The Search Bar

(Philosocom's Directory on Politics) Synopsis and Feedback by Ms. Gabbi Grace The article "Honest Thoughts on Constitutional Monarchy" explores the logical reasoning behind the Constitutional Monarchy as a form of government, and criticize it. Constitutional monarchies offer several advantages, such as providing national unity, stability, and continuity. Monarchs often serve as unifying figures that embody national identity and tradition, which can help foster a sense of common purpose and cohesion within a politically diverse society. Additionally, constitutional monarchies tend to offer a balanced system of governance with checks and balances that can prevent any one branch from becoming too powerful​. On the downside, constitutional monarchies can be criticized for being costly, as maintaining the royal family and its functions often involves significant public expenditure. Furthermore, the process of decision-making in constitutional monarchies can be slow and cumbersome due to the need for approval from multiple layers of government, including the monarch and the elected bodies. This can hinder quick responses in times of emergency. Additionally, there is the issue of quality in leadership, as monarchs are not elected based on merit but rather inherit their positions, which can sometimes lead to ineffective or inexperienced heads of state​​​​. The article concludes that while Democratic Republics can be more just, and relying on merit and not ancestry. (Background music) Dethroning Absolute Rule: Understanding Constitutional Monarchies A constitutional monarchy is a form of government where the monarch, whether a king, queen, sultan, or emperor, holds a symbolic or limited leadership role. Unlike absolute monarchs of the past, their power is restricted by a constitution, a document outlining the laws of the state. This effectively denies their ability to rule with complete authority. Interestingly, another term for this system is "democratic monarchy." However, it's important to understand that the people don't directly elect the monarch. That is known as elective monarchy. However, an elected monarch can still be a symbolic figurehead, as expressed in the Cambodian monarchy, where the figurehead is elected for life by the royal council. Beyond such elections, the monarch's title is usually hereditary, passing down through a royal family. The democratic aspect comes from the system itself, where the power of the citizens outweighs that of the monarch, as they elect the government that rules alongside the monarch, or actually rule, while the monarch remains nothing more than a prestigious status symbol wearer. While the monarch may retain some influence, it pales in comparison to the authority held by the public, often referred to as "subjects" in historical contexts. The concept of a constitutional monarch isn't limited to kings and queens. Countries like Japan have an emperor position to this day, who fulfils a similar symbolic role. The current Emperor of Japan, for instance, wields minimal to no political power under Article 4 of the nation's constitution. A Meritocrat's View on Modern Monarchies In today's world, the concept of a constitutional monarchy, where a king or queen reigns with limited power, seems like an unnecessary layer in a functioning democracy. A true republic, where the power rests with the people, embodies the spirit of democracy more authentically. My personal view on monarchies isn't about the individuals themselves. I hold no hostility towards members of royal families. However, the very idea of inherited privilege opposes the legitimacy of meritocracies, which promotes the equality of opportunity. Their lives are often treated like celebrity gossip, their voices amplified solely due to their ancestry. While Prince Harry's book release gained international attention, I believe his own experiences and message, rather than his royal title, deserved the spotlight. After all, he stepped down from his royal status. As such, historically, being a royal member gives you greater access to education and are less likely to live in poverty (with exceptions such as King Ludwig II of Bavaria who assumingly paid for his debts with his life). This makes a bit more sense when actually have power, and not when your power is a mere status symbol, and a burden on taxpayer's hard-earned work. The death of Queen Elizabeth brought a wave of mixed emotions. While sadness dominated my feelings before I died inside, I was surprised to witness some celebratory reactions. However, my dislike is directed at the unfair institution, not at the individuals. I believe these people are worthy of respect simply as human beings, not because of their titles. I wouldn't seek to dishonor someone just because of their titles, or lack thereof, while they still retain their right of respect, which I can enforce in my behavior towards them. If I found myself in the peculiar position of a symbolic nobleman, I wouldn't settle for a purely ceremonial role. The drive to achieve merit and build a legacy on my own terms would be far more important to me than luxury gained through mere historic symbolism. I wouldn't want to be defined solely by a noble bloodline. In that scenario, I would choose to be recognized for who I am, Tomasio, rather than just another member of the nobility. That includes