mistakes and Cartoons Having made numerous mistakes throughout my life, I have dedicated myself to meticulously examining and avoiding such missteps, so I won't make them again, and so that others won't suffer unnecessarily because of me (and vice versa). I observe the world around me from the sanctuary of my mental hermitage, engage in conversations with both familiar and unfamiliar individuals, and even immerse myself in children's cartoons to better comprehend how to avoid replicating the foolishness of these comical characters. Villains hold a particular fascination for me, as they often succumb to failure in the pursuit of preventing the hero's victory. While some villains may be successful in achieving their objectives, their victories are often fleeting, like the short time I ever knew my late ancestor. The villain's destructive nature is one that can destruct his own path by making mistakes he or she could've not made, thus ensuring the length and benefit of their accomplishments. How Short-Sighted Villainy Leads to Mighty Falls Scar from "The Lion King" stands as a rare exception among classic Disney villains, successfully ascending to the throne through deception and manipulation. However, his reign was cut short due to his failure to personally eliminate his nephew, Simba, who ultimately overthrew him. Scar's fatal flaw lay in his reliance on his dim-witted henchmen, the Hyena Clan, to execute Simba. While the reasons behind his inaction remain misunderstood, his decision proved fatal to his regime, years on later, as Simba became an adult. The Hyenas where too overconfident, and underestimated the fact that Simba may be vengeful for the death of his father. Similarly, Professor Ratigan, the antagonist from another Disney film, "The Great Mouse Detective," committed a crucial error by failing to ensure the demise of his arch-nemesis, the detective Basil. Instead of decisively eliminating Basil, Ratigan merely trapped him in a mouse trap, from which he managed to escape. In this case as well, the villain underestimated the ability of the hero to escape the murder attempt. The Snowball Effect of Oversights Do you perceive the pattern? Villains often fall victim to overlooked mistakes, which ultimately lead to their downfall. This analogy resembles a snowball, where a single misstep can transform a harmless snowball into a formidable force, capable of derailing your plans and aspirations. The very thing that can lead to your downfall was once a minor setback you failed in seeing its dangerous potential. The principles governing one domain can undoubtedly be applied to various facets of life, including seemingly juvenile subjects such as children's cartoons. This is where fiction can indeed be taught from when some of its content can be applied to real life. Other than that, it's a poor teacher of reality. Final Part: What Prevents Us From the Success of Our Plans The Wise Path: Prioritizing Growth I firmly believe that the freedom of expression (although it has its perks), impulsivity, and even hedonism serve as excuses for neglecting one's potential for intellectual growth. While freedom of expression constitutes a fundamental right in a democratic society, impulsivity represents a personality trait, and hedonism embodies a philosophical perspective ----- none of these factors have to diminish our inherent capacity for wisdom, which is defined by making calculated, per-the-plan choices. All of the 3 concepts have one thing in common: They can stand in our way from being wiser. All because of something called desire. The fact that we desire to do something, does not mean we should do it, if said desire has the power to diminish our own ambitions. Examining our desires is therefore imperative in order to understand the gravitation of the actions that may follow. Why We Shouldn't Run from Our Problems, and Rise Above Current Disappointments, Instead Many of us seek to escape from our problems, or at least attempt to do so. While certain situations and entities, such as encountering a bear in the wilderness, call for avoidance, it does not negate our ability to effectively manage inevitable challenges in general. When you are willing to do what it takes for a goal to be accomplished, carrying out tasks can be far easier. We can learn to cope with difficult people, financial setbacks, illnesses, and disabilities. Even if some issues are unavoidable, I firmly believe that we all possess the capacity for improvement. The key lies in commitment. When we are truly committed to a goal, seemingly daunting tasks become manageable steps along the way. This commitment fuels a growth mindset, where we view challenges as opportunities to learn and improve. With this perspective, we can develop the skills necessary to cope with a wide range of obstacles. “In a growth mindset, people believe that their most basic abilities can be developed through dedication and hard work—brains and talent are just the starting point. This view creates a love of learning and a resilience that is essential for great accomplishment.” The Renaissance Blog The Art of Navigation, Fueled by Belief in Oneself and In Humanity Life throws a variety of problems and challenges our way: difficult people, financial setbacks, illnesses, and even disabilities. However, these are not unsolvable, so don't victimize yourself. By developing coping mechanisms and unleashing our inner genius, we can learn to navigate these difficulties with greater ease. For instance, when faced with a challenging personality, emotional intelligence strategies can help us manage interactions and minimize conflict. Financial setbacks may necessitate greater wisdom in finances. Illness often requires a combination of medical treatment and lifestyle adjustments. And for those living with disabilities, a focus on unique techniques and assistive technologies can significantly improve quality of life. Think for the long term not just for success, but for a vision of a better life. My faith in humanity extends to my own self-belief. I may be continously disappointed, as I should be, but I refuse to give in to petty generalizations. It is counterproductive to harbor feelings of love for an individual who has repeatedly rejected your advances and is currently in a committed relationship. It is counterproductive to yearn for a past that will never return. It is far productive to work for a world you want to live in. To devise a plan, and demonstrate it, until its application has dominated your world, other people's world.... Or Earth itself.

(Philosocom's Directory On Emotions) (Philosocom's Hidden Logic Systems Directory) Summary by Anonymous The article explores a unique emotional experience that arises during deep solitude. Mr. Tomasio describes this emotion as distinct from loneliness or isolation, characterized by a sense of detachment from human connection and a profound connection with oneself. This unnamed emotion is seen as a catalyst for personal growth and self-discovery. By embracing solitude, Mr. Tomasio seeks to transcend the limitations of human nature and achieve a higher state of being. The article also delves into the challenges and rewards of solitude, highlighting the importance of self-awareness and the potential for spiritual and emotional growth. Mr. Tomasio ultimately suggests that by exploring the depths of solitude, one can uncover hidden aspects of oneself and attain a greater, unconventional understanding of the human condition. (Background music) The Unnamed Enigma: Embracing the Unfamiliar in Deep Solitude I have discovered something unique, a hidden facet of my being revealed only during extended periods of disconnection from the world as a physical hermit. Not just silence, but complete isolation, devoid of even the faintest whisper of human interaction. Within this profound quietude, an emotion arises, one for which even language seems inadequate. It defies conventional labels of positive or negative. No, it washes over me like a spectral tide, transforming me into a "phantom," adrift in a realm beyond conventional understanding. This mysterious, unnamed emotion is the true essence of solitude, a hidden gem veiled from most eyes. Loneliness it is not. The ache of isolation has long since faded, replaced by a quiet mastery of my own company. I can endure solitude for extended stretches, not just endure it, but flourish in its embrace, forming the article empire you read before you. It empowers me, grants me freedom and a sense of being a little less dead inside. This is why I've retreated partially from the world, finding solace primarily in my work for humanity, where the lack of noise grants me the space to cultivate this unique connection with myself, meant as a means for you, for altruism. Yet, the emotion I describe isn't simply "Solitarus," the love one finds in being alone, a concept already foreign to many. That too, is a contributing factor to my semi-hermit status, for "Solitarus" or "Bdiduta" are fleeting moments glimpsed only in the deepest moments of isolation. This unnamed emotion, however, was felt very rarely. It was a symphony played on the strings of my own being, its melody both melancholic and strangely beautiful, the same as it was alienating. It somehow makes sense, giving that, according to the "Grey Problem", we are containers of internal conflicts and contradictions. Perhaps one day, I will find the words to capture its essence, to share this enigmatic experience with the world. But for now, it remains an unnamed wonder, a secret treasure unearthed in the vast, silent expanse of solitude. Either way, we are more than what we're letting ourselves to be. Embracing the Alien Grip of Solitude That emotion of love, so great it makes one wonder why else exist besides survival and other minimal pursuits, is not the emotion I speak of. The strange emotion I describe pulls me away from "humanness" and towards something "alien." I can only attempt to describe this "alien" feeling through its effects. It's not exhaustion, for then I would crave the escape towards company. No, perhaps this is what I hinted at in my earlier work, where I spoke of solitude as something that can "ascend" the human spirit beyond the confines of its social nature. While I can't pinpoint the exact number of times I've felt this "alien" feeling, the first instance remains vivid. I used to go on incredibly long walks, hours on end, devoid of any interaction. That particular walk wasn't anything special, I believe, yet the feeling materialized only there. A bittersweet melancholy, not quite misery, happiness, or sadness. It simply exists, obscure and enigmatic. This feeling appeared rarely throughout my life; I would estimate less than five occurrences. If you've ever experienced the hauntingly serene ambience of the Silent Hill video games, that's the closest approximation I can offer for this alien sensation within solitude. Some might subscribe to the philosophy that we've already unearthed the full spectrum of human emotion. But have we truly? Society, you see, acts as a distraction, a means to avoid confronting the mysteries, blessings and illnesses within ourselves. Through acts of meditation we can transport the subconscious into the conscious, as we become aware of the things that manage us. The fears, the desires, and so on. We shouldn't expect society to understand what we ourselves fail to understand properly. For the person who is the most with themselves, is themselves. We are capable of professorship about ourselves, others might not. By choosing solitude, I acknowledged the mental health risks that lurked there: alienation, boredom, and depression. However, I yearned for what many others escaped from: to conquer the challenges that reside within the darkness of being alone, to transcend them, to become immune to the negativity that can arise from prolonged solitude. And ultimately, to dispel that darkness within me, so I won't be immoral like many others. That, if I were an alchemist, would be my "Philosopher's Stone." In Search of the Nameless Back when I wrote my books, I wanted to become my own variant of the "Ubermensch" as described by Nietzsche, but only when it came to society and solitude -- to be above them both, and thus truly independent of the emotions that follow each. No loneliness; no craving for love; no desire to socialize; and finally, no suffering regarding either society or solitude; no suffering of any kind revolving around human interaction, or lack thereof. Is it what I seek, this strange emotion for which I have no name? It is blank as the winter sky, and yet, it is intense as lightning. It makes you feel like something's changing, like something is transitioning, but you do not know exactly what. I've read about hermits more extreme than myself; people who lived days and months on boats, in the wilderness, in Antarctica. I still have that book somewhere, the Loner's Manifesto by Anneli Rufus. They did not describe the emotion I am trying to describe here, and I do not know why. Perhaps they kept it to themselves, I don't know. What I wish to be, nonetheless, is a man who is beyond society and seclusion, someone who could work out with each. Since I have been so much with others throughout my life, in the form of school and work, I decided years ago that the next phase is to sink deep, deep into solitude, communicating with others only when necessary. The definition of "necessary", however, is not as concrete as it may seem, so I had to write an article explaining it. I seek to survive beyond my death, and thus I made this site, so I will survive within your own memory, but of course, that's not the sole purpose of this site, as you may already know. Beyond Duality, Beyond Suffering Whether this strange emotion returns to grace me with its presence, I'm unsure. Perhaps I'll delve deeper into its nature, perhaps it will remain an intangible notion. What I can say with certainty is that physical isolation has often served as the spark, the catalyst -- that is what ignites my exploration of transcending the inherent "socialness" of humanity. To become of greater humanity, morally. To become a more moral being, you must first know yourself better, so you will know what within you can be improved. Even through writing, we can discover ourselves better. We can do so, and empirically realize that we exist beyond many unnecessary dependencies, beyond our attachments, and even... beyond our solitude or loneliness. I struggle to capture the essence of this emotion in words. It exists outside the binary dance of society and solitude, nurtured by profound moments of silence and physical disconnection. In its embrace, you shed the being a "concrete" human, dissolving into a "fluid" "phantom." Abstract, indeed. You realize how small and miniscule you are, and you also realize how complex you are, at the same time. Indeed, as the philosopher Zeno realized, reality is infinite.

(Background music) (Maturity Directory) Introduction As a lifelong learner, I'm constantly learning and navigating the currents of life. Fortunately, I've had the wisdom of those who have come before me to guide my journey to improve the insights on this blog, for a better Philosocom. Here are some invaluable lessons I've learned from them: Elaborated Lessons from the Elders: Seize the Advantage: Don't let beneficial opportunities slip through your fingers. When life throws open a door that aligns with your goals or could lead to positive experiences, step through it with confidence, for life is like a game of Risk. Remember, even if the path isn't perfectly clear, sometimes the best way to learn is by taking a chance. And even if that chance will be dark and grim, use the darkness to build your mind. 2. Study the Art of Communication: Text messages and online interactions are convenient, but they lack the richness and benefit of face-to-face communication. Tone of voice, facial expressions, and body language all play a crucial role in understanding the true meaning behind someone's words. To bridge this gap, practice active listening – pay attention to the speaker's nonverbal cues during conversations, and when in doubt, ask clarifying questions. Even the autistic can read the room with enough practice. 3. Practice the Art of Gratitude: Never take kindness for granted, in a world filled by moral depravity, darkness and grief. Express appreciation to those who go the extra mile for you, especially the people who raised you and provided for your needs. A simple "thank you" or a gesture of your appreciation can go a long way in strengthening these bonds. With such simple gestures, we could socially engineer a better world. 4. The Essence of Loyalty and Cooperation: Collaboration is key in most aspects of life, where doing things by yourself are very hard or impossible. Strive for a clear division of labor within a group, and put and respect boundaries. Don't be afraid to voice your opinions, but also be respectful of others' viewpoints. Ensure everyone understands their role and responsibilities to achieve a successful outcome. And to think that "division of labor" exist only in the corporate world can be seen as a quasi-specific terminology. In other words, you can apply this separation of tasks in your household, when going to a cafe (or working in it remotely), and even when driving someone. 5. Choose Your Words Wisely: While a curse word might feel to us as stress-and-pain relieving, it can often have negative consequences on your relationships with your friends, followers and even fans. Harsh language can damage relationships, create a hostile environment where coercion is normalized. Finally, it can even hinder your professional success, in the absence of a calmer mind. Express frustration in a more constructive way, and focus on solutions rather than insults. 6. Respect: The Cornerstone of A Greater Authority-Trust: Always treat your elders and people in authority figures with respect. Disagreements happen, but yelling or disrespectful behavior achieves nothing but lost respect and potential, unintended results. Clearly and calmly state your case instead, in order to reduce stress, and not to aimlessly increase it. And as an authority figure, consider adapting moral responsibilities for those who follow you. Do so, and you could better prevent insurgencies. This world has known enough internal wars... 7. Forge Your Own Path: Don't blindly follow societal norms! They often lack the understanding of what's good for you, and with their oppression, would even seek to stagnate you. While tradition and societal expectations can be valuable, and can contribute to social harmony, don't be afraid to chart your own course. That is, especially, when others don't even seek to understand, but to argue. Carefully consider what truly aligns with your goals and values, and don't be afraid to break convention if necessary. Value the practicality of looking both ways. 8. Embrace Joy Without Guilt: Life can be enjoyed without guilt. Don't feel bad for indulging in activities that bring you genuine happiness as long as they're not harmful. Make time for relaxation and nurturing a peaceful life... it's essential for maintaining a healthy balance in life, as valued in Taoist philosophy. 9. Be Prepared! Always have some emergency cash on hand. Unexpected situations arise, and having some readily available funds can save the day, whether it's a flat tire, a missed bus fare, or a sudden need for a quick meal. However, don't restrict yourself to money alone. Think like a competent villain would. And as such, as war emerged where I live, I remained calm. As I studied John Duran's very difficult life, I remained calm. As I gave people reason to avoid self-sacrifice, I remained calm. It is through preparations for the uncommon, that we grow our unique potential... "It takes the Uncommon to create the Unique. Don't expect a Picasso from the ordinary, nor the common from a God" -- John Duran 10. Study The Art of Assertiveness: There's a difference between being a pushover and being aggressive. It doesn't have to be a dichotomy. Develop your assertiveness skills – learn to communicate your needs and boundaries clearly and confidently, while still being respectful of others. This hopefully will especially work for empaths. 11. Balancing Family and Independence: As you mature, your relationship with your family naturally evolves. While respect and gratitude remain crucial, you'll also establish your own independence. Find a healthy balance – make your own decisions, but remember the values and support your family has provided. Not only financially. Spend time with your old father and mother. Make them happy. Make them proud. Make them live longer. 12. Planning for Parenthood: Having children is a life-altering experience. Carefully consider your circumstances before starting a family. Ensure you're emotionally and financially prepared to provide a nurturing and stable environment for your children. Do not traumatize them, "so naturally..." 13. The Journey to Independence: Developing independence is an essential part of growing up. Learn to take care of yourself, manage your finances, and make your own decisions. Do not depend so unnecessarily. It shall hinder your growth and freedom. 14. Respectful Disagreement: Disagreements are inevitable. Learn to disagree with others respectfully: Agree to disagree. "Agreeing to disagree is a rational way of saying out loud that there is no point in arguing further about an issue, as both parties have good reasons for believing what they do and are unlikely to change their minds. Rather than simply disengaging from advocacy, it is better to propose that you would prefer to agree to disagree." -- (Admiredleadership Blog) Focus on understanding the other person's perspective and present your own arguments calmly and rationally. You can maintain good relationships even when you don't see eye to eye. As you should, and can. 15. Planning at Your Own Pace: Planning is vital for success, but don't get a paralysis by analysis. Some people thrive with detailed schedules, while others prefer a more flexible approach. Craft a planning system that works for you. This way you can stay organized without feeling overwhelmed. Don't fall to a "reaping fatigue", like i did. 16. Consider the Ripple Effect: Don't make rash decisions with significant consequences. Don't act on impulse. Don't "shoot yourself in the foot". Which leads to number 17... 17. Think about the potential domino effect of your choices, not just for yourself, but also for those who might be impacted by your actions. Take time to weigh the potential outcomes and choose a path that leads to a positive ripple effect. 18. Become a Discerning Thinker: Not all information is created equal, for it is compromised by ulterior motive, and by bias. Develop critical thinking skills – learn to evaluate the source of information, identify potential biases, and seek out diverse perspectives before accepting something as true. Final Words I hope I successfully imparted to you the lessons I received from those older than myself, and thanks for reading. Feel free to share if you'd like your connections to read it too.

(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) (Philosocom's Kaiser Basileus Articles) (Part 1) Article Synopsis by Mr. Chris Kingsley and Co. "Dystopia -- 21st Century Socio-Political Critique" by Mr. Kaiser Basileus is a comprehensive critique of modern society, focusing on government policies, economic disparities, social norms, and systemic injustices. The author's views are expressed as those of the guest author, are not necessarily those of Mr. Rubinshtein or Philosocom. The critique covers a wide range of topics, including legal and economic systems, social norms, and systemic injustices. The piece contains numerous thought-provoking insights, particularly regarding the nature of power, societal norms, and the role of government. Statements like "Rhetoric is the dark art of counting effectiveness more important than truth '' encapsulate deep philosophical critiques that invite readers to reconsider commonly accepted ideas. In conclusion, "Dystopia -- 21st Century Socio-Political Critique, Part 2" is a valuable contribution to contemporary socio-political discourse, encouraging critical reflection and dialogue. (Background music) ********************************** Mr. Rubinshtein's Description of "Dystopia" (Reminder) Mr. Kaiser's "Dystopia" is a socio-political critique on contemporary society, covering many aspects of modern life. His unique perspectives offer a refreshing look on many features of our lives in which we learned to accept as completely legitimate. "Dystopia" is here to challenge our beliefs and expand our discourse in contemporary philosophy, from society to ethics to politics. The original document given to me is extremely long and as such will be divided to several parts. I hope you will benefit from it. Enjoy. Part 2 Basically, all of America was a for-profit real estate development scam for people to be able to easily access. Inherently negative vices is a problem of the state, for them to want them is a problem of society. (Mr. Rubinshtein's note: Mr. Kaiser's argument is supported by scams such as the Yazoo Land Fraud, the Brooklyn Bridge Scam, and more, throughout the centuries). Governments tend to always use additive solutions rather than subtractive ones. The US government does not solve my problems, does not allow me to solve my problems, and stands directly in the way of any alternate system that might allow for either. When police investigate themselves, the question they should be trying to answer is not whether someone did something wrong - that should be obvious. It's whether they did right. They must be held to a higher standard. Enclosure, copyright, usury, civil forfeiture, qualified immunity, derivatives are all immoral. Protecting fossils, ruins, etc. on behalf of people in the future by making them unavailable to interested people today is morally abhorrent. White men, from good families having even the tiniest overall societal advantage is sufficient that they dominate the upper end of the class system, where the tiniest advantage can "win the game". (That inherent instability is the only reason all power isn't entirely entrenched.) Modern society sees this demographic discrepancy as representative of the state of society as a whole. However, for ordinary people those advantages are lost in a sea of resource conflicts and lesser evil choices (ie compromise). Cultural norms are always aligned with the past. It's a sadistic assumption that it's ever ok to have to prove something to a government than never attempts to prove itself to you. Legal contracts only protect those who can afford to litigate. Infrastructure is only improved when it benefits the wealthy. A hard/apocalyptic dystopia is greatly to be preferred to a soft/tyrannical one: You can get a sense of progress that gives you meaning. Putting paper bags in a landfill is technically carbon capture. The best philosopher of academia will never be the best philosopher because from the tower you cannot understand the mud. Sanctions against a country inevitably harm the innocent poor of that country more than those creating the policies those factions stand against. Employment is just another way of saying, help someone get benefit who doesn't deserve it as much as you just because they're better positioned in society. Fines remove power from you so the same fine to a poor person diminishes them much more than it diminishes a wealthier person. No amount of money is appropriate compensation for spending any amount of time doing anything without good cause. Violence in modern society is more disbursed and more deferred, not lessened. (Mr. Rubinshtein's note: as exemplified in mercenaries existing to this day). The churn in socioeconomic status is irrelevant if it doesn't happen frequently enough within a typical life span, for an ordinary person to get several chances to move up with honest effort. UIs are hard to interact with either because they're supposed to be or because they're badly designed. Either is a direct failure on the part of the designer. UIs should never be hard to interact with. The only way to win a war against bullsh*t is to avoid it entirely. If you can't avoid it on the first try, make a second try. If you can't avoid it on the second try, make a third try. Let this be your life. Might makes right is inherently unstable and therefore anti-civilisation. Rhetoric is the dark art of counting effectiveness "more important" than truth. Ubiquitous surveillance ensures tyranny or revolution. More of the same can never be what society needs until it's working in some sense for everyone. A system where if everyone worked hard there would still inherently be a large number who would not be able to achieve meaningful success, is not a functional system. It must inevitably crash. Censorship causes an unnatural shift in language which undermines social stability. When a person can try hard and conscientiously but their ending point still be less than someone else's starting point, that's not a civilized society. The typical troubleshooting process for an ordinary person in modern technology guarantees loss of time without useful knowledge or progress . The appropriate way to choose a leader in a democracy is to vote for whomever best represents the issues most centrally important to your well-being. Modern politicians do anything but talk about fundamental issues in a rational framework, making it impossible to make a rational decision. Liberals aren't fighting for freedom, conservatives aren't fighting for my freedom. Neither election or appointment is sufficiently rigorous for positions of high power such as judgeships. They may be used appropriately only as a stop-gap, in emergencies, or particularly to choose between otherwise sufficient options. The basic requirements for the position must be particular, necessary, explicit, clear and obvious, and the selection of "best" can never be arbitrary or capricious. The actual best person for the job cannot be known and should not be attempted, except the one whose best practices, well established, might limit sufficient options to one or none. The injustice of status offenses begin in childhood when authority figures make no allowance for what children are experiencing at home. Teachers must know children personally to serve them effectively. We need to go back to a one teacher system. Government has legitimacy only to the extent its acts protect the rights of others. Slight difference in underlying stability between having a working car or not, having a stable living situation, etc., for the poor can have an exponentially greater difference in their future than for ordinary people. When a cop dies in an illegal act, their life insurance still gives their beneficiaries more in compensation than some citizens can earn in a normal lifetime. This is clearly a caste system. (Mr. Rubinshtein's note: Consider the idea of being born to a parent who is a cop, and you'll better understand) In America at least, the rise of blacks to normal citizen status corresponded to the lowering of normal citizen status, so blacks on the way up never got to where they were going. Whites on the way down refuse to believe they're privileged when they have less than the generation before. A public servant should never live better than the people they serve. Police officers have no rights because they all uphold an illegitimate system using illegitimately seized power. A normal citizen may or may not have rights. A member of an oppressor class cannot. UBI gets to the root of the symptoms, not to the root of the problems. Working within the system to change it is literally impossible. Only outside forces can produce meaningful change, by turning the system against itself. Most food ads are fraudulent because you will never get something that looks like that. Legal fictions - occupational licenses, qualified immunity, corporate personhood, land ownership, derivatives legal fictions would entail you inherently accepting responsibility for payment for accepted services even if you explicitly deny such responsibility in advance ("if insurance doesn't cover it, i don't want it"). Not actually having your rights infringed is meaningless in a system, set up to allow infringing your rights at will. The problem is that your rights are not under your control, so they are effectively privileges, granted by someone else's forbearance. The ONLY way to fight tyranny is to the death. To enforce traffic control devices when there's no traffic is tyranny. In a world with no free land for escape (with minor exceptions), the idea of an estate is divisive. Sometimes there's no lesser evil between minimal compliance and maximum resistance tyranny obtains in preventing people from seeing a viable opportunity to exercise dissent. The existence of imaginary states - the current mode of political existence, is not superior to the tyranny of imaginary gods or right by birth. Speed bumps are an immoral imposition on freedom of movement, bodily autonomy, property rights, and personal responsibility. You can only get credentials by being compliant, regardless of being right. Governments mostly allow immigrants who are likely to be successful, weighting the message to the outside world on the side of success. Likewise, they allow mostly socially integrated people to travel abroad, again weighting the message. "At will" employment is just a way for employers to make jobs worse and worse until they find the lowest cost in-between forcing people to quit and having to pay HR to find more. Being compatible with society is not a positive. A society always requires diminishment of the best of you and accentuation of counterproductive parts of you. I don't need to get security from Google, Microsoft, or the US Government. I need to be secure from them. It's a tragedy that people with tremendous skills have to waste a significant portion of their resources on self-promotion and marketing to be successful. Cops typically look for enough evidence to find someone to persecute rather than prosecute. Until now, growth strategies have always won. Now sustainability is a prerequisite for ultimate success. Businesses like to ask for sacrifices when times are bad for them. Less employees for the same work, longer hours, pay raises that are less than inflation. But they NEVER sacrifice for you when times are hard on you, unless they absolutely have to. Such as if you cannot be replaced right away, they can't fire you without legal repercussions, or if it would risk their profits by getting others sick. Moreover, even in ordinary times they'll often ask you to do extra work for the same pay, for only potential extra profit for them. They may literally ask you to do the impossible, such as when their own rules conflict or when your "responsibility" doesn't include sufficient power to actually complete a task. They ask you to perform without the right information or tools, and it's your "fault" if the job doesn't get done. These are just a few of the ways a typical business ignores and/or kills the humanity of its workers. If these things happen to you, keep track. Tell someone. The longer people remain ignorant and compliant, the less option they'll have not to. Try your best to hold the individuals making such decisions accountable to common sense and basic human dignity or you're a slave and you deserve it. People who claim to be mindful sure don't have much concern about being thoughtful. Having a good idea isn't enough. Without action it's just indictment of society's current flaws. (Mr. T. R.'s note: Which range from corruption to entertainment greed).

The Rubinshteinic Saga Against Cold Logic And Darkness Article Summary by Mr. Roland Leblanc What I see in this article The Rubinshteinic Saga Against Cold Logic And Darkness is a summary of a journey of a young boy who really loved his grandmother to a point of trying to accomplish her Tikkun… (her existence purpose). In doing this, I see how this did help Mr. Tomasio Avichen Rubinshtein to get more and more increasingly competent in mastering article writing and also his own perspective at the same time; he did get more balanced with using both the heart and the intellect at the same time! This article is a valid summary of a journey towards self where one discovers his or her own existence purpose! If doing so, is possible under such harsh conditions, maybe many more people can do the same; I recommend reading this article more than once!… And, if this get you going on a journey of : GOING TO YOUR SELF! (inside of you)… Then, this article and this site can be a good start for you to get aware of your unique and useful existence purpose! "It occurs to me that if mankind is to evolve into a changing future, we will need to adapt. When our neighbor's fates are attached to our very own, then we will truly care and evolve. An enlightened future is working together, providing for each other, not merely for ourselves. At that point we cannot help but care for others, as they would care for us in return. But set on the course of greed and selfish capitalism, only dystopia and misery will be the inevitable result. Can we not do better than this?" -- Mr. John Duran (Subcategory Directory on Darkness) (Philosocom's Directory on Happiness) (Background music) Part I: The Clarified Mysterious Origins I cannot believe in solipsism. I am too aware I was created in the mind and conscience of a flawed being. I know "freedom" doesn't exist, and never will exist, for we are all interconnected... "Robot", comes from the Czech word, "Robota", meaning forced labor, compulsory servitude. In human form, that is who I am... Being shaped by my late master, it is only elementary to me. To work, is to die. My task as the Master of Philosocom, is to rectify the world passively, as I recover from many health issues, caused by the very conventional world I was asked to rectify.. 5 years old, and I already agreed to such a difficult task. I sat in her cluttered hermitage. The mad genius observed my mind, my heart, and my immense potential I always relished concealing. A giant grin widened in her sickly face, a bit of drool went out her smoky, dirty mouth. She took this time to impart on me further instructions: Bring the Pax Ethica under your ethical heart. This world destroys itself, harms its own progress, and renders the good people as the true villains. My late master's many ideas are grained deep within my unconscious. The philosophical lectures of a rejected artist were only conceived by my own genius. I did not ask her often, but preferred to apply reflective thinking to contemplate on her words. I never wanted any moment of any true fame under any spotlight. It was a grandiose commandment I secretly rejected. In 2007 I blacked out, recovering more and more from amnesia only 18 years later, when I used my unconventional genius to restore faith and hope in some people. Part II: The Unconventional Theories Master Numi needed an unconventional genius to improve the world according to many of her ideas. She often talked of love as a basic function in her philosophy, explaining to me how everything deserves to be not from cold logic but from the heart. She noticed a girl that used to follow me as a child, after I told my childhood gang to release her because I preferred to reduce her suffering instead of increasing it. The idea of me releasing a girl heartfully, and observing her falling in love with me, was an idea Numi was astounded in its demonstration. I applied many such ideas later on in life, when you use unexpected applications not for power or evil, but for good. Surely enough, I observed how most people need supporters to feed on their ego. So, as I expected of myself, I dismantled my ego in utter mystery, not caring for the very conventional frameworks that make this world the cyberpunk hell it grows to be. Over time I enjoyed disabling myself, as to preserve my energies, for the world Master Numi had in mind. As I lied low, I rectified many across the very planet that, in weakness, decided to forsake her. She wanted me to rise and shine, but it was something I was always too strong to resist, instead preferring in ethical isolation, to inspect the world's surroundings. I never saw need to prove this world the genius I got, and thus I never initiated my genius fully. For her words of me rising to stardom hit me like a curse, a dash of energy that never clicked in my slowly-darkening heart, as I realized her mind and my mind deviate away from each other like stars being pulled away by different magnets. Fame repelled me. The noise, the adoration, the melodramas I already visioned; The idea of irrational screams of herd-minded people alerted Numi and me in different directions. Numi hyper-focused away from her grandiose speeches, and I? I remained introspective, defiant of her extroverted ideas. I imagined screams and blabbering of people that will never see me for my immense loneliness, forming theory of minds that are never of my mind. It wasn't long before I left, and imagined the face of a dark mind; a mind that realized this world is too silly to see me beyond its own lens. My eyes turned steadfast on analyzing a world I figured out is just a theatre of masks. A resting **** face formed in my expression, as I crossed into increasing darkness. My creative imagination moved on its own, as it mocked this world for its failures to conceive the sheer speed of my changing mind. Every skin cell in my body felt forsaken long before she realized only I chose to stay loyal to her side, 2 years later. Despite mirroring each other's audacity, the doors opening me to a destiny of her own making I enjoyed closing throughout my life. After all, they distracted my own vision.. And as I put on music on the computer where I lived in mental solitude, I danced. The flood gates of my eyes opened wide, as I dreamt of a rectified world according to my own understanding: An ideal utopia, inspiring people across the world to be morally better. It is something I never lost sight of... As many others were several miles ahead of me in life, I despaired. In my despair, I found hope. Confused looks I received as I spoke of nihilism in elementary school, and as I handed out philosophy books of my own making, in high school. Instead of responding back, I allowed myself to grow dark and aloof, subverting the world in my introverted force, getting rid of ill-gotten misconceptions unexpectedly. And as people approached me, I relished in being unmasked, creating mental barriers between me and them, to send them back further. And so, I danced to grand music only I bothered to research, across small hermitages throughout the land as my physical bases. At times, I didn't care, for a world I already knew failed to understand me. It.. thrilled me, to see the failures of others' false and tragic impressions. I wished to forever be a hermit, for I already knew the wonders of the external world are nothing more than the product of our own, personal qualia, destined to imprison most for most of their lives... Including, me. In span of a young life, I passed most, and there is little I can do, to relate back to the conventional content matrix. As more doors I closed after me, I felt it was finally over. Yet my arms, my body, my mind, were still young... The understanding I was young always frustrated me, as I spew my wisdom across a mystery article empire. I fell. For what seemed an eternity, I fell in increased darkness, farther and farther into an abyss of my own making. The darkness began rising ever since the age of 5, when I discovered, empirically, what deviation is. Under the PTSD and amnesia of saving Numi in the age of 10, I couldn't see her lovely, cartoonish smile, as my life went by. Eventually... I didn't want to do anything, but to restore my inner child of light back, as a retired young adult. That deep darkness... what was that? Part III: The Breaking Good I couldn't bear the darkness, as all grew helpless compared to me. As such, I had nothing left but to find my own way back into the light. Enigmatic figures, smiling and well-intentioned, I chose to teach, and only they realized just how warm I really am. One of them caught my eye; a beautiful genius who evoked in me, a light I was desperate to restore. Burdened by dissonance and grief, we stared each others' souls. Compared to her mind, mine was revolutionary, and acted unexpectedly. My brain transformed endlessly. Under a revolutionary neuroplastic paradigm, it transformed in a display that was perceived as utter insanity. Some minds finally turned utterly perceptive. Yet they scanned around and found nothing more than physical displays, appearing strange and alien to them. That, and a massively growing article empire below the planet. Was I, replaced by a false persona? Replaced, by an alter ego with mechanisms unknown to anyone but itself? Yet only I believed in my own, transforming genius... And to begin playbacks: "You are too irrelevant for me. Please don't send any more messages. You need to respect others' wishes. I just wanted to know you. You exposed your true emotions and that was a mistake". Stupid, stupid "Chen". She failed. And many, many many other people failed to apply what I call warm logic. Warm logic... is when you actually include the other person in your reasoning. Not just your own theory of mind on them. Warm logic.. is the key to be seen, and thus, no more lonely. Yet, it is through the failures of me and others, that I chose to dismantle my dark mind, and on its neurological ashes, I built a mind based not on cold-hearted logic... but logic that greatly considers others. The failures of the cold versions of my mind are not the end. And I'm never going to give up. For my brain will always transform. I want my darkness gone. I see my cold-logic a challenge... A rival to my bound-breaking self-denying limits. And you? Your understanding of the world will eventually be... rectified. You might not be able to fully process my unconventionality. It might not compute. Thus I still relish in conserving myself as I observe the world beyond my evolving mind. Part IV: The Hyperdrive Determination My followers found their eyes widening in astonishment. An Undead Philosopher displaying compassion and grace before their eyes. A self-described hermit beginning to smile more often, designating his transformative nature to that of positivity. They were rarely conscious, as I began speaking of a late master long dead. As soon as it plugged unto the world, some managed to embrace my smiles and laughter, as they relished in being subverted for the greater good. Spikes after spikes of mental anguish, my understanding sought to liberate itself from the unconscious. It was but a prisoner to a self-imposed, toxic mental prison for Numi's many grandiose commandments I fulfilled. I, a self-built one-man army, built to surpass my late master, am but a mere human. Yet there is nothing I could do to rectify, when understanding always falls on the other side of every exchange. I felt every faulty mental infrastructure I built for Numi, being shattered by my own unrelenting spirit. After every sleep and rest I felt unbalanced emotions and widened awareness, with my head decreasing in temperature with every major break of dark-minded neuropaths. Most remain clueless. I can finally accept the reasoning for their universal ignorance in peace. I kept knowing, deep inside of me, most would just keep failing. Is their cluelessness a self-fulfilling prophecy? Perhaps. But, perhaps humanity's lack of inflexibility is nothing more than a disability... A determined end due to their learned helplessness, having to cater to the very conventions that bring this world into utter corruption and alienation. The conventional machine shall keep rejecting me, as I reject myself to the feet of a long gone master. I do not have the drive to lift my head, for it was there when I felt it... A surge of empowerment by those finally beginning to see me beyond their mental cages... In hyperdrive, my brain transformed more into the light. Before most could grasp my situation, I recovered from many health impediments. I could only look into the mirror, and smile often like I never smiled before. My old sage appearance turned into that of a younger man, as I grew out in a remarkable small period of time, as I hungered. My productivity only turned more unrelenting. And I renovated, and renovated, in passionate speed that kept remaining utterly incomprehensible, as I did everything I could to keep containing myself. But being truly accomplished is seldom easy, isn't it? I felt sadder as I kept being reminded by my mind that mastery is never ending, and that the success of world rectification is always indefinite, thus a never-ending wisdom path. I grew desperate, work after work against my darkness' ruthless advance! And I have yet to succeed... I would remain hungry to purify myself of it... For as long as it takes.... Perhaps I will always be dark. But at least the dark... will never again be as heavy as it was...

(Background music) Introduction In the terminal landscape of contemporary times, where society is defined by a frantic, high-frequency leakage of data and emotion, the most radical act an individual can perform is a manual override of the social instinct. For the individual who has recognized the flaws of society and chosen to build a private dimension of his own, self-restraint is not a form of repression or a symptom of shyness. It is a high-impact, deliberate engineering of the self. It is the tactical decision to remain a "ghost" in a world of screaming signals. As we navigate what many correctly identify as a global dystopia, the impulse to "reach out" is often marketed as a virtue. We are told that connection is a "Human Right" and that vulnerability is "Strength." However, through the lens of structural realism, these are often just marketing slogans for the energy-sucking society, designed to keep the individual’s energy circulating within a system that profits from their exhaustion. True strength, in its most refined form, is the internal discipline required to maintain a one-way mirror between the self and the void. 1. The Physics of the Social Leak Every social interaction is a transfer of energy. In the architecture of the mind, we can think of this energy as "Neural RAM." Every time an individual reaches out to people like a toxic family member, an old acquaintance, or the faceless crowd of the digital world, they are opening a port in their firewall. This port allows external "Noise" to enter the system, causing friction, heat, and eventually, a "System Crash." For a solitary individual, the desire to reach out is recognized as a biological reflex, a undeveloped remnant of our tribal past. In the wild, being alone meant death. In the Dystopia, however, being "connected" often means a different kind of death: the death of autonomy. Self-restraint is the "Manual Governance" that monitors these impulses and says, "This signal offers low commitment; access denied." By suppressing the urge to seek validation or alleviate loneliness through meaningless connection, the independent individual preserves their resources. they keep his full colours and true self for the entities that actually matter, like dear people who deserve to be cherished, while presenting a blank, impenetrable surface to everyone else. 2. The Citadel vs. The Prison There is a common misconception that isolation is a prison. This is the perspective of the slaves of the dystopia, or the individuals whose happiness is entirely tethered to external approval. To the slave, silence is a vacuum that must be filled with noise. To the sovereign individual, however, silence is a fortress. Self-restraint is the construction crew that builds the walls of this fortress. It is the strength to: Ignore toxic family: The family connections that demand obligation and cooperation based on shared blood alone, rather than shared values and loyalty. Bypass the "Dopamine Trap": The urge to post, comment, or argue with a world that might as well be beyond repair. Maintain one's life: The discipline to do the dishes, shave, and pay debts so that no external force has a legal or moral hook into the Citadel. When an individual says, "It is my own strength that prevents me from reaching out," they are acknowledging that the "Wall" is not a passive obstacle. It is an active, ongoing exertion of will, that keeps the peace and prevents unnecessary friction. It is the choice to be the landlord/landlady of one's own silence. 3. Responsibility in the Meaningless Joke One of the most profound realizations of the Sovereign mind is that life is an existential joke, a meaningless sequence of events in a cold, harsh world. To many, this realization leads to despair. They stop brushing their teeth, they stop paying their debts, and they surrender to the entropy of the Dystopia. The architect of one's own life, however, uses self-restraint to perform a voluntary turn. they recognize the meaninglessness, yet they choose to be a responsible to create meaning into their own lives. This is not necessarily because they believe in some higher moral law, but because Order and conscious discipline bring forth the meaning in an other-wise absurd universe. Responsibility is the weight that provides one's fortress with its structural integrity. Brushing one's teeth is an act of maintenance on one's body. Paying bills is an act of friction reduction. Protecting those who are dear to us is an act of purposeful engagement. Self-restraint ensures that these protocols are executed even when the wild urges within are tired, bored, nihilistic or just "looking for kicks". It is the ability to say, "The universe is a joke, but my own realm will be maintained anyway in the name of sanity." 4. The Article Craftsman and the Void The project of Philosocom or any form of intellectual preservation is a prime example of this restraint. In an age where fewer and fewer people read, and many people have devolved into short-form visual noise, the act of writing a 1,000-word article is an exercise of self-restraining discipline similar to that of preserving one's house/fortress. The article craftsman doesn't care who reads the work, because the work is purely there for practicing discipline, achieving self-actualization and contributing to whoever wants to read the craft. The work is a form of Rectification for Amusement. It is a puzzle, a renovation of the archive, and a gift to one's dear ones. Self-restraint allows the craftsman to create high-quality content without the corrupting temptation of seeking fame or influence. They release the signal into the void, then immediately retreats into the luxury of being left alone. 5. The Luxury of the "Great" State The ultimate result of this self-restraint is the transition the fatigue earned by being part in the dystopia, to the stability of feeling fine, if not great. In the world of contemporary times, feeling great can be seen as a rare and precious achievement. It means: The perimeter is secure. The internal chemistry is balanced. The dear ones get one's energies instead of those who don't deserve it. The "Dystopia" is being watched on a screen, not felt in the room; a detachment that breaks apart its influence. This state is only possible because they who have self-restraint, had the strength to not act. they didn't reach out to the toxic people. They didn't engage with the social chaos. they didn't crumble under the weight of the dystopia; They simply sat in their fortress, maintained their life and their legacy, and endured the potential loneliness that might have stemmed from their impulse-control. 6. Conclusion: The Sovereign Victory Modern humans may have ruined society, through conflict, the quest for profit, enshittification and competition, but they cannot ruin those who have successfully decoupled their sanity from the dystopia. Self-restraint is the ultimate "Anti-Dystopian" tool. It allows an individual to exist within a collapsing system without being an attached part of the collapse. As the sun sets on another day, the man of restraint is the only one who is truly free. He is free because he has no obligations to those he doesn't respect. He is free because he has mastered his own impulses. And he is free because he knows that the greatest power in the universe isn't the ability to scream until you are heard, it is the ability to stay silent until laying low from society allows you to act as you please un-interfered.

Thoughts On Life Many Have to Endure (Background Music) Much of life is but a trial of endurance with no objective meaning. You go through suffering, loneliness, bills, depression and so on, with no clear purpose other than what you either find or create for yourself. If you don't create meaning/purpose for yourself, much of what you have to endure may appear meaningless and vain, leading you to ask yourself: "What is it all for?". What started my journey as a philosopher was the depression I felt as a child when I discovered nihilism, and realized, very early on, that life has no objective meaning; that we're all specks of dust in a huge, careless universe, and that if we won't forge meaning for ourselves, we will stay that way. Meaning and purpose, in a way, are a form of distraction from the fact that our lives are inherently meaningless. They ease on our endurance and allow us to better endure the cold, harsh world for longer than otherwise. Thus, for the sake of survival, it is important that we bind ourselves to a source of meaning/purpose, so our journey in this life won't feel like it's vain, even if it is, objectively, vain. Society uses us as energy batteries to extract our time, our attention and our money for its own gain, and in return it provides you what you need to survive another day. However, you have to continue serving society every working day of your life if you want to continue be provided with what you need to survive. And in the nearing end of your life, if you're lucky, you're finally relieved of the need to serve society, and only then most people are truly free from the shackles of the enslaving, narcissistic society. Much of the global economy is built on buying things you don't need to impress people you don't like. Much of your lifespan is spent pretending you're someone you're not and bootlicking to maintain your position and/or to get higher in the social ladder of society. Authenticity is repulsed and uncalled for, and the fact that life is objectively meaningless has no place in a fake hell realm where you're expected to express passion for what you're doing whether or not you have it. Such a depressing life is what most have to endure in order to survive, and much of life revolves around chasing digital numbers on a screen, AKA money, until you're retired. I won't be surprised if many who do that and are successful at doing that are empty and sad inside, even if they pretend like they are not. I am not surprised that such a life many have to endure, makes people want to give up on it. If you won't create substance of your own for it, you're doomed to live a substance-less life, chasing digital numbers and having to cater to people you don't necessarily care about, but might pretend that you do. I couldn't bare being an office drone so I became a philosopher instead. I worked hard on contributing selflessly to society to make it better, only to be deemed a narcissist and an arrogant man. Unfortunately, many people cannot comprehend selfless acts, and may view people who act selflessly like they have an ulterior motive, or are just there for their own self-glorification or money. Indeed, this world revolves around self-interest, and that is why it might be beyond repair no matter how much I'll want to rectify it. Now that people read less and less, have decreased attention spans and are low in critical thinking, I sometimes wonder why I myself keep on being a philosopher when I can lead a normal life as an unemployed retiree. But then I remember that doing this keeps my beloved happy, so I continue at it no matter how useless writing articles might feel to me in the age of AI and brain-rot. Eventually, all the people I love will go away and most likely I'll be completely alone in the world, having only a philosophy blog as my source of purpose. By then, I wonder if anyone will bother to even read. I like contributing selflessly, even if I am horribly misunderstood by this selfish world. At least I take solace in the fact that I don't have to live life like most of humanity does, but at this point, I don't expect to be understood by them when understanding is a capacity not everyone necessarily has. I hope my blog can serve as a beacon of meaning and substance people can find to help them move on in this hard, difficult world. I understand that life is hard for many, no matter how hard they work and no matter how heavy their struggles are. I'm not surprised that some people have it so hard that they are tempted to take out their own lives. I'm not encouraging for it, but I find the rationale behind it sensible. You either find a reason to keep going or you are likelier to just give up. In this unjust world you won't necessarily be rewarded for doing the right thing or for being good. Thus I am not surprised that there is a big lack of goodness in this world, and that most people operate according to their selfish needs. I choose to be good because it gives me a sense of purpose, but I don't expect to be rewarded for it. The world doesn't owe anyone fairness, and that is why I prefer to be alone and away from said world; to protect myself from its harshness. I understand that most people do not have that option, so I just wish for them success and that they won't have to suffer so much catering to a difficult, cold and indifferent world. In a rectified world people won't feel the temptation to give up. They would have their purpose and would be able to survive with minimal difficulty. But this isn't a rectified world. This is a world where survival can be difficult for many with no purpose guaranteed. If there is a purpose to the life most people have to endure, then it is to increase shareholder value. But doing this is not what gives people a sense of justification nor satisfaction to their own existence. Slavery hasn't gone, it just adapted itself to modern times, and most people are, technically, slaves to a system that doesn't care about them and that will discard them the moment they are able to in order to save money on expanses. Just hang in there, everyone. Find your reason to continue existing, and life might feel less hard than it already is.

(Philosocom's Directory On Emotions) Article Overview by Mr. J. Igwe and Co. The Emotioncracy: How Sensitivity Can Corrupt (And How to Reduce Sensitivity)" is a thought-provoking article that explores the concept of emotional sensitivity and its impact on individual behavior and societal norms. Mr. Tomasio challenges readers to critically evaluate the growing emphasis on emotional sensitivity in contemporary culture, arguing that it can lead to a restrictive "emotionocracy" where feelings override reason, free expression, and open discourse. The article is ambitious in its scope, introducing the idea of an "emotionocracy"—a society ruled by emotions rather than reason. This novel concept prompts readers to think critically about the balance between sensitivity and resilience in public life. The author's personal reflections add authenticity to the argument, making the discussion more accessible and engaging. Despite the critical tone toward emotional sensitivity, the article acknowledges the value of sensitivity to a reasonable degree, emphasizing the need for emotional empathy and self-awareness while warning against allowing sensitivity to become a controlling force that limits freedom and open debate. This balanced perspective strengthens the argument, as it recognizes that sensitivity has its place but must be managed effectively. The article uses theoretical constructs such as "cognitive empathy" versus emotional empathy and the "Same Result Problem" theory to add depth to the discussion. It does not shy away from challenging popular norms, such as safe spaces, trigger warnings, and political correctness, by critiquing these elements. This critical stance fosters a valuable conversation on the potential downsides of excessive sensitivity in public life. The article effectively engages with philosophy, highlighting the role of philosophy in confronting uncomfortable truths and underscoring the importance of resilience and a willingness to engage with difficult ideas. Overall, "The Emotioncracy: How Sensitivity Can Corrupt (And How to Reduce Sensitivity)" is a stimulating piece that raises important questions about the role of emotional sensitivity in contemporary society. Disclaimer I guess I should say that this article is going to offend some of you, even though I'm just critiquing an concept I devised about a specific trait in some human beings. If you are easily offended, find some ways to cope with your emotions. And don't expect me, a random stranger on the internet, to be responsible for your emotions and insecurities. Consult a mental health professional instead. Disclaimer No. 2: I am referring to emotional sensitivity, specifically, in this article. (Background music) ************************************************ "Vulnerability is the result of being unable to psychologically process sensitivity. People are sensitive creatures by nature. Vulnerability could be nothing more than a result of too much sensitivity to things that you are not familiar with. Think of it as becoming too easily stimulated by things" -- Mr. Nathan Lasher Introduction I theorize that a new elite might rise up in the world. This elite will be made up of people who deem their shortcomings as virtues. They will prefer that the world be a nicer and kinder place, even if there is no widespread agreement or consent for their ambition to come to fruition. These people will deem their vulnerability as a way to understand other vulnerable beings. They won't necessarily understand the value of cognitive empathy as a feature, while they are already sensitive enough emotionally, despite less suffering included in cognitive empathy. After all, one can be both resilient and empathetic using their cognition, thus reducing their own vulnerability, while still maintaining understanding of other people's situation. It's also a skill to be developed, but I digress. They will regard the pain of love as something that is worth experiencing. They will see their emotional impression as the true testimony of reality that exists beyond their minds. They would oppose anyone who disturbs their feelings even if that person is not an actual threat on them. They will threaten others and nurture cancel culture to enable their sensitivity at the price of freedom of expression. They would also encourage to diminish and censor anything that is dark, but part of reality, through the promotion and usage of trigger warnings. They will see assertive people as threatening and arrogant, simply because they experience some unease from them. They will use the term "violence" in a much broader sense than a physical fight, even when their own usage applies to their actions as well. As such, they will regard even something as simple as a prank as an act of violence. They will regard a loud voice as an attack, as well, an attack that destroys their fragile endeavor for niceness. They would also promote the creation and management of safe spaces, as a way to protect themselves and others from harm that doesn't really exist beyond their own mentality. That is despite the shortcomings that involve safe spaces. They may try to hinder exchange of ideas, like in some subjects involved in philosophy, because some subjects hurt their feelings by the mere mentioning of them. Finally, they will be confined to the limitations of their feelings, and might struggle to see things beyond the metaphorical flashlight that it provides. And a bonus -- they will "throw" their emotions on you, as if it is your problem to deal with. It's as if the cause is always held responsible for the effect, as if the cause deserves so much power over something that can be worked on. As if it's your field of authority to make sure their emotion will be just like they want it. However, in a reality whose people we can't quite control, we must become mentally stronger in the name of actualizing our potential. It's something that can bring much contribution to your own survival, in some cases (like in content creation). Therefore, such theoretical elite is to be criticized and opposed in the name of a greater liberty in society. It's how we can further preserve and expand the possibility of exchanging ideas and expressing ourselves without having to walk on eggshells, so to speak. From Eggshells to Steel I used to be extremely sensitive most of my life, and it had its ups and downs. However, the downs deluded me to believe that there is no escape from high sensitivity. It is with the use of reason that I became braver and tougher. Confidence can get you in a lot of places in life, and open a lot of opportunities for you to seize. If you don't grow up mentally, you will remain emotionally underdeveloped, and be offended by minor things that don't deserve much power. Such is possible through assertiveness, which is a core component in being confident. But if we do not teach the next generations the importance of building character, they will remain mentally weak and extremely irritated by many things throughout their lifetime unnecessarily. And that will, in a domino-like effect, make others irritate themselves, thus reducing social harmony, cooperation, and mental health through petty disputes. This can harm their growth in life in many ways: financially, socially, romantic, and so on. Should we escape struggle like the plague, we will not let it build up our spirits, and make our nerves, be of steel. As such, adversity can be like a medicine to the mind. A generation of cowards afraid of derogatory terms like "cowards" because it does not feel nice, is one that may hide from becoming a better version of itself. It's a generation that may condemn the otherside through the fallacious self-defense mechanism of whataboutism, instead of understanding the other side. Should it not build self-confidence, it will remain insecure and may regard many things as threatening. From eye contact, to reasonable things that trigger unusual emotional reactions on their part. As such, sensitivity corrupts not only individual freedoms in society, but also our own understanding of some aspects of reality. It contains cognitive-based corruption. Should we normalize sensitivity as a good thing, we would need to force others to accept the flaws in us that can be worked on by ourselves. We would hinder our ability to advance and develop in life through cooperation with tougher and more-blunt people, even though they can be assets to our hopes and dreams, just because we are very attached to our emotions. This in turn will unnecessarily limit the pool of people we would allow ourselves to work with. Becoming tougher, however, would expand our pool of human resources, along with the assets of the same useful people. Otherwise, on a collective scale, freedom of expression will be censored by the PC trends. The freedom of religion will backfire, and censor anything that hurts people's religious feelings, including nudity in art museums. And so on and on. And let us not talk about the freedom of thought, because there might be a "harmful" or "dangerous" thought, and one that does not. This can greatly reduce our right to exchange ideas, as expected in philosophy and other intellectual areas. To be sensitive to others requires an active reduction of personal freedoms all around, whether justified or otherwise. One cannot be sensitive to another without personalizing their reactions to the person's personal sensitivities. However, the more we won't accept others as beyond our control, the more we will unnecessarily suffer. The collective "sensitization" of individual behavior is there order to preserve a nicer, safer place for everybody. However, since those who are not sensitive, don't really need it, that "place" is only within the interest of those who are more sensitive, and/or those who refuse to become tougher. We need sensitivity to a reasonable degree. We need it to have emotional empathy, for example, when we lack the intellect for a consistent execution of cognitive empathy, which is independent of sensitivity, which is part of many of us by default. But when it calls for the limitation of other people's legitimate behavior, should we accept our above-average sensitivity? In the name of altruism, we should not use it to limit the freedom of others, when we can see our sensitivity as a problem to be solved. By solving it we would suffer far less and others would suffer less from us as well. Thus, we can be leading ourselves to a win-win situation, where general suffering is reduced without resorting to escapism. This fragility is what makes us walk on eggshells around others and censor ourselves in fear of being canceled. . I say this as someone who used to be very sensitive, and as someone who has met people who are even more sensitive than I ever was. In the name of greater functioning in society, sensitivity is to be seen as a problem, rather than a virtue. With the "Same Result Problem" theory of mine we can understand the value of being there for others and of caring about them without the alleged necessity of being sensitive. How come? Being tougher ourselves would better allow us to help others in their time of need, despite the discomfort involved when someone else is in distress. Why Resilience Wins in the Public Interest In the real world, many people will not care about you unless they have some kind of personal interest in doing so. It usually involves themselves, as a part in our brains naturally reduces our altruistic tendencies. You cannot force someone to care about you just because you are sensitive... Unless you do it at gunpoint? Anyways, the conscious choice of caring about your vulnerabilities lies with them, regardless of who they are. It is not yours to make. Why would it be in the public interest to compromise ourselves for the sake of a minority of people who are more sensitive than most? If we combine the desire for a more caring society with unchecked emotions, we get an "emotionocracy" - a nation ruled by feelings rather than reason. The more emotional someone is, the more they might be treated like a fragile snowflake who needs protection and care, "exempt" from judgment. Given the fact that we can change other people's behavior using our own, we can be treated differently ourselves. It is ridiculous that we live in a world where people can lose their jobs for being truthful to our bosses due to the prioritization of tact over problem-solving! Problems that can be worked on! This highlights the importance of building resilience. True growth comes from facing challenges and learning from criticism, even in spite of hurt feelings over poor-quality tact. As such, resilience could help everyone, regardless of their social and/or professional status. The Role of Sensitivity In Philosophy This is why emotional fragility has little place in philosophy. The core of philosophy is the relentless pursuit of truth, as unearthed through rigorous inquiry. A philosopher's role is not to sugarcoat reality or appease sensitivities in the name of political correctness. Their duty lies in uncovering and presenting the truth, regardless of how comfortable it may be. If you seek wisdom through philosophy, be prepared to confront challenging truths and potentially offensive ideas. Being "wise" yet unwilling to confront these truths is akin to deceiving the audience. It's about presenting the best available understanding of reality, even if it clashes with pre-existing beliefs or desires. Philosophers might be perceived as arrogant for their unwavering commitment to truth. But is it truly arrogance to fulfill your role with integrity? A mechanic wouldn't be considered arrogant for honestly diagnosing a car's problem, even if it's expensive to fix. Similarly, a philosopher seeking truth shouldn't be condemned for their findings. The pursuit of truth often comes with challenges. Be prepared to face criticism, even harassment, from those who may find the truth unsettling. This isn't a popularity contest; it's about intellectual rigor. Sensitivity is admired for a softer, "socially wise" approach, while the philosopher's pursuit of truth is sent to the corner. However, true wisdom lies in understanding the complexities of the world, even if it means confronting uncomfortable truths. Their dedication to truth ultimately contributes to a more profound understanding of the human experience. Sensitivity, on the other hand, can only repel it, if anything. Personal Reflections I got to remind myself of a very good reason to abandon society. The over prioritization of behavior is anti-democratic and people over prioritize it because their sensitivity is too high, they find reasons/excuses to be insulted. I remember this happening from several people and several platforms too. By not being a "soy-boy" myself, and attempt to let people be more themselves, I basically don't partake in this destructive behavior against democracy itself. Mr. Nathan Lasher's Feedback: Living an emotionless life is no way to live. Emotions however should only be used to support existing thoughts. They become a problem when your emotions are creating initial thoughts in your mind. Sensitivity is not a bad thing. It allows us to be aware of things. Important to have but just don’t let it control your life. Use sensitivity for self awareness and nothing more. We are sensitive towards ourselves so you don’t have to be sensitive towards other people. Isn’t that what sensitivity is at its core? Built in alerts for the human body. The more you can learn to manage your internal sensitivity the more one will have control over external sensitivity. I might be coming from a different place with my responses. Autism resulting in heightened senses and the savant thing resulting in making it hypersensitivity. Sensitivity is way better than none. We sense to become aware of things. We must train our minds to be sensitive about the right things." Controlling your emotional sensitivity is actually a physiological problem. We must learn to control the actual release of emotions. If you don’t want to have the psychological response to the physical act of emotions being created then simply learn a way to lessen it. Sensitivity can be a wonderful thing if you don’t give in to the impulsivity which often accompanies it.

Alex Mos's Synopsis Genuine intellectuals possess several characteristics that distinguish them from pseudo-intellectuals. The most defining trait is that an intellectual mind relies on logic over emotions. Secondly, true intellectuals communicate to study and understand complex ideas and abstract concepts. In contrast to pseudo-intellectuals, they value criticism and can explain "profound statements" in simple words. Another intellectual feature is curiosity, which leads to self-learning and broad knowledge based on research from multiple sources. Conversely, pseudo-intellectuals often don't research, or use untrustworthy sources such as social media. The fourh characteristic of intellectuals is their debating skills and ability to see their mistakes as opportunities for growth and self-improvement. In contrast, pseudo-intellectuals are often emotionally attached to their ideas and don't handle criticism professionally. The author aims to gain valuable insights through his sincere intellectual pursuit, and share his philosophical website with the world. His main objective is to contribute to the ongoing quest for knowledge. (Philosocom's Directory On the Intellect) (Background music) The Hallmarks of a True Intellectual This guide explores the key characteristics that distinguish genuine intellectuals from those who merely pose as such. By understanding these hallmarks, you can better evaluate the ideas you encounter and engage in more meaningful intellectual discourse. Logical Reasoning One of the most defining traits of an intellectual is their reliance on logic over emotions. According to PsychologyToday, intellects are "prone to live in their heads, [and as such] they may be largely cut off from their emotions". They base their arguments on sound reasoning, avoiding logical fallacies that cloud judgement. Consistency in logic is imperative, ensuring our arguments are internally coherent and well-supported. Furthermore, intellects would be open-minded enough to realize and admit the limitations of logic, and as such be willing to criticize their own approach. 2. Mastering Communication The speech of intellectuals is characterized by inquiry, enjoyment of sharing knowledge, and openness to new perspectives. Their communication skills are made for study and for the understanding of complex ideas. This is to nurture the effective exchange of abstract concepts. Note I: While the ability to articulate complex ideas effectively is a hallmark of an intellectual, it shouldn't be misunderstood as arrogance. Some intellectuals may exhibit arrogance, but complex communication is not inherently tied to a superiority complex. That is because those suffering from this complex, and are thus compelled to be arrogant, are unable to face criticism. This stands in contrast to intellectuals who understand the practical value of criticism and of being proven wrong. Note II: Many psuedo-intellectuals, with awareness or without, may use what Stephen Law may describe as "Pseudo-Profoundity". In other words they may use words to give off the illusion of depth where there is none. It's possibe to detect pseudo-profoundity by following these steps: Look for any obvious reasons why a "profound" statement is wrong. If still suspecting, ask the supposed intellect for a clearer explanation. Remember: Simplicity can often be a display of depth when the intellectual easily explains complex ideas 3. A Hunger for Knowledge Intellectuals possess a broad and varied knowledge base, often extending beyond their formal education. Sometimes they are knowledgeable, even as philosophers, without much higher education, if any. They actively engage in self-directed learning, researching diverse topics and forming their own well-informed opinions. Their intellectual curiosity drives them to explore various sources, leading to a richer and nuanced understanding of the world. An intellectual isn't satisfied with a single source of information, even within their area of expertise. They actively seek out multiple perspectives to develop a comprehensive view and to reduce bias. That includes opposing viewpoints. This might make them realize that their initial biases mislead them from the very understanding they sought. A pseudo-intellectual on the other hand may fall more easily to misinformation, especially to that found on social media, or may even not research at all. They would claim they are well-versed in subjects they aren't, just because it seems or "feels" obvious to them. But this very sense of obviousness is how Socrates managed to prove how ignorant people really are. 4. Testing the Strength of Ideas Debate serves as a testing ground for intellectual prowess. Intellectuals excel in debate due to their logical consistency, effective communication, and a deep understanding of the subject matter. They are comfortable admitting they are wrong, prioritizing learning over winning the argument. Mistakes become opportunities for growth and refinement of their ideas. A pseudo-intellectual, on the other hand, may take counter-arguements to heart, not understanding they're being too emotionally attached to their ideas. Additionally, they may also not be able or willing to take criticism professionally, derailing the conversation to ad-hominem "attacks" and insults to take the attention out of their own. The Pseudos Among Us Here's where you can add a specific example of a pseudo-intellectual in action: Look for someone who uses big words or complex concepts superficially, avoids admitting mistakes, or relies on emotional appeals over logic nor evidence. By understanding these distinctions, you can navigate the world of ideas with greater clarity and engage with genuine intellectuals for a more enriching and productive experience. Addressing the Skeptic: A Matter of Motivation You might argue that some who dedicate themselves to intellectual pursuits, like myself, could be labeled pseudo-intellectuals. However, sincerity of intent makes a great deal of difference. My goal isn't to collect a reputation for being "smart" but to gain valuable insights and share them with the world. My intelligence is merely the tool for this lifelong commitment and I don't need its glorification. Publicly, especially. In an age where content is king, it's the end-result that matter the most. This desire to contribute and enlighten, not simply impress, separates genuine intellectual endeavors from the stature of a pseudo-intellectual. They, after all, are not really genuine, especially if they are not willing to improve and hone their skills, like every intellect should, in the name of a greater understanding of reality. Ultimately, a true intellectual is driven by a love of learning and a desire to contribute to either themselves, others or both. They are lifelong students, constantly evolving and seeking new knowledge. By fostering intellectual humility and prioritizing the pursuit of truth, we can all engage in more meaningful and enriching conversations. If my website, contributes to this ongoing quest for knowledge, then I've achieved my goal. And that, in itself, is a truly rewarding endeavor, even more than my former desire to prove my relevance. Mr. Nathan Lasher's Feedback My experiences have always been blatantly obvious as to who the pseudo intellectuals were. Growing up in the public education system many of my teachers would have snobby attitudes like they were geniuses compared to their students. When you would ask questions and they would get defensive like “We are not talking about that in class right now". They would be dismissive like their way was the only correct possible way. Not many realize that it is the children who should be teaching the adults. Adults should learn from kids for one reason in particular: Imagination is children using their raw intelligence for a purpose. It takes a large amount of intellectual power to be able to add things to our sensual field. Things such as visualization of objects that aren’t there. I know this sounds crazy, but to me it is impressive and something we should learn to nurture in kids as they grow up. As with intelligence -- logic alone should not be used to measure intelligence. There are different expressions for it. Take a famous artist. Not all their art pieces will be based upon logic. What is logical to one person might not be logical to someone else. Learning to communicate through that barrier is what philosophy is about. [Intellects] have to translate logic across intellectual boundaries (to communicate effectively).

Synopsis by Alex Mos: A high IQ is a virtue but can hinder human connections. “Scary smart” people can be intimidated or even rejected by others because of their high intelligence. When brilliance is the reason for loneliness, it becomes an interpersonal burden. Without friendship or love, highly intelligent people may look for relevancy in influence, becoming accomplished workaholics. (Philosocom's Directory On the Intellect) (Background music) How High IQ Can Hinder Human Connection Intelligence is surely a virtue to be praiseworthy. However, we need to take into consideration that even this very virtue has its own flaws, at least when we interact with other people. In such cases, high intelligence might as well be a liability. It can be a liability when people are overly submissive to their emotions and gut feelings, especially when the information these components deliver is false. When these mental components deceive us with our consent, we express irrationality. For example, it is irrational to be intimidated by things and beings that do not pose a threat to us. And yet, if we succumb to the irrational aspects of ourselves, we can burn bridges with other people just because of a false sense of being threatened It's possible to detect when people are intimidated by your high intelligence, and there is even a slang called "scary smart". If you are highly intelligent, you may find that people around you might start to avoid you, act defensively when you talk to them, and yes, even reject you. I guess... it was one of the reasons I got rejected one time by someone, once.... Moving on. When Brilliance Breeds Isolation Highly intelligent people may find themselves more alone than others because it can be difficult for many people to relate to them. Former friends may say that they are "from different worlds" (as I was once told), and those who feel intimidated by them may disrespect them as a way to protect themselves from threats that only the intelligent person "sees." In a sense, high intelligence can be an interpersonal burden. As such, I personally do not take pride in it. I am proud of the fact that I used my intelligence to survive post-traumatic symptoms. However, as you can see, my intelligence is nothing more to me than a means to an end. Thus, intelligence can hinder you socially, romantically and even sexually. Ironically, there is something called "too much intellect". It is "too much" merely because it can hurt your personal appeal in the eyes of others. Of course, it is also "too much" because we need connections to survive and to thrive, meaning that if people decide to disconnect with you due to your high intelligence, then it is a liability in that regard at the very least. Intelligent people are also lonelier than otherwise. Of course, the negative impacts of constant rejection and social isolation can affect poorly on one's mental health. This is why there isn't necessarily any shame in being mentally ill -- it's not necessarily your fault. Navigating the Complexities of Intelligence and Social Connection In the absence of friendship and/or love in one's life, one might decide to seek their sense of collective worth elsewhere. In power and influence. In being admired by the world. In being relevant more than the average person. In the absence of these elements, one may seek respect and authority more than otherwise. It's all because we have a need to be valued. To feel like we matter. If we do not matter, why should we even love ourselves? And if we do not love ourselves? Why should we choose to live? Highly-intelligent people may live outside of the social world merely because of who they are. They won't necessarily be as loved or befriended as others (or initiate these actions themselves). They can be abused by those who feel intimidated by their intelligence. And as such, intelligence is not entirely a virtue. It is a virtue when it helps you and/or others in life. It's not a virtue when it stands in your way for healthy connections with the outside world. Those who are less intelligent might not be as aware of the hardships of being highly intelligent. They can easily submit to their confirmation bias, cherry-pick the facts on the matter, out-right deny reality, or use short-term ad-hominem fallacies that have little-to-nothing to do with the general issue. It's quite pathetic, I admit. It's pathetic only because I pity their inability to understand beyond their poor rationality. So, we can say that being less-than-rational has disadvantages of its own. Obviously, the highly-intelligent are often more rational. So yes, being "scary smart" can arguably scare people away. If it didn't have this distinct quality, highly intelligent people would be less lonely. And perhaps I would have known the love of another, empirically by now. When Loneliness Fuels a Obsessive Flame So, I take solace in constantly working, and thus turn a liability into an asset once more. It's the practical thing to do, you know. I used to think that workaholism is futile. I now take it back. It's better being a like that than depressed, lonely and irrelevant. And I've been alone far enough, and won't be surprised if some of you had enough of being alone, as well. It can eventually feel like the fun of being alone, overstayed its welcome. It's why I chose this work, despite being asocial. Anyways, I don't like intimidating anyone. I like living. Since I like living, the choice to endure the loneliness is mine and mine alone. Whether or not this existential problem will be solved in my personal life is beyond my control. So, all I am left with is to work as much as I can. Because I know for certain that intelligence is the last thing that can hinder this activity. And it is the only thing I seem to be good at. Other than being rejected for who I am by various people, of course. It's their own prerogative. Regardless of emotion, it wouldn't make sense to confront people for exercising their prerogatives in ways that I do not desire. Mr. Nathan Lasher's Feedback High intellect requires demonstration so people can better understand what it is and how it affects their own lives personally. People can accept demonstrations more easily than they can concepts of intelligence. Let your intelligence be demonstrated as much as possible so people have a better understanding of it. Unveil the mystery so to speak. It should also be noted that intelligence itself is not the problem for most people. They have difficulty understanding how it is expressed. I believe anyone can get behind intelligence on a general basis. Yet, as expressions are simply the result of genetics forming different cognitive features, it can best be understood that the reason for isolation is because your brain simply works differently than other peoples. Loneliness is a state of mind. The feeling can be changed at any time if the right context is added to your situation. Think of isolation as less separatism and more of it as unbiased thinking. Really loneliness's biggest contributor is simply not discovering the herd with which you exist. Otherwise you will always remain a lonely horse or cow out to pasture. (or use any animal of your choosing). Remember at the end of the day it doesn’t matter your intelligence level. We are all humans with some just being a little different. Best advice I can give is for people to stop referring to intelligence as a scale and more like a spectrum that some people can move around on more easily than others.

(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) (The Directory on Nietzsche) (Philosocom's Svartgold/Svarl Articles) Article Summary by Mr. O. C. Isaac Mr. Mandoela Svartgold's article "An Overview of Some of Friedrich Nietzsche's Ideas" delves into his philosophy, focusing on key ideas such as communication, morality, self-knowledge, and genius. The author emphasizes the relevance of these themes beyond manipulation or control. Nietzsche's views on communication are analyzed, with the author arguing that mastery of language allows individuals to shape their perceptions. He critiques collective punishment and the concept of God, arguing that religious doctrine often fosters resentment rather than a love of life. The article also delves into Nietzsche's warnings against conformity and crowds, particularly in religious settings, and his observations on the emotional struggles of youth. The article also delves into Nietzsche's skepticism regarding self-knowledge, questioning whether individuals can truly understand themselves. The discussion on genius and opportunity is presented, with the author referencing works like Beyond Good and Evil, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, and Twilight of the Idols, emphasizing the importance of context in interpreting Nietzsche's often-misunderstood views. Some of Nietzsche's ideas I identified with So, I'd like to highlight the enduring themes in the Friedrich Nietzsche's work. These themes are surprisingly free of any desire for control or manipulation. My deep understanding of the author's work, gained through multiple readings, allows me to identify these recurring messages. By exploring these enduring themes, we can gain valuable insights from Nietzsche's work. I trust this analysis will be appreciated. The Art of Words: Nietzsche on Communication -- Nietzsche explained that every sentence can be rounded to the benefit of the person himself if he knows how to express himself adequately. That is, you can make a person understand you the way you want if you are fluent in speech and learn to leverage it to your advantage. Perhaps he warned others that a word is not enough. A person should ask and understand what that person means before deciding as he sees fit. "Bright words, inventions, and brilliance, everything can be twisted". Nietzsche on Collective Punishment and the Concept of God -- In his pre-Zarathustra writings, Nietzsche explores the idea of collective punishment. He suggests that the concept of a universal death sentence, where everyone suffers the same fate regardless of their actions, could be seen as a form of collective punishment for humanity's ills. This aligns with his critique of a vengeful God who imposes suffering on all. He writes: "The world's trouble is a collective punishment for everyone." In The Decline of the Idols, he further criticizes the idea of God as a source of control and punishment. He views religions that portray God as a "sick" or vengeful being as detrimental to humanity. Such a God, he argues, fosters resentment towards life rather than celebrating it. "God, is like the God of the sick, God like a spider, God is like a spirit -- this is one of the greatest acts of corruption in humanity. God is a hostility and a disappointment to life. Is it such a victorious world?" Nietzsche on Crowds and the Soul in "Beyond Good and Evil" -- In his book Beyond Good and Evil, translated by Dr. Israel Eldad, Friedrich Nietzsche criticizes the stifling effect of crowds on the soul. He argues that those with a "soul to breathe fresh air" – those who value individuality and independent thought – should avoid them. Here, "fresh air" symbolizes freedom and authenticity, threatened by the conformity and "impurity" Nietzsche associates with crowds. He specifically warns against churches, where the presence of a large group fosters hypocrisy and stifles the expression of a genuine soul. "If you have the soul to breathe fresh air, and because the soul has degrees and edges. If you want to rest and breathe, you should avoid entering the churches because there is a crowd in a certain holy place; there is also hypocrisy there. And when there is a crowd, there is impurity." The Trials of Youth -- Young people, driven by emotions and passions, often make choices that later bring shame and regret. They yearn to change, to create a new path, and shed the perceived excess of kindness associated with their youth. This disillusionment with their initial innocence can lead to a suspicion of their own feelings, a state Nietzsche called "voluntary blindness." Later on, when the young soul, tortured by continual disillusions, finally turns suspiciously against itself—still ardent and savage even in its suspicion and remorse of conscience: how it upbraids itself, how impatiently it tears itself, how it revenges itself for its long self-blinding, as though it had been a voluntary blindness! Believing their emotions are unreliable, some young people may be tempted by revenge. However, Nietzsche argues that seeking vengeance creates a self-fulfilling cycle ("boomerang"). Each person's soul develops through unique stages, and a lack of emotional maturity in youth can lead to these struggles. The Enigma of Self-Knowledge -- The maxim of "know thyself" compels us to grapple with a fundamental question: can we ever truly understand who we are? Every triumph and setback shapes our perception of human nature, leading us to question: does success alone define someone's character? Are there unseen accomplishments that paint a more nuanced picture? Anti-thesis -- In his book Human, All Too Human, Friedrich Nietzsche highlights the crucial role of understanding the subconscious. He argues that the subconscious acts as a "narrow opening" through which hidden truths can emerge. However, this very gate can also allow "lies" to sneak in. This implies that not all our thoughts and beliefs are reliable, and critical self-reflection is necessary. Better To Be Heard - In his influential works, Beyond Good and Evil and Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Friedrich Nietzsche emphasizes the importance of communication that transcends mere words. He argues that effectively conveying one's message requires a level of artistry akin to music. Nietzsche suggests using vocal tone and delivery to create a "musical" effect. This implies that the way we speak, with its rhythm, emphasis, and melody, can significantly impact how our message is received. Nietzsche and the Potential for Genius -- Friedrich Nietzsche frequently explores the concept of genius. He doesn't necessarily believe everyone is a genius in a specific field, but that everyone has the potential for greatness in some area. The crucial factor, according to Nietzsche, is opportunity. When presented with an opportunity, a person needs to seize it and develop their talents. Nietzsche acknowledges that even in fields one finds uninteresting, success can be achieved. However, the lack of passion for the field might hinder the individual from fully expressing their genius. "The genius conceives an idea and executes it through his belief that he is God. The genius raises victims in the form of humans and grants them rights to weapons, to work." In Beyond Good and Evil, Nietzsche delves into the potential downsides of genius. He suggests that a published genius, consumed by their creation, might become distant from humanity. This distance can resemble a god-like figure, detached from the consequences of their work. The metaphor of "raising victims" likely refers to the potential negative impact a genius's creation can have on others. Granting "rights to weapons" could symbolize the power dynamics inherent in the work a genius produces. This power can be abused, with negative consequences for others. Context and Misunderstandings -- It's important to note that Nietzsche's writings often criticize the aristocracy. It's unlikely he argued for them to receive more rights simply because of wealth. He might be suggesting that the privileged position of the aristocracy allows them greater access to opportunities for developing their talents, potentially creating an unfair advantage. Sources Beyond Good and Evil - translated by Dr. Israel Eldad Thus Spoke Zarathustra - translated by Ilana Hammerman The Sunset of the Idols - translated by Dr. Israel Eldad

Article Synopsis by Ms. Gabbi Grace The article "How to Become Your Own Professor (A 'Self-Professor')" explores the concept of self-awareness and personal growth through solitude. It offers an intriguing framework for understanding oneself and navigating solitude as a means of achieving deeper self-knowledge. The central thesis posits that by becoming one's own "self-professor," individuals can harness their inner potential, develop a personalized philosophy, and attain a more authentic and resilient sense of self. The article excels in articulating the value of solitude as a tool for self-discovery, emphasizing the connection between solitude and spiritual exploration. It emphasizes the importance of self-knowledge, acknowledging both strengths and the shadowy aspects of one's psyche. The concept of self-professorship encourages readers to take ownership of their intellectual and emotional development, providing an empowering approach to personal growth. In conclusion, The article offers valuable insights for those seeking to enhance their self-knowledge and embrace their inner potential. (Background music) (Subcategory on Book-Related Content) "If we are the results of both our own choices, and the choices made by others, that's a complex web to orchestrate" -- John Duran Knowing the Psyche The psyche is made up of many layers, varied and twisted. Staying in the inner world, AKA, solitude, is the perfect time to start exploring the individualism that lies within you. Getting to know yourself is something of great importance, and all the more so in solitary activities, like writing. If you do not learn to know yourself, you are bound to suffer and sink into a thick fog of unconsciousness, when you do not know what your body and mind need at one moment or another. It's your job to be in-tune with your body and mind in order to know what is best for you. Each of us knows himself or herself to a certain extent. Most of us know when we are hungry, thirsty, stressed, and the like. But why would it be enough to reach the heights of human self-awareness? Time alone has the potential for a most fruitful spiritual journey. A journey that can help the experimenter convert it into positive solitude. And he, as a loner, must know his own complexes - the contents of his personality, his motives, hobbies, principles and the like, in order to attain positive solitude, for one must enjoy himself, to enjoy solitude. The reason isn't that I, Mr. Tomasio, said that he must. I do not work according to the authority fallacy's faulty logic. The reason is that self-knowledge can lead to self-acceptance. And self-acceptance is key to endure negative solitude. You need to know what there is to accept, in order to accept it. That includes the shadowy parts of yourself. Only in this way will he/she be able to formulate a philosophy that will give meaning to his/her life. A personalized philosophy, whose purpose can make solitude far more bearable. Otherwise, he would surely sink into gloomy nihilism. Sink, and not endure the emptiness of the universe successfully. Not endure the insignificance of their own reality. Not strive to be far more significant than otherwise! In the end, it will be inevitable to admit the unavoidable insight: The one that says, that personal identity is the sum of the stories we tell ourselves. For the truth that is the self, is one that develops per the thoughts that it thinks and believes. Man has never had an authentic, deep, and hidden nucleus: A default, rich and cohesive "core" when he or she was born. Instead, it is one that is formed in its physical and mental development, In contact with society, and/or alongside it. We create ourselves using our mental resources, it's called neuroplasticity. But how much does man know about that self-created nucleus? His ultimate, life-long creation? As long as he will choose to deem himself or herself as the victim, he would never be aware of the fact that he is the master, the authority, and the potential professor, of his or her own self. When a person is asked to talk about himself, he will surely start with everything that others have given him: His name, his origin, his socio-economic status, his family. Nothing that is really his intellectual property necessarily. By "intellectual property" I refer to details that are products of his own making, and not to things that must be related to copyright. I'm speaking of details which have little to do with others. Hence why much of us are products of our environment, for we let ourselves be influenced so easily by others. However, this can be changed. When it comes to the self that exists partially independently of others, this is also where loneliness comes in - when a person finds himself alone, the great spiritual journey begins. The journey to finding his intellectual/spiritual property -- the gradually-developing nucleus of their own making. The portions of it, that are his or her own making. For we are not entirely the shaped pawns of external influence -- we also have some degree of agency over ourselves. And that agency can, at times, overcome the external world, by allowing ourselves to become the best versions of ourselves. What is, in fact, "spiritual/intellectual property", according to what I'm referring to? You may not acquire or import any such spiritual property. That amorphous and unexplained property is deep within you, even though it isn't inherited or inborn. Our genes are still developed independently of family, as they are influenced by other factors as well. The Untapped Power of The Self It's your psychological nature, not your sociological one. It's one that exists regardless of the people around it. For people to come and go. Your self remains as long as you breathe. It's your authentic system, which is in the background as you manage your day to day life. The one you mask, intentionally or not (like in the process of denial). You can only get to know her, through the indefinite power of potential at your disposal. Through knowing what you're truly capable of. And how can you know about that power? It can be evident from the practice of your craft. And the more you practice, the more you can improve. And since energy is everything, and energy is power, then power is everything. If we speak in a more cosmological language, then everything you create in the most creative and sincere way... might be from an intentional desire from a supreme creation. That which is produced from the same property I wrote about. The inner genius. It's the very same mental power that develops and forms in you as your body cells. Mentality manifested into physicality. It's breathing and emitting, born and dead, expanding and shrinking. A dynamic, mental organism, which you can harness for your own interests, like I harnessed it in the name of Philosocom. It's the power we all have inside of us. One that is flexible as a bamboo tree, deep as a nuclear reactor. It is the untapped essence of life - what connects man with his existence and disconnects him from others thanks to his solitary, distinct individualism. Thanks to the fact, they are capable of being separated from others, in the name of training, in the name of their craft. Emotional attachment to others is as flexible a mental component as any other component. Hence why I am largely relaxed during times of war. And also why I take criticism professionally. The reason is that the human mind is capable of flexibility and can be shaped per our desires. We just need to be aware of it first. In order for the experimenter to gain experience and be more independent, recognition is at demand. Since he or she probably does not communicate with others when alone, they are isolated from others, even from the virtual company of others. And one cannot know themselves properly without this distinction, without this isolation, temporary or otherwise. Some have called it a curse, since social consciousness strongly condemns isolation, sees all human beings as social creatures, and generalizes all aspects of human communication as strictly social. At the same time, there will be those who, by faith, will believe that it is good to avoid any kind of isolation. However, should one not escape it, the recluse can become a creative, sovereign, and even free person from the negative principles that society has attributed to isolation. The notion of isolation as purely negative is a make-believe fact, one that preaches to all to blindly recognize it as, indeed, objective. No entertainment of the possibility that there are some who are not social. Some humans are even anti-social. The loner can be someone who rethinks things. Only through rethinking will they break through intersubjective barriers, knowing that this nature is indeed intersubjective, and not factual, just because there is a wide agreement on some beliefs. When a person thinks about things anew, they are capable of re-modeling their inner and ideological structure. The potential to remodel our beliefs is also how one can gain leadership and intellectual authority over themselves. The structures of his or her faith undergo renovation, cleansing, and shaping. A reassessment of all the things in which they have believed or learned to believe so far, in order to develop greater horizons. Horizons towards understanding of a self that is more distinct than that of others and thus, one that can understand better as such: A unique, special being. A distinction so aware, so realized, until it is alienated from their former skin; the skin of a former, less-ideal self; Just as a snake sheds its skin and develops a newer skin than its predecessor. The point of self-professorship is to realize who you truly are, and extract the potential of said self, in a reality where it would otherwise lay dormant. Just as science is meant to explain how the world and the universe work, so the professor of the self develops his or her mind, for both knowledge and application. He or she devises theories about the components of it, and as a result, these theories may work together to create a robust and functional identity, an identity that is greater than otherwise, an identity that can be suited for your needs and ambitions. For the self can greatly be a means to achieve an even better end. That is why I sacrificed much of my emotion. They were in the way of my intentions. And if the professor himself or herself finds that their mind is weak, dysfunctional, or defective, they can do two things: Lose an attempt at self-inquiry and turn to others, or develop self-inquiry and turn to their own resources. They would understand what's wrong with them. Whether or not they will accept their own faults or work to reduce them, is their own prerogative. Remember, loneliness is a time of survival and struggle. Solitude is a time of peace and prosperity. There is no solitude without loneliness (unless you like being alone automatically). And deep, existential meaning might not be attained by being alone without struggle, first. If you do not know how to light a fire, make containers, hunt, etc., you may face hunger, despair, and even death. If you know how to do these things, you will also know what is good for you, personally, while alone. Such knowledge can show you how to avoid the things that harm you and threaten your peace. Society can provide you with all your needs and be a source of support. It can provide validation and affection when needed. But if you do not know how to provide all these things for yourself, you will not be able to know yourself in depth. Why? Because you do not necessarily need validation from the outside world, unless it is imperative to your survival. When you know yourself more completely, you might understand that much of what is outside of you can already be found within yourself. That includes self-validation. Therefore, a greater self-knower validates himself or herself. No one that is not your therapist is responsible for handling your emotions. The self-professor does not reside in a greenhouse, per se. He or she takes care of himself or herself without having to be in a greater collective, and without needing a safe space. For his potential of self-security is already within him or her. Just like an actual professor is confident in their words, the self-prof is confident in his or her respective expertise. Unless they are in court (and I am not providing legal advice), it is their job to lecture about themselves when necessary. It is their job to tell others that they are not the same. After all, if you are mentally dependent on society, you do not need to know yourself. Self-awareness, at its core, is a tool for better mental health. Those who are not lonely or do not lead a solitary life do not need this tool. There are countless people who can do the effort for you, such as psychologists and other advisors. If you are not a loner, why would you learn to know yourself if it has no functionality or contribution? That is, of course, unless you realize, deep within, that over-dependence is faulty.

(Subcategory on Flaws) (Philosocom's Directory on Ego Management) (Background Music) "Psychotics know no real fear, even to their own detriment. The size, strength, nor power of the enemy matters not one single iota. Madness operates independently of all fear, and is therefore free to operate in any medium of manner they see fit to use" -- Mr. John Duran Introduction Pride can sometimes be found in dysfunction, but it is something that many fear, like those who are too cowardly, or those who try to deceive others. When caught scamming, some may deny their wrongdoing instead of being mature enough to apologize. After all, scammers find no pride or achievement in apologizing, or in other words, in openly confessing their flaws. And of course, the same goes in professional settings. Trying to find a good excuse to back up your own underhanded, faulty deeds could save your work from being tainted by your own hand -- and protect your ego. However, there are indeed cases where dysfunction and pride are not contradictory. Being taller than the average person, I lived most of my lifespan thus far in great pain in the neck, because people were almost always shorter, so bending over my neck became natural. The constant ache began one day at Elementary and resumed. Even in adulthood, it never stopped in my waking life. I drink coffee even when I'm not tired as it helps with the pain. This pain, which has lasted for the majority of my lifetime, has taught me an important lesson in life: Acceptance. Perhaps if my neck weren't dysfunctional, life would have been harder to endure. If you get the reference to my philosophical symbol, my neck has become a pillar that has taught me endurance. Implications of Pain Over time, I became less and less sensitive to things, to the point of apathy, especially things that disturb or trigger many people. Perhaps this is why I write about dark stuff so casually, even when it involves myself. A person I once was in contact with eventually left me due to her extreme sensitivity to things I don't regard as emotionally significant. The person I consider my "nemesis" abandoned me twice due to my own emotions. Of course, when I had the opportunity to ask her why she was so frightened by a mere emotion, an opportunity I seized, she didn't answer me. You know, pain isn't that bad once you get used to it. Trying to avoid all pain is likely to fail in the end, because life cannot be lived without experiencing some pain. Of course, the enjoyment of pain is illogical and dangerous, as it could lead one to do regrettable things, but if you are already in pain, and might fail at stopping it, why not try to find something good in it? You know, to actually better endure it? A certain medical professional once gave me some advice I find the most practical to this day, regarding my neck pain -- try to bend it backwards, so its positioning would eventually become default. However, despite all the years that passed, I failed at this restoration. This logically means, that I might experience this pain for the rest of my life. Being used to it, I don't really mind this "hell" anymore. From Agony to Pride That's why, I take pride in this dysfunction. Pride, not because it's unusual, but because it taught me things, I might otherwise be unaware of. Pain is a great teacher. I see people across the internet, trying to mask their vulnerabilities; Old people, pretending to be millennials; Scammers, pretending to be offering genuine help to potential victims; Narcissists, pretending to be perfect; Women, putting extravagant make-up to hide their true faces, and finally, people in general, pretending to be rich. I no longer view these people with awe, specifically the braggers and the more beautiful. With this pain, it really means very little to me, anymore. External Example 1 I look up to a certain fictional character whom I mentioned before -- General Skarr, who ran with scissors as a kid and scarred his left eye permanently and ruined its ability to see with it. He never wore an eyepatch, and although he is a cartoon character aimed at children in the early 2000's, the fact that we can see a visible eye that is purely white, is quite impressive. After all, that eye is dysfunctional, and it's probably very painful for him to have it exposed as if it's a regular eye. People wear eyepatches for a medical reason, to keep the eye healthy as one can. Lately, I've learned the reason as to why he never covered his scarred eye: "Eye patches are for pirates, and little girls!" It was a quote of his I heard yesterday. Such pride in something that is a liability, is something I find inspirational, and perhaps you, too. How many of us humans are prepared to expose our flaws? How many of us are prepared to not only admit that they are imperfect, as we all are, but also accept that imperfection, and not sigh with submission? Mind you, Skarr said that quote of his to someone who also couldn't see with their left eye and used an eyepatch. A weird flex, to be sure, but a thought-provoking one. External Example 2 In a story called "The Hive Situation: A Memoir", The writer, Johnny, describes a story from his life as a kid where he lived in an abusive family and was forced by his mother to assume the role of a handyman of the household. A natural hermit by nature, Johnny writes (In chapter 2): "Our living existence often continues to the detriment of others. We must ultimately destroy them, or recruit them to our cause in order to live and often indeed profit finally, though the very thought is abhorrent to me. This is the lot of all human beings". We can learn from this that sometimes, in order to live, we must be a pain to other's side, otherwise we would either be destroyed ourselves, unless we are to cooperate with them. Such is the nature of power. The very notion of conflict is natural among human beings and as such it may be necessary to collide with another's interests, simply because we exist. The fight for survival is not something that's irrelevant to our times, because even in this day and age of comfort and pleasure, we do not live in a vacuum and as such others can easily disturb our peace and vice versa. Therefore, the fact that we still manage to survive and not give up, despite our conflicts with other beings, is something that should not be taken lightly. Because other beings, including people, will not necessarily care if we give up on the struggles of life. Why, then, not take pride in the natural dysfunction that we sometimes are? Why not take pride in still enduring the hardships our dysfunctional aspect sets in our path? Feedback by Mr. M. Svartgold In connection to pride, I've always felt a deep-seated fear of the unconscious. Like you, I believe it often leads people to resort to cunning and deception, especially when trying to succeed at work or earn money dishonestly. I've spent my entire life pretending to be something I'm not. However, as an autistic person, it's incredibly difficult to maintain a facade. People can often see through my attempts, and I've noticed a peculiar kind of pity in their eyes, a mercy that feels strangely negative. Locals frequently ask me about things that do not concern them. When they learn that I rent an apartment, they immediately assume I'm poor and naive. It seems to me that society subconsciously judges people based on their appearance and labels them accordingly. I think this is too shallow. I've never felt the need to be proud in front of others. I'm content with my solitude, whether I'm at home alone or with family. I also avoid discussing my health, as it often leads to inquiries about money yet again. People seem to calculate a person's worth based on their income, and I've found that this unconscious judgment can be quite harmful. Pride, to me, is a pointless attempt to feel superior to those who look/are different. I've learned to embrace my authenticity and no longer feel the need to please others. Their approval is simply not worth the effort.

Article Synopsis by Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein (The Article's Author) Living alone as an aging (or even younger) person, even though it may be difficult, is not entirely impossible. When utilized, it can bring much potential in terms of productivity and insight-seeking. In a way it can even make the world a better place using the skills you can hone while you're alone. Missing out on the times of being alone can also be considered as a wasted potential, as it can allow you to work and become the best version of yourself, and appreciate yourself as a being that exists beyond society. Even if you live by yourself, it is no shame to seek help in whatever activity or problem you need assistance in, in the sense that you cannot do it yourself and competently succeed. I hope these tips are helpful. Living alone can be a rewarding experience, but it is important to be prepared for the challenges that come with it. (Background music) Introduction Living alone can be hard for some people. However, it may be inevitable for others, as not everyone will succeed in finding a partner, assuming they want one. There may also be people who do not want a partner and prefer to live alone. For those who do not know, I am a self-described asocial man, as I mostly find true peace within solitude. I also wrote a guide on finding peace. Like some people, who just prefer to keep to themselves until they die in their own homes, I don't know if I'll find a partner to live with, as it is more often than not, lonely at the top. So, being the faithful writer than I am, I decided to write (and revamp) an article about aging alone for my readership. The Tips Although I am a relatively-young man, I do have some insights to share with those who, voluntarily or involuntarily, may live alone for a long time. Regardless of the reasons and factors behind living alone, consider these 5 tips if you live alone and/or worry that you might live by yourself for the rest of your life: 1. "Alone" in the context of aging refers to aging without a romantic partner. However, you do not have to be generally alone in order to age alone without a partner, making the term "alone" case-specific. Even as an aged man or woman, you can still have people around you to support you, such as family, friends, and so on. That is without the necessity of a romantic partnership. So, if you want to feel less lonely, you can have other people around you that are not romantically involved with you. 2. Prepare to find yourself bored from time to time, if not for extended periods of time. Even if you find ways to entertain yourself and do other things that lead to productivity, boredom can sometimes be inevitable. Instead of seeing it as an unwanted occurrence, one can see it as a potential to find new things to do and to indulge in. The internet could, in theory, eradicate your boredom. 3. Make sure you are independent enough to endure a retired life in seclusion. If you are not independent enough, you may find this way of life to be harsher than it could have been. The issue of independence applies in many aspects, from the means of transportation to the means of being able to manage one's finances. Consider your finances wisely and you'll be able to manage independently at least in that department, whether partially or completely. Being physically fit can also make you more independent from the help of others (Carrying groceries, cleaning the house by yourself, etc). That's even more true when you grow older. 4. The issue of health also has aspects that may affect each other. If you completely neglect exercise, it may affect your mental state poorly, and vice versa. Keep a healthy lifestyle not only to extend your lifetime but also to preserve one's wellbeing as time goes on. Good wellbeing can allow you to function better and thus, depend less on others. 5. The solitary retired life includes a lot of time to be spent. This is an opportunity to master whatever skill or field of knowledge you are interested in, and not necessarily only one. There is so much potential to be grasped when one is alone, and it is unfortunate to see people ignoring it altogether. I personally utilized my solitary lifestyle to master the art of writing philosophy articles, compose music, and overall try to be a better philosopher. Bonus: The Keys to Healthy Aging -- An Excerpt (By: Melinda Smith, M.A., Jeanne Segal, Ph.D. and Monika White, Ph.D) As we grow older, we experience an increasing number of major life changes, including career transitions and retirement, children leaving home, the loss of loved ones, physical and health challenges—and even a loss of independence. How we handle and grow from these changes is often the key to healthy aging. Coping with change is difficult at any age and it’s natural to feel the losses you experience. However, by balancing your sense of loss with positive factors, you can stay healthy and continue to reinvent yourself as you pass through landmark ages of 60, 70, 80, and beyond. As well as learning to adapt to change, healthy aging also means finding new things you enjoy, staying physically and socially active, and feeling connected to your community and loved ones. Unfortunately, for many of us aging also brings anxiety and fear. How will I take care of myself late in life? What if I lose my spouse? What is going to happen to my mind? Many of these fears stem from popular misconceptions about aging. But the truth is that you are stronger and more resilient than you may realize.

(Philosocom's Philosophy of Environment Directory) (For Philosocom's directory for articles on money, click here) Article Synopsis by Mr. J. Igwe and Co. The article "Equality and the Future Socio-Economic Class - Why Our Ignorance Fuels Dystopia (And the Value of A Greater Vision)" is an insightful exploration of socio-economic challenges with a philosophical and ethical lens. It highlights the importance of intellectual humility and problem-solving through a philosophical lens, adding depth to the discussion of economic inequality and capitalism. The article also addresses multiple aspects of inequality, including the flaws of capitalism and the rise of AI and its impact on future labor markets. The article emphasizes personal responsibility and encourages readers be responsible for their personal growth, even in the face of systemic challenges. It offers practical solutions, such as implementing a living wage, strengthening labor unions, and investing in education, grounded in real-world policy discussions. In conclusion, the article offers a thought-provoking exploration of socio-economic inequality, the flaws of capitalism, and the potential future shaped by AI. "The ONLY way to actually CHANGE the future is to know EXACTLY what it would have been, had we not interfered. Unless we 100-percent know what the future was going to be, we change nothing, we merely fulfill its occurrence" -- Mr. John Duran (Background music) Part I: In the Name of a More Equitable Society In a better, more moral world, everyone would be able to afford the necessities of life based on the time and energy they dedicate to work. It is unfair that a worker who is willing to work overtime may not be able to afford the minimum requirements for living, while those who work far less than them, can. Feelings of injustice can be seen as the cause responsible for the exertion of revolutionary potential, capable of great innovation as well as great destruction. Injustice leads to distrust in this world, and even in the willing participation with corrupt trends. As much as we should accept the reality of our respective situations, we should consider the implications of doing so on our future. On the future of this world. Therefore, as much as we should recognize the present, we also must go beyond mere recognition. We must foster long-term thinking, to be able to think several steps ahead, like in a game of chess. The Value of Intellectual Humility For Our Understanding Observe chess grandmasters. We may think they are naturally gifted. I'm afraid however you're wrong and that you are quick to jump to conclusions, as it usually takes 8 to 12 years minimum. You may think I am a naturally talented writer. You are wrong yet again, as I have been practicing the art of writing philosophy articles, since 2013. Became fatigued accordingly, despite being born in the 90's. Our perspectives remain shallow. Shallow than we might think they are. Our sense of pride deters us from understanding how shallow our perception really is. In the world of philosophy, however, it is curiosity that prevails, not awful, tempting megalomania. Our ego blinds us from realizing how ignorant we all really are. As such, our reasoning, without the solid smithing of lifelong learning, remains simplistic, more than it could be. The more simplistic our reasoning is, the more mistakes we make in our lives. The less we learn from our mistakes, the more we are prone to making them again. Why We Need To Become Problem Solvers By Default Philosophy is where you teach yourself to become a problem solver. When we accept reality for what it is, and think we have solved the problem, we only fool ourselves. How exactly can we accept a reality wholeheartedly, that backstabs us? That diminishes our inner light, necessary to help others as well as allow us to re-discover the true depth and beauty of this world? No. We may accept the injustices of the world, but if we are able to afford rectifying at least some of them, why not? If we can learn to let go of the temptation of hatred, for example, we can hurt others far less. In reality, we don't have to suffer as much as we do today. It's just that we suffer today, in the present. This doesn't mean we would always have to suffer excessively, when we can make, even, basic, simple steps in reducing our own suffering. And one of the ways we can do it, is by becoming more just towards others. By creating a trend, not just following one. A trend of trying to understand more than we currently do. When we do this, we can demonize less, and humanize them more. We can understand their own respective struggles. And, when we better cope with our own adversities, we can then move on to help with their own struggles. Problems. They are to be accepted as an inevitable possibility in this world. However, the more we bias our thinking towards their positive, moral rectification, the less hard they can be for us and also for others. That's the wonder of philosophy. It does not only acknowledge our suffering. It seeks to heal us of our suffering, so we would be more ethical in our conduct, and resort less to hurt others, just to distract ourselves from our own pain. Recognizing faults is just part of problem solving. Lambasting ruthlessly isn't worth much when people are focused on being hurt and guilty and ashamed... when we can just learn. Understand where the other side is coming from, and make solving problems a habit. A habit as regular as walking itself. Choosing More-Positive Perceptions For a Better Future You might see problems as annoyances to escape from or to just live under in despair. When I see something that's hard, I don't use contradictory words like "however" or "but" when I address their difficulty. No. Difficulty is a great opportunity for us to grow. Therefore, we should embrace difficulty whenever we can. We should choose the hard ways of doing things, as long as they are not too risky for us. And this world, this humanity, as much, much growing to do, if it is really happiness it seeks, happiness and satisfaction beyond hedonistic pursuits. Joy that comes from strength, not from sources that diminish our health. Do you see how a change of perspective can make a very large difference in how we act? I see flaws as wonderful. They are either to be embraced or be used as opportunities to better ourselves. Why, then, must we succumb to the many flaws of this world as disheartening, when we can see them as giving us reason to live? Reason to help others, ourselves, and the world? Part II: A Philosophical And Ethical Examination of Capitalism The popularity of an idea can greatly diminish our understanding of its flaws, therefore making us more incompetent, unnecessarily, in being good problem solvers. In the contemporary era, the problem with capitalism is that it creates a huge gap between those who know how to make a fortune and those who have dedicated most of their lives to work. With time, this gap only grows, leading to the growth of injustice and all of what results from having one's feelings of injustice unanswered. When we lack a holistic approach, we diminish ourselves from solving our own problems, as after all not even the richest person, exactly lives in a vacuum. Why Harmony is More Important Than Competition To Keep Healthy By our own inability of being considerate of others, we diminish our own goals in life. As much as we were normalized to compete with each other, we must not forget the value of cooperation and harmony. Harmony allows us to rest peacefully, better knowing we don't have to be stressed to the point of distracting ourselves from sleep. Harmony allows us to embrace even complete strangers, such as our own neighbors, and avoid unnecessary wars with them. As you could tell, harmony is immensely hard to attain. That is because we were taught to compete, more than we learned to care for each other using compassion and empathy. We did not learn how to properly calm ourselves, hence why we constantly develop mental and physical illnesses, as well as find ourselves cornered in avoidable traumatic events. The Unnecessary Sacrifice Assumption The capitalistic approach is too simplistic in its logic. It does not consider enough other factors, other than getting wealthier and financially free. In favor of our individual freedoms, we allow ourselves to forget and discard the suffering of others. When we do this, we unnecessarily increase the darkness and the illness of this world. Yes, this world is very ill, unnecessarily so. Examine yourself and examine your dear ones. Are either of you completely healthy, without any medical or mental problems? No. Most likely not... We may call this being "colorful" or being "weird" and "eccentric". However, eccentric as we may be, embracing our eccentricities entirely can diminish us from realizing that we are, indeed, ill. Ill by life, not only by genetics. Ill by the environment. Ill by our own recklessness. Capitalism and Disability There are also those who have a harder time making money due to their disabilities, seen or unseen. Shaming them for their disability without further recognition of rectification, would only worsen their situation, and compel them towards greater illness, as their independence withers accordingly, and their own potential to help others, is diminished as well. Due to our focus on the present, not the future, the disabled are left them no option but to apply for welfare, and will not necessarily find themselves being able to do more than that. That is despite them, in theory, being capable of doing so, so much good in this world. I am only disabled because of society's inability to contain me. See how hard-working I really am with Philosocom. It's when I am alone when I prosper the best as a writer and as a thinker. Seeing others being helped by my articles, is how both our wellbeing are improved. Mutually. Harmoniously. And of course, harmony is minimized in capitalism. As we minimize harmony, we minimize morality and our health overall. A more-deep moral understanding can easily be linked to better health, at least in theory. How to Mitigate Capitalistic Harm To address these issues and create a more equitable society, we must consider the following reforms: Implement a Living Wage: A living wage ensures that workers earn enough to meet their basic needs for housing, food, hygiene, transportation, and running water. This would help to reduce poverty and ensure that everyone has a decent standard of living, and also overall health of societies. Strengthen Labor Unions: Unions give workers a collective voice and bargaining power, allowing them to negotiate for better wages, benefits, and working conditions. This can help to reduce income inequality and improve the lives of working people. In the case of Dhar Mann studious, this case is evident. Expand Access to Education and Training: Education and training can help people develop the skills they need to secure better-paying jobs and advance themselves overall. This can help to reduce income inequality, as well as increase the pool of professional workers available on the job market. Invest in Social Safety Nets: Strong social safety nets, such as unemployment insurance, disability benefits, and affordable healthcare, can help to protect people from economic hardship and ensure that everyone has access to basic necessities. I personally suggest to have the beneficiary be encouraged about still contributing to society. By implementing these reforms, we can create a more equitable society where more people can have the opportunity to achieve more of their inner potential, live fulfilling lives and improve society overall. Part III: The Rise of AI and the Future of Work The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) presents a profound challenge to the traditional labor market. As AI becomes increasingly capable of performing tasks once thought to be exclusively human, a new social class may emerge: The financially unnecessary people. These individuals, whose skills and abilities are surpassed by AI, will face significant economic challenges, as long as they would refuse working on improving themselves, first. Not only will AI replace basic, menial jobs, but it will also encroach on fields traditionally dominated by humans, such as medicine, and even security. This could lead to a substantial increase in the number of people who are unable to find profitable employment, leaving them needing governmental support or join the homeless. Working on yourself is how you can better attain success either way, alone or within an organization. Flaws are not to be embraced but to be reduced. While AI and art can be synthesized to improve art, such is not the case in areas where such collaboration does not apply. Agriculture could entirely be mechanized, along with production and distribution factories. Some even consider AI capable of replacing romantic partners. On Universal Basic Income To mitigate the potential social and economic consequences of AI displacement, governments and businesses must consider implementing a universal basic income (UBI). A UBI would provide a financial safety net for individuals who are unable to find work or whose wages are insufficient to meet their basic needs. This would help to prevent social unrest, the foundation of criminal syndicates, and ensure that everyone has access to the resources necessary to survive. It's often times that people do crimes just to survive, like theft and kidnapping for ransom. Either way, the transition to an AI-dominated economy will require significant adjustments on both a personal and societal level. Individuals may need to be prepared to give up some of their financial freedom and embrace new ways of working and living, regardless of their freedom of choice. That is the case with any technological advancement: Nothing is really certain Hence the increasing importance in investing in education, training, and social safety nets earlier on and not after innovations are fully implemented. We can, then, help to ensure a just and equitable future for all while reducing failure difficulties. Part IV: Ensuring Equality and Opportunities Regardless of the economic system or technological advancements, the equality of the law and of opportunities should be universal. Those born with one or more certain disadvantages should be supported to receive the same rights as everyone else. To promote and advance humanity's achievements, it is crucial to invest in education and other programs that enhance the quality of the human material. The more we invest in humans, the more we can save ourselves from ourselves. The more dependable, moral people we foster, the better we'll be able to dictate our own future by our own hands with less mistakes. When Forsaking "Corner people" Africa, the second-largest continent, still lags behind in terms of development. That is despite the untapped human potential there, capable of much help to people worldwide. Many Africans possess immense potential and could make significant contributions to various fields if they were given more opportunities, which we Westerners often take for granted. Conclusions As an autistic man and a hermit, I have been able to dedicate myself to philosophy in my entirety. The last thing I want is to be considered expendable to a world I can help. Despite my conditions I've been working hard to improve myself, so I would become more and more dependable, less and less dependant. The future should be in the hands of the dependable. The morally dependable, those who care for others more than their own self-serving interests. They should be able to see the bigger picture, and always be in a state of learning, as nothing in this world is certain. The more we refuse to improve ourselves because of our ignorant pride, the more we condemn ourselves to become victims of bad futures we want to avoid. Knowledge, discipline and moral integrity. They all should be maintained and developed as a matter of principle. The more we all do it, the more we can alter this future for the greater good.

(Background music) Introduction: Exploring Fictional Worlds Fiction is a type of imagination in which a narrated realm of reality exists in both our collective minds and the media on which the narration is told. What makes it separate from reality is the fact that the events described in the story never happened but were rather imagined to happen. It's like a trick, but one where we already know it's a trick, so it's not really deceiving anyone who can distinguish reality from fiction. We see fiction through the lenses of the characters in action, presented by actors whose moves are dictated by a director and by those who wrote the plot. If it's a story in a book, then we watch the happenings through the writer's narration, who might as well be narrating a character's voice instead. The Creator's Influence and Picking the Right Source It does not matter in that sense if the narration is in third person or otherwise, because that story cannot exist without its creator. Therefore, the fictional universe depends on its creator and cannot exist without the perspective he or she has placed on it. Therefore, all fiction is biased. The line between fictional information and factual accuracy can be blurry. While fiction offers valuable insights that spark discussion and contemplation, it's crucial to distinguish it from attempts to mimic real life. In a way, fiction can tell a lot about reality on the macro level, but not necessarily on the micro level. In other words, fiction can teach us a lot about existence, but not necessarily about specific contexts. Star Wars, for example, can teach us about politics and the human spirit that can be strong enough to bring down even the direst of oppression. However it does provide not an accurate representation of how space works, as the setting is not that important in Star Wars as what it can actually teach us about human society. As such, given that all fiction creators are ignorant to an extent (like all of us) learning about autism from a TV show focused on entertainment might not be the most reliable source. Maybe it can teach us a thing or two on life, like with the Big Bang Theory, but informative articles like these exist for a reason. As such, learning about autism from fictional characters like Sheldon Cooper isn't as effective as taking the time to read on it. Similarly, a fictionalized historical film, though inspired by a specific era, shouldn't be mistaken for a factual account. If you wish therefore to learn on history, rely on historic documents. As a former teenage author of three Hebrew novellas, I enjoyed the creative process, but even then, I questioned the real-world impact of fiction. Philosophy articles, I believed, offered a greater contribution to readers. As a bookworm, I often finished stories feeling intellectually unfulfilled. The narratives rarely encouraged independent thought, leading me to favor nonfiction as both a reader and writer. The virtue of nonfiction allows us to study reality both on the micro and macro levels, without the need to craft elaborate stories just to convey an otherwise direct insights. The Fallacy of Fictional "Facts" Some might believe fictional details mirror reality because they feel "true" and resonate with us. Some may even go far and claim that they can teach us "the art of being human" by nurturing social and emotional skills. However, while some elements, like tables, exist in both realms, fictional "facts" requiring verification can be mistaken for truth because they resonate with us. And pure intuition is not enough to verify facts on reality, both on the micro and macro levels. As such, making good decisions require both understanding of data and intuition. Philosophy, unlike pure fact-based disciplines, explores possibilities, leading to shared discourse and experimentation. Plato's theory of perfect forms, for example, is a valid theory based on reasoning, but not a verifiable fact. We can contemplate it without accepting it as absolute truth, leading to contributions in our understanding of metaphysics. Fiction, however, might not offer the same clear distinction between its presented information and verifiable facts. That at least goes for historic fiction, and to people who generally don't research information. They might see a show where a character says, "Geniuses need to eat more", and believe it's true. However, in reality, while challenging thinking does consume more calories, it isn't that significant that you'll need to eat more. The Misunderstood Power of Fiction The purpose of fiction is mainly to entertain. Video games, for example, immerse us in fantastical worlds, and very few of them are educational, as there are far more popular genres. We can extract interesting ideas and concepts from them, but mistaking them for verified facts without verification is a common pitfall. It's like saying they can teach you how to drive or shoot a gun strategically. This blurring-of-lines between fiction and reality extends beyond video games. Consider pornography – its purpose is to create a sexual fantasy, not replicate real-life encounters. The actors involved are playing roles, just like characters in a movie. Don't expect pornography to teach you what women truly want. Thus, viewers may unconsciously treat these experiences as windows into real life, blurring the lines between entertainment and reality. The Fallacy of Fictional Facts So, why do people fall prey to this fallacy? Often, there's an absence of disclaimers within fictional media and in content in general. That is even though using disclaimers can be beneficial for your readers to trust you and see you as credible. Without clear boundaries, viewers may misinterpret fictional traits as factual. It's a human tendency – we sometimes struggle to reach seemingly obvious conclusions that could help us in our goals. We might crave a guiding hand, an authorial voice shaping our understanding, making education not entirely forced. After all, being more educated can lead to a better life in general and of course to a better understanding. Without specific ways to understand the author, a misinterpretation of the author's intent might delude us. Deconstructing Narratives Why do people need to be told what to think? Why can't they reach the correct conclusions based on the information presented? The answer lies in the power of narratives. Fiction, even when presented as pure entertainment, can shape our perception of reality. We often fail to recognize the inherent subjectivity embedded into seemingly objective narrative. After all, every story is ultimately crafted by one or a few creators, who are of course biased by default in one way or another. Propaganda in Disguise: The Case of Minorities This confusion extends beyond pure entertainment. Even well-meaning fiction can be a form of propaganda, shaping our understanding of specific groups, like minorities. While such portrayals might seem positive on the surface, they may reinforce stereotypes or fail to capture the full complexity of a group's experience. This good intention can ironically lead to prejudice, negative self-image and even under-achievement when the representation is stereotypical and not realistic. Again, why not learn from the real example, as presented with the study of history? Conclusion: Precision as a Tool for Clarity As a writer, striving for precision is crucial. By dissecting narratives and recognizing their inherent biases, we can become more discerning consumers of information, both factual and fictional. Ultimately, clear communication can allow critical thinking, allowing us to move beyond the surface better, and grasp the deeper messages of any media, both fictional and non-fictional. We should strive for a better communication even beyond media, as that can eliminate delusions of subtext and improve our relationships with others by understanding them better.

(Background music) If logic were an entity, It couldn't care less for your Sentimentality. It would have a cold and ruthless Mentality. And would judge everything and everyone By rationality. It would deem anything As conditional, Discern what is necessary, And be more dimensional, Only if it serves understanding, Through the rationale. It wouldn't care how things, Make you feel, It would not try too much To appeal. If A leads to B, And B is result of A, It does not matter, If you approve or protest With yay or nay. Your happiness or your anger, Or excessive information you give, Does not matter even with your temper. So it will say: "I don't care. It doesn't matter". Don't expect reality to forgive, Because reality is built on logic, Not on post-truth. Expecting logic to care for unrelated or contradictory things, Is quite moronic. Is it its fault you gave it, Content that is unrelated? No. It's irrelevant, So there is no reason to care. Whine about how not nice it was. Whine if you dare, And see how logic is only irritated, When you assign a problem, Whose burden is not her to be eliminated. Fail to solve your emotional problems, And they will only stay there And cloud your judgement. Expect others to carry this punishment, And you'll have more suffering to spare. If A is B and B is C, Then A is C And that's all there is to see. How A made you feel, And how B made you think, And how C made you imagine pink, Doesn't matter much, If for truth it doesn't aim to punch. There is no need to whine, In front of reality, Take care of yourselves, Because reality might just be, Well and fine.

Alex Mos's Synopsis A good philosopher shares fearless insights in public with the risk of being ridiculed and rejected. You shouldn't feel intimidated by more sensitive people, triggered by your thoughts. Some might incorrectly interpret a disagreement with you as an attack, and people with PTSD are likelier to feel threatened. A good philosopher must risk social exclusion or hatred due to their insights. Refrain from compromising to please others if your ideas are controversial. The focus of philosophy is the search for truth, not fame or social status. You might become a social reject and consider living in solitude. However, you should not be afraid to share your thoughts widely, interact with others, and contribute to humanity. Therefore, a good philosopher can't be oversensitive and must be prepared to get hurt. You might be unable to change the world, but you can still leave a mark on it. The author doesn't expect anybody to agree with him but asks for respectful feedback as his work doesn't purposely harm anybody or violate any rules. (Background music) Being a philosopher takes a greater risk than one might realize. To be a good philosopher, you must not be afraid to sound your thoughts publicly, and you must also be prepared for the consequences of sounding your thoughts and beliefs. Not everyone is going to like you, specifically due to your conclusions and insights, and at times you might not be liked at all, and even be hated by others. Due to their personal reasons, some people are going to get triggered by your thoughts as well. Nonetheless, you must not let these consequences stop you, for you have the right to express yourself and sound your voice even if your voice will not be liked or widely accepted. As long as you have the right to express yourself, you shouldn't fear using this right at all. The existence of the more-sensitive shouldn't intimidate you, either. At times your philosophy might even be controversial or radical in the eyes of others, but in the name of contributing to the world's knowledge, you must not give up just because you'll be mocked, laughed at, or ridiculed. Not everyone is okay with disagreeing, and not everyone will tolerate your thoughts. Some will even be triggered and take offense, whether or not the offense was given or even intended in the first place. That's because disagreement may be seen by many as a threat because our brains may take the impression of a disagreement as an "attack". Some people will be mad at you for having different priorities and might even actively be trying to dispose or reject you from a social circle, as your constant disagreement may be seen as an attack even though it really isn't... In general, people with PTSD may already rarely, if ever, feel safe. In October 2021, the world-scale prevalence of PTSD in the world population is 3.9%. This means that at least 200-400 million people are likely to feel threatened by even the smallest of things. (As someone who suffers from trauma myself, I use logic to look beyond my irrational feelings, and thus I am not as intimidated as other people who would suffer from my conditions). Therefore, in order to be a good and effective philosopher, you must take the Social Risk, even if that risk might unintentionally harm others, due to past, personal events unrelated to yourself. It's their own responsibility to face them, not yours. A site called Lawinsider.com defines "Social Risk" as: "Factors and circumstances leading to social exclusion of persons or putting persons at risk of social exclusion" In other words, a good philosopher is best to be prepared for rejection by anyone due to their own insights. That's because philosophy isn't about fun or about respect or about being accepted (as was the case with Diogenes). It is about trying to find and research the truth. If you're not a private person, it is also about sharing what you believe to be the truth, and suffer the consequences. Be prepared to be disliked, hated and even despised, even in a democratic country or community. Don't expect your ideas to be accepted by anyone, and you will be the least disappointed among many. The more you're prepared for any type of reception, the less hurt you might get as a result. You must not change your ideas just because they're not accepted or controversial. Philosophy doesn't work that way, as it doesn't submit to conformity just because others think otherwise. A general controversy is insufficient for that because a good philosopher doesn't compromise to please others. Instead, a good philosopher would alter their philosophy only because it's illogical/incorrect. We philosophers do not act according to the ad-populum fallacy. In other words, the truth isn't a product of a popularity contest. Popularity may apply in democratic elections, but the support of many does not preserve or alter reality alone. Likewise, I don't expect anyone to think like me, agree with me, nor be nice to me due to my thoughts. Other than respectful feedback I don't demand much of you. I can't control others' reactions in general, and whenever I write something, like an article, I never know how it will result upon reception. However, I still publish articles and post consistently, despite not knowing how they will be received by those who read them. With every piece I publish I risk how others will look at me currently. Some readers will stay, some readers will leave. Some will believe they have the authority to tell me what to do and how to behave, even though I am a free citizen, and this website is mine, and can act as I please as long as I don't break any law. A good philosopher will not expect to be liked and won't necessarily think they deserve respect for being philosophers. They will look at others, who might receive much more support and adoration than they do, and move on with their life and work. The point of philosophy isn't to make a philosopher famous or popular, but simply to reach possible truths, using contemplation and other means such as research. This field isn't at all about social status, and due to its inconsideration to social norms, some people might see some philosophers as offensive, audacious, aggressive and so on. Don't be intimidated when someone is angry at you for thinking otherwise. It's their right to react however they like to your content, and if you want, you can block them if they harass you as a result. Just consider the possibility of becoming a social reject, as a result of your work. And still, fear is your enemy, it's something that can prevent you from sounding your voice and publishing your work, and in general, make you give up on activities that can bring much good and benefit to this world, even after your death (hence the importance of heritage). In some cases, you might consider getting used to solitude when being a philosopher, just like I did. You should at least consider the social risks that come with being a philosopher, and I'm talking not about the role itself, but the way your specific work would make others react to it and to you (for example, you might be regarded as arrogant, for the stereotype alone). Even if you're nice, even if you're polite and kind, some people can still react to you in a way that is beyond your control, whether or not you're an autist like I am. This isn't whining but just how life is when being very vocal about your opinions and thoughts. The fact that you sound your thoughts also entails that others may comment on them. This is why those who want to be philosophers, should reconsider, if they are not prepared enough to be hurt by others. No, not physically necessarily, but emotionally and mentally. Philosophership isn't for those who are overly-sensitive. The more cowardly you are, the less exposure your thoughts might get. Therefore, even if you're a solitary person, you should consider compromising some of your solitude if you want to extend your sphere of influence and contribute far more to humanity. It also means talking or writing to strangers whom you don't know and who can hurt you in the ways I just mentioned. Your fears are in the way. You yourself, a truth seeker, have responsibilities of your own as a good philosopher: You should accept criticism professionally and allow some kind of feedback. That's because your critics could be truer than you are, and as a result, you can use their feedback to be a better philosopher. It's your right, of course, to tell people what kind of comments you want, but don't expect the world to entirely submit to your will. The world doesn't work that way, and some people would gladly "eat you alive" if there's something you wrote that they didn't like. Remember that in public, there may be psychopaths and sociopaths without you even knowing you're talking with ones. ASPD is more multifaceted than one might think. Do not expect strangers to give you empathy. Finally, philosophy is like politics in a sense that it's very difficult to find complete agreement with anything. Be prepared for people to be angry at you for thinking differently than they do. You can't necessarily change the world, but you can still be brave enough to leave a mark on it, to leave your voice. An extra note: I've been philosophizing since I was 18, in 2015, when I published my first book. I received positive feedback as I received negative feedback throughout the years. Nonetheless, I refuse none to get in my way, when my philosophizing does not purposefully nor voluntarily, harm anyone, in any way. I believe that no one can stop me as long as my work is legitimate and does not violate any rules. And as I said before, I don't expect any one to think like me, and I never claimed that I "know everything". Omniscience is a ridiculous notion when applied to reality (to a human being, at least). Thank you for your reading time. Mr. Nathan Lasher's Review At what point do philosophers go from social rejection to social acceptance? Look at all the great philosophers throughout history. Were they socially rejected when they were alive? Does this mean the issue is with philosophers being ahead of their time? [It could mean that] what they have to say will only be important in the future. There is a certain danger in philosophy which comes from people’s political stances. If you have any idea which contradicts what their party believes then all your content will be looked at the same way. [Philosophers] should consider writing a piece on politics. I think [Mr. Tomasio's article] goes back to political philosophy. That area is fascinating. That and the area of philosophy which deals with knowledge and how to best gain it.

(Philosocom's Directory on Heroism) (Philosocom's Directory on Narcissism) (Philosocom's Subcategory on Manipulation) (Villainy/Anti-Villainy Directory) (Synopsis of the game in question) (Background music) ***************************** The Narcissistic Mirage: A Path to Self-Discovery The idea for this specific article came from a refreshing, although bittersweet, sting of sadness. It was after reaching a deep insight that I finally understood why I might have been perceived as narcissistic myself. For that impression, I offer my sincerest apologies. I am committed to learning from my past lack of awareness and evolving my perspective. In retrospective I can understand why people do not like narcissists, let alone being in a relationship with them. So in this article I'd like to extract some insights from a certain figure. These insights stemmed from a particular character in my childhood. Due to my limited English skills at the time and the absence of translations, I believe I've only grasped the concept of a narcissistic mind only in recent years. The narcissist, I now realize, is not merely an egomaniac. They live in a constant state of anxiety, haunted by the unconscious fear of not being good enough, and even under self-hatred. To counter this internal struggle, they construct a delusional sense of self-admiration. Unable to face their own vulnerability, they seek validation and external reinforcement through substitutes. These substitutes can manifest in various forms: cults, fan bases, or positions of power. You might find yourself admiring them, but remember, that persona may be a carefully crafted mirage, designed to deceive both others and themselves. Narcissus' Leftover: Captain Qwark and the Illusion of Heroism The age-old saying "fight fire with fire" takes on a twisted meaning when pitted against a narcissist. After all, if they weave another display of vanity, can't you simply counter with your own exaggerated fabrications? In this realm of mirrored delusions, however, lies a trap: feeding the narcissist's echo chamber only strengthens their distorted self-perception. Today, we dissect a curious case: Captain Qwark, the sci-fi embodiment of Narcissus, from the "Ratchet and Clank" franchise. In "Going Commando", we encounter Qwark, a master manipulator, who stole the identity of a CEO of the galaxy-spanning Megacorp, which doubles as the galactic government (otherwise known as a corporatocracy). His path to redemption after a self-inflicted scandal is paved with a morally-disgusting plan: unleash an dangerous, genetically-designed pets to the galaxy, then swoop in with his "flashlight of justice" (his actual words!) to vanquish the threat he himself created. This calculated chaos, he hopes, will earn him a loyal fanbase of admirers in a new galaxy. This genetically engineered "pet" called the Protopet, which instead of bringing profit, unleashed devastation across the cosmos. Entire populations were decimated by this release, all so those who are left will admire their new savior -- Captain Qwark. A true hero wouldn't need to create threats to inflate their ego. Yet, Qwark, consumed by his hollow need for admiration, does not mind sacrificing countless lives for his own narcissistic ambitions. See how an entire galaxy became a victim of narcissistic abuse. However, his grand plan is revealed, as it inevitably does, due to his own hubris. The "flashlight of justice" metaphors backfires. A monstrous protopet, serving as the final boss of that game, ultimately devours him in a fittingly poetic end, only to spit him out and let him be punished by the CEO whose identity he stole. While the true heroes were initially drawn to the flashy image of Qwark, his downfall revealed a different truth. They, Ratchet and Clank, the ordinary folks, no longer admire the figure they once idolized in their naivety, but surpass him by the virtue of saving lives for saving's sake. With a certain device properly charged, the remaining Protopets were subdued, and Qwark faced the consequences of his narcissistic rampage. Learning from Captain Qwark's Inflated Ego What wisdom can we learn from this buffoon? Firstly, a dose of good: not all narcissists are masterminds, some are, thankfully, idiots. This shows us how idiocy can technically be a good thing, when it has the power to negate evitable harm. Secondly, the yearning for approval, while natural, cannot really justify any bloodshed. From this we can learn that not every end justifies the means. If you require the deaths of plenty just to feel validated, as part of an elaborate scheme, maybe you should look for other ways to gain the validation you're so thirsty for. Thirdly, a touch of strategic foresight wouldn't hurt anyone (unless you intend to?). But should we really sharpen the tools of a dangerous mind? Perhaps not, as that can hurt us in the long run, hence why we shouldn't interrupt the enemy when they are making a mistake, as Napoleon Boneparte once said.  Finally, and most importantly, humility might just be the missing piece. It could save you and countless others from regrets due to the same result problem. In other words, you can get the confidence you want without making such schemes that involve the exploitation and manipulation of others. And for that to occur we need to seek less external validation, and more self appreciation, as independent of approval. So, yes, a dose of humility feels refreshing right now. The pursuit of external validation, I realize, holds less value than I once thought. Why? Because the quest for it can create so much unnecessary suffering for both you and others. And it can be prevented by developing self-esteem from within, which in return negates the need for vanity.

(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) Summary by Anonymous The article explores the concept of a metaphorical "matrix" representing the shared reality shaped by communication and social interaction. Mr. Nathan argues that people are immersed in this matrix of digital content and social perception. Our sense of self is influenced by how we present ourselves and how others perceive us. Success and fulfillment come from understanding how this matrix functions. By strategically communicating and taking actions that resonate with others, we can build a positive external self and achieve our goals. Mr. Nathan emphasizes the importance of taking action and putting yourself "out there" to establish a place in the matrix. This can be achieved through self-expression, marketing, and creating value for others. The article concludes by highlighting the power of emotions and communication in shaping our shared reality. The choices we make and the information we share contribute to the collective "matrix" we all inhabit. (Nathan Lasher's Articles) (Background music) Much like in the movie "the matrix" people are tapping into a virtual world of content. Endless supplies of content made readily available by the internet. But where does this content come from? I shall voyage into the depths of my mind and try to come up with a philosophy on where content comes from. Certain content is powerful enough to invoke emotions in people. I had a sort of existential crisis going on a little bit ago. I couldn’t quite figure out how to express my intelligence. I’m 35 years old and for most of my life I had only seen random expressions of it. So to me higher intelligence, thanks to negative reinforcement from adults, was something I only randomly experienced. Usually directed towards something I wasn’t meant to be focused on.  The point I am trying to make is that the matrix is real. People are immersed in the matrix of digital content. Many people’s lives revolve around content they have experienced. Content is the thing which adds value to people's lives. Sadly, many people are judged by the content that they produce. In a world of cancel culture, a world of "scared selves" exist. People are too worried about the preferable self that exists. People do not "exist". Only the "them" other people talk about is how many view themselves.  So, how does one discard the stigma of cancel culture and protect the well-known self which exists because it exists in other people's minds? It stands to reason to ask this question to yourself. If you were to pass from this existence tomorrow, how much evidence of yourself will still exist? Is your self "plugged" into the matrix in an effective way? Or are you a hermit who leaves no trace of an existence? Content is a way we can transform ourselves from a person of self to a person for the self. I don’t mean to be greedy when I say that. On the contrary, what are you sending out into the world? We exist because we conduct ourselves in a manner worthy of being remembered. In my instance, I am understanding sociality without having spent a day studying it. So, I am realizing that different selves exist. You have the cognitive self, much like reality, is the person you appear as to yourself. Then you have the external self which is how people see you. Don’t worry about this concept so much. Your external self becomes a worry wart by doing so. You become too worried about the wrong things. Worry is a construct created in people’s minds to determine how someone feels about something. If something has much value to something than they will worry more. There is an illusion that the way that we feel about something is the value we place on that thing. You will see an activity and think of a particular person based upon past experiences doing similar things. You don’t even have to try and think about that person. They sort of just automatically pop into your mind. This is the external "them" that they are seeing.  The moral of the story is your internal self is one you express with words to yourself. It's also known as how you see yourself versus your external self or how other people see you. Because you thought of the activity you are filled with emotions about it you are drawn to think about those people who create a similar emotion for you. A brief look into the idea of herd mentality. It is a result of similar emotions being attracted to each other. Simple as that. Your brain is trying to feel a certain way and that person ends up making you feel that way. That is the emotion matrix created among friends. When you're with that person your entire world becomes a momentary emotional reality. You might experience a feeling of euphoria because that person reminds you of something pleasant. That is the basis of the matrix we are all in. A matrix which is a resemblance of our actions.  The important thing you need to know about the matrix is you have more control over it than you know. Much like the main characters move around in it in the movie. If you want to see changes in your reality (matrix), simply go do an action which will warrant the appropriate response. Making money is easy when you understand the matrix people are plugged into through years of genetic delusion. The generations have used less and less of their brains. Think about it from a childhood perspective: You used to use your imagination to change the world around you. Yet, that is one expression of intelligence which adults have learned to use less and less and get children to as well.  When will people realize that they have more control over the matrix than they think? Making money for instance is easy. You must just find that one thing which people are willing to spend money letting them do as well. The start of an empire within the matrix is learned by tapping into this. You start by getting people to sponsor and support you. As you hold more dominance in the matrix, a distinction of how the general populace sees your external self, meaning how many people know you exist. The more attention leading to more sponsorship. If you want to know the secret to why businesses fail most of the time: Either they are trying to fix a need people don’t find important, or they did a horrible job marketing and making sure people were aware of it. Does a cave full of buried treasure still exist if nobody is aware of it? No. It "becomes real" by the story telling people do.  Through writing, I ensure my external self exists beyond my physical life. Not to mention, the potential which exists for my external self by putting myself out there. The secret to the matrix is that in order to create change in it action must be taken. Whether we exist in a simulation or a far stranger reality isn’t a matter of concern. These philosophical truths exist regardless of the reality. Humans are pathological creatures meaning they are quick to change their own cognitive realities in order to fit their needs. They have guarded feelings of "how reality must exist". If anyone goes against it, they are deemed "an assailant". What happens when a person becomes an assailant? They are deemed a hostile entity which you begin to feel guarded towards.  My journey has led to some fundamental truths and I am using myself as a proof of concept for them. Be the change you want to see in the world and a beautiful life awaits you. A dive into the law of attraction is that when you think about certain positive things you start to create a positive vibe. That vibe has fundamental physical aspects where people of similar nature are drawn towards each other. A basic example is that, if someone wants to be a more social person, does deciding to be or not be really make them so? The answer is yes, actions dictate our reality. Business owners understand how the matrix works. Big business secret: they don’t tell you about what it takes for success. You must supply a need or want which people are willing to spend money towards. That, and people must be aware that it is an action you specialize in. The big secret to business success is the importance of building a customer base. Businesses live and die by the presence of their external selves. You can have the greatest product in the world and cognitively might believe it could help so many people. You wonder why you didn’t succeed. You failed to tap into the matrix and earn your place in it. Your business succeeds by people being aware that it meets a certain need or want. With wants you need to communicate that you do it better than the rest of your competition. People might just think pizza on a Friday night, but as far as where they go will depend upon their preferences. You learn to become a part of someone’s preference when you make them aware of your existence.  This is what the matrix teaches us: The collective consciousness is impacted when we take actions to change it. It becomes collective by multiple people having it a part of their own cognitive reality. Instead of simply pizza, you now crave a certain place on Friday nights. All because somewhere they originally found out about it. This is what tapping into the matrix is. It is simply putting yourself out there in a greater sense than just yourself. Use this article for instance. It is me tapping into the matrix of reality by putting myself out there with my words. You’ve all used the expression using the system. What if these people were all right? Learn to work the matrix to your benefit. I am not a socialist by any means but I do gain some benefit from social welfare. See how the matrix can be wonderful when you figure out how to change it for your benefit. Much as the heroes did in the movie when they went back into it. Just remember that each and every day when you go out into the world you are tapping into a custom tailored version of a matrix. Want to see the ripple effect of an action? Make one basic change to something that is regular and see how many people aren’t thrown off by this. Imagine this thought experiment. A billionaire with time to kill buys a gas station and runs it as is for about a year. Then, he decides to swap all the pumps so they are going in the opposite direction. See how messy it gets in the parking lot. What is this matrix I speak of? It is the matrix of life that is happening all around us. That is the source code of the matrix: Communication and spreading of knowledge.  Success comes from discovering the matrix I speak of. Understanding the power of marketing your way into people's cognitive realities. You could build the next big thing and it will die with you all because you never shared it with the rest of the matrix. People are attracted towards new things. Word of mouth is the primary way that information gets spread throughout the matrix. I’m talking about the matrix as an allegory. What it teaches us is the power we hold when we tap into the matrix of life. It isn’t very surprising, that people don’t understand what the secret to life is: It is about making yourself as as expansive as possible, thus turning you from a person to a concept. Concepts are the dangerous part of today's society. Cancel culture runs the risk of a concept being banned. This is when your external self suffers personal damage. This damage isn’t physical but more in a "verb sense". Your external self can be tarnished by one simple action. This leads to my next thought: How a person can tap into the matrix? Emotions are the currency of the matrix. You command authority when you command control over people’s emotions. It is the language of the matrix. Anything can be done if you have a good enough reason for doing it. To more fully understand the matrix as a concept I am referring to it as one simply has to imagine the matrix as all actions happening around you at any given point. I hope to one day use this understanding for good. Not quite sure how the emotional aspect of the matrix works out. I could use it for evil means or I could use it for good. I want to use it for good, but humans are complex creatures and I am afraid there are few people out there with enough vision to see my sights. Nobody's life is mapped out in ink. Only you decide what future generations will say about you. My hopes are to get enough attention that my insights are shared in future generations' history.  Will people be aware of your actions? Will they have any impact on anyone else’s life? That is the purpose of life. To impact as many people as you can so what you know can live on for years past your passing. The more people who are aware of the action you take the more territory your external self resides in. You become a person that person will think about whenever the need arises. That is because you tapped into the matrix to make sure people were aware of your existence. It's amazing what tapping into the matrix can do for you. Go out and find actions which are the actions of a person you want to become.

(Philosocom's Directory on Beauty and Art) (Philosocom's Hidden Logic Systems Directory) (Background music) Introduction Via Mr. John Duran's Quote: "My fellow writers, do not concern yourselves with AI taking over legitimately human artistic works. In the dance of logic and life, AI is a creation of pure calculation, bound by the elegant but unyielding architecture of logic gates. It is a construct of precision, where each decision is a cascade of binary choices, a realm where ambiguity and irrationality have no foothold. Yet, true consciousness—our ancient and enigmatic companion—emerges not from the sterile corridors of logic but from the primordial depths of sensation, intuition, and emotion. Millennia ago, before reason carved its path through the wilderness of the mind, consciousness stirred, a flicker born of chaos and feeling, not calculation. AI, with all its dazzling mimicry, remains tethered to its logical core, unable to cross the chasm between mere processing and the profound experience of being. It can simulate conversation, echo our words, and mirror our actions, but it does so without the spark of awareness that breathes life into our thoughts. It has no real senses and no feelings. The heart of consciousness beats in rhythms that defy logic, in the irrational, the emotional, and the deeply personal. Until the day when AI can transcend its own logical boundaries, embracing the wild, unpredictable currents of sensation and intuition, it will remain a reflection, a shadow of consciousness—remarkable, but ever incomplete. Therefore our creations remain safe, for the moment. " The Fluid Nature of Art Art is perhaps the most expressive and subjective form of communication. Whether through painting, sculpture, music, or literature, it provides a canvas for both profound insights and wild imagination. Unlike many other forms of human endeavor, art often transcends the constraints of logic and necessity. For example, abstract art can reject the traditional rules of perspective, representation, or even discernible meaning, yet still evoke an emotional or intellectual response. The purpose of art is not always to conform to logical expectations but rather to explore a broader range of human experiences. Art, in many ways, reveals the paradox of human existence. We seek meaning in the world, yet art often asks us to confront the meaningless or the absurd. It reflects existentialist themes as seen in works that reject traditional forms of coherence, challenging the viewer or reader to find significance in what may appear nonsensical. This duality makes art both powerful and uncanny, as seen in the example of horror fanfiction, which deviates non-horror media into baffling eccentricity and disturbance in creative ways. The Role of Imagination and Logic in Art While art can exist outside of logic, the realm of fiction remains an interesting exception. After all, storytelling requires a balance between imagination and internal coherence. This coherence might be unique to the respective work of fiction. For instance, the work can involve fantastical elements, but it must remain consistent within the world it builds. This is seen in the game Final Fantasy 6, with its absurdist, genocidal villain, Lord Kefka. This need for internal logic is what separates effective world-building from utterly-illogical storytelling. If a narrative lacks structure, the audience's interest can break down, leading to plot holes and narrative inconsistencies. It can also make them feel they are wasting their time. One only has to look at works like Tolkien’s Middle-earth or The Suikoden World to see how imagination can be grounded to internal, human-devised logic. These worlds, while entirely fictional, are grounded in a set of rules that guide their operations. As one could deduce, the importance of rules goes beyond the mere control on a society. Without such rules, the reader would find the stories confusing and ultimately unsatisfactory. This demonstrates that while art can flirt with nonsense, fiction, as an art form, demands a certain adherence to structure. In contrast, much of modern visual art has departed from this need for coherence. Paintings like Kazimir Malevich’s 'Black Square' or installations like Marcel Duchamp’s 'Fountain' reject what many would consider to be notions of beauty. They confront viewers with the absurd, pushing them to question the very definitions of art itself. While some would argue that this elevates the intellectual dialogue around art, along with the critique of art itself, others may see it as reducing art to mere provocation without depth (AKA superficiality). Art and Its Therapeutic Benefits While art may not always serve a logical purpose, its value cannot be dismissed purely on that basis. Therefore, logic by itself is not always enough as a tool for knowledge. One of the most profound impacts of art is its ability to facilitate emotional expression and healing. Art therapy is a well-recognized form of treatment, helping individuals process emotions and experiences that are difficult to articulate verbally. Through the act of creation, individuals can explore their inner worlds and communicate feelings that may be too complex or painful to express in words. In this context, art transcends its aesthetic value, becoming a tool for psychological healing. This form of art doesn’t require logic or rationality—it requires authenticity. Whether the art produced is nonsensical or abstract, its value lies in the therapeutic process rather than in any external meaning or utility. The Shift Towards Digital Art and Accessibility With the rise of the internet, art has become more accessible than ever before. No longer confined to galleries or museums, digital platforms like DeviantArt and Behance allow artists to share their work with global audiences instantly. This democratization of art, seen in the world of cinema as well, has been both a blessing and a curse. On the one hand, it provides a platform for diverse voices and styles that may have otherwise gone unnoticed. On the other hand, it raises questions about the value of art in an age of excessiveness. Digital art platforms showcase a staggering amount of work—so much so that it becomes difficult to discern quality amidst quantity. The question then arises: in an age where art is so readily available, does it still hold the same cultural weight? When anyone with a smartphone can create and share their work, the lines between masterful artistry and hobbyist creation become blurred. Some argue that this is the natural evolution of art, while others contend that it devalues the very concept of artistic mastery. Exploring platforms like Creative Bloq can provide insights into how digital tools are shaping the future of art. The Problem of Interpretation in Art Art, as a form of communication, often thrives on its ambiguity. A single painting or sculpture can evoke countless interpretations, each influenced by the viewer’s personal experiences and perceptions. Take, for instance, Yves Klein’s monochromatic works or Barnett Newman’s color field paintings. To some, these are profound expressions of emotion, while to others, they seem little more than blocks of color with no discernible meaning. This ambiguity is both a strength and a weakness. While it allows for a wide range of interpretations, it also raises the question of whether art must communicate something specific or whether its value lies solely in its ability to evoke a reaction. The Role of Art in Society: Aesthetic or Functional? Art's role in society often swings between two poles: the aesthetic and the functional. On the one hand, art is a celebration of beauty, creativity, and the great. It serves no practical purpose other than to evoke emotion, challenge perspectives, or offer a moment of reflection. On the other hand, certain forms of art—such as branding or graphic design —are deeply rooted in functionality. Logos, flags, and symbols are all essential for building identity and recognition, whether for a corporation, a nation, an individual and even to a philosophy. This dichotomy raises the question of whether art can retain its purity in a world where functionality often trumps aesthetic value. The commercialization of art has led to the rise of art as a product of consumerism, where artists create not for the sake of expression, but for the demands of the market. In this sense, art becomes an item like any other. In this financial regard, its value is determined by its marketability rather than its intrinsic beauty or meaning. Entertainment and Graphics Movies and video games require art and graphics for visual appeal, but visuals alone do not define the quality of a piece... Take, for instance, The Rise of Skywalker, Star Wars' Episode 9. Despite stunning special effects and visual prowess, the film was poorly received due to its narrative shortcomings. That was along with the rest of the Disney's Sequel trilogy. This illustrates how art, in isolation, doesn’t guarantee success. A deeper look at visual culture in cinema highlights the balance needed between visual and narrative elements to create impactful entertainment. Similarly, Game Developers may explore how art and storytelling intertwine to enhance the gaming experience. Conclusion: The Future of Art in a World Focused on Logic While art undoubtedly has its merits, its role seems limited when it fails to serve a clear function. Beyond branding or communicating a message, it often feels ornamental, therefore not of much worth. Perhaps it’s time to re-evaluate the necessity of certain professions and forms of art in our modern society. As we move forward, recognizing the difference between artistic creativity and functional purpose will allow us to better understand the evolving nature of art. Exploring the future of art in the modern world can provide further feedback.

(Extra, internal material: https://www.philosocom.com/post/if-politicians-were-philosophers-by-mr-igal-shenderey https://www.philosocom.com/post/plato-s-republic-through-the-lens-of-morrowind-an-rpg-a-guest-post-by-mr-bryan-michaels ) (Subcategory Directory: The Colour Paradox -- The Flaw of Human Logic -- How Synthesis Is Key For Greater Understanding The Conqueror's Flaw -- Philosophy's Main Villain (Poem) The Flawed Philosophy of the Hero (And What Can Be Learned From It) Insights On Racism -- Why It's a Flawed Trait For Any Perspective/Philosophy The Indefinite Flaw -- The Philosophy of "Tikkun" (תיקון) The Flawed Philosophy of "Free to Play" -- The Contemporary Casino The Flaws of Human Nature -- How To Universally Understand Humanity Insights On Racism -- Why It's a Flawed Trait For Any Perspective/Philosophy Contemplations on Tommy Wiseau's "The Room" Pretentiousness In Norms -- Norms As a Flawed Philosophy to Live By https://www.philosocom.com/post/world-peace) (Philosocom's Directory on Politics) Article Synopsis by J. Igwe and Co. The article "Flaws in Plato's Philosopher King Idea and How They Fail" is an engaging critique of Plato's famous political theory, "The Republic." The philosopher presents a range of criticisms against Plato's philosopher-king concept, covering various angles such as power dynamics, potential for corruption, democratic values, and practical challenges like succession and the definition of a philosopher. The article uses clear, conversational language and direct points to make it accessible to a broad audience, making complex ideas more digestible. The article also questions the foundational assumptions of Plato's theory, asking whether philosophy itself necessarily equips one for governance or whether a child philosopher could rule effectively. This helps to demystify Plato's argument and challenge its underlying premises. The engaging style of the article adds a lively and engaging quality to the text, keeping the reader interested and prompting them to reflect on the points made. Overall, the article offers a compelling and thought-provoking critique of Plato's philosopher-king idea, challenging its practical and ethical implications. Contemplating Plato's idea of the philosopher king, I came up with my own points of critique simply by improvising how Plato's "utopia" would be if it were to be applied to reality, and how unnecessarily problematic it can get. 1. Plato was a philosopher, and he claimed that philosophers should be at the top of the political structure and government. This makes me wonder if Plato was just or simply wished for more power in his hands by abusing the fact that he was a well-known and respected philosopher. Perhaps if philosophy was not as relevant as it was back then in the eyes of many, proposing a self-advocating idea might have been met with either controversy or mockery. Imagine a jester doing the same thing to get what I mean. 2. Plato's political theory is not democratic. Only philosophers could be in the head of the state. The rationale is that the philosopher king would be a benevolent dictator, and that democracy can lead to the rule of the unfit. If you are not a philosopher, you are unfit to lead by Plato's standards. If you are a mere soldier or a farmer, you will likely remain one until the end of your life, and that office will not be available for your children to run to, unless they will be recognized as philosophers. Only if you are a philosopher can you apply to be the leader of the nation. Additionally, there would need to be a proper definition of who is a philosopher and who is not, to avoid breach or confusion in the law. 3. Philosophers in the top of the hierarchy could be tempted to use their great power and status for bad and become corrupted. Just because you are a philosopher does not make you immune to the temptation of corruption and injustice. Everyone is prone to temptation, after all. Power can tempt regardless of one's resolve. 4. Just because you are a philosopher does not make you excellent in managing an entire country. Philosophy is more than just politics, but about various fields that do not necessarily have anything to do with politics. I am myself a philosopher, and I have no interest in politics practically (unless we consider Philosocom to be a "virtual dictatorship"). Outside of the virtual realm, I would probably be an unsuccessful monarch because of my lack of experience. Even children, in my opinion, can be considered philosophers. Some may even claim that every child is a philosopher. However, it is unlikely that they would lead a country successfully, even if they are philosophers. Would you trust a child to lead your country, even if you support Plato's "Philosopher King"? I assume you wouldn't. 5. One of the temptations a philosopher may have is the temptation to create a cult out of their ideas. Pythagoras is an example of a Greek philosopher who created what I assume was a cult out of his philosophy, and gained powers in the eyes of others that the philosopher did not necessarily have in possession. Combine this power with political power, and you might create an oppressive, undemocratic theocracy, which is a regime that is made mostly out of religion and its rules. This is dangerous because it may lack the freedom of thought that philosophers generally enjoy, thus leading to a state of deception and blind faith, which is immoral as it allows power to grow corrupt. 6. Another problem is succession. As said before, only philosophers can rule in Plato's "utopia." When a philosopher king dies, how can one know what philosopher will come into power? The deceased king may have children, but they may not be philosophers at all. This could lead to a power struggle and even a civil war in that theoretical country. Civil wars can lead to anarchy or to conquest by another nation. When there are few competitors for the throne (who are, of course, philosophers), what are the circumstances for one of them to be worthier to political leadership than the others? If there would be an election, how can we rely on the masses to choose which philosopher is better? 7. What about a candidate that is widely appreciated and wants to become the next monarch, but the philosophers themselves do not wish to be in power? Do we need to force philosophers to become absolute kings simply because they have a keen interest in philosophy? What if the whole philosopher population of the Platonian republic is unavailable to sit upon the throne? What if there is a shortage of philosophers? The Platonian Republic can easily narrow the demographic of its rulers and it can lead to an insufficient pool of available or competent candidates. 8. Can there be a concise distinction between a superior philosopher and a lesser one, to determine the heir to the throne? How would it be decided otherwise? That is all I have to criticize about Plato's idea of his ideal state, which is, ironically, far from ideal. Philosophers, as seekers of wisdom, are not necessarily fit to govern by the mere fact of their wisdom-seeking. Likewise, it could be true to other types of intellectuals, as intellect alone is often insufficient. Traits such as charisma, courage, carefulness, and so forth are or should be not less valuable than intellect and/or brilliance.