the actual, underrated dynasty I am part of, the Zackheim rabbi dynasty of Belarus, comprised of many rabbis and philosophers forgotten by history. The Price of a Crown The enduring presence of constitutional monarchies raises a question: are these elaborate institutions a valuable relic of the past, or an outdated burden on taxpayers? While tradition, culture, and national heritage hold weight, a closer look reveals some practical and financial concerns. Maintaining a royal family can significantly drain public resources. Tax money that could be used for essential services goes towards funding their opulent lifestyles. Perhaps the financial benefit of abolishing these monarchies outweighs the sentimental value they hold. Returning to the British Royal Family, in 2023, the monarchy got paid "£86.3 million, made up of £51.8 million for the core funding and an extra £34.5 million for maintaining Buckingham Palace" according to the Standard news outlet. This is quite a hefty sum of money to pay for a symbolic institution and its assets. The core principle of a democracy is the power residing with the people, exercised through elected representatives. In a constitutional monarchy, a hereditary ruler holds a position of power – a technical contradiction, whether symbolic or otherwise. As such, not all constitutional monarchies are symbolic, with Liechtenstein's non-elected Prince having a considerable power of his own, along with the people. Can a leader who wasn't elected by the people truly be considered democratic? The nobility, seem to be aware of their diminished influence in a world dominated by republics and democracies. Those with no actual power, form of elaborate live-action roleplaying (LARP) with little practical relevance. While some democratic republics, like Germany, have titles of nobility, these individuals don't wield political power. Their lineage has no bearing on the functioning of the state. So, what is even the point in such hollow, privileged display of vanity? My Hope The ideal form of government, in my view, is a democratic republic. These nations hold legitimate elections, ensuring that leadership is based on merit and the will of the people, not on ancestry. When you have, for example, kings like Charles II of Spain, who suffered from physical and mental disabilities, maybe it's not a good idea to have a heredity rule for an entire nation. While this vision may not be fully embraced, a world where absolute monarchies are completely relics of the past, and democracies reign supreme, should at least be considered.

Those who aspire to be philosophers, specifically, see this article. (Background music) Alex Mos's Synopsis Academic degrees prove that someone is knowledgeable in a specific field. For some professions, diplomas are a necessity; for others, certificates are optional credentials. "The Degree Fallacy" is a bias in judging a person's character or intelligence based solely on their diplomas. It overlooks that some people can become experts outside academia through self-study. Also, an academic degree only makes a person knowledgeable in a field of study. A misconception of a scholar's generalized expertise can hinder a productive exchange of ideas by disregarding the valuable insights of a person without a diploma. While degrees are valuable for careers, studies in the humanities, such as philosophy, can be learned independently. The author became a competent philosopher through self-study. He works with reviewers and summarizers to produce high-quality articles, proving that self-education can be effective and successful. Getting an academic degree can be too stressful and expensive for some people. If you cannot pursue traditional education, you can always acquire knowledge online. Being a true intellect means constantly learning, with or without a diploma. Philosophers such as Socrates, Diogenes, and David Hume didn't graduate from a university; regardless, they became influential thinkers. "To deny wisdom/ability on the basis of someone's lack of "official credentials" is the dumbest thing smart people often do" -- Mr. John Duran The Value of a Degree Academic degrees are currently one of the most concrete proofs that someone is knowledgeable in at least one or two fields, especially in fields where a degree is either mandatory for professionalism (as in medicine and engineering) or optional but very useful as a credential (as in philosophy or literature). However, because of how luxurious degrees can be, a certain bias could be created in the eyes of some, when judging one's character and even intelligence. I'd like to call this bias "The Degree Fallacy" because there are still a few things we should remember about degrees, that are, for some, still severely overlooked: One can become knowledgeable in a field in more unorthodox ways, like by learning things on their own. Because of that, there could be a possibility of finding at least one pair of people who are equally knowledgeable through academia and through independent study. Academic education is a privilege for many people in most countries. Logically, to many worldwide, it is a liberator from their current socio-economic status, capable of elevating their lives to greater heights, better ensuring their survival. However, not everyone is financially capable of such financial dedication of funds, or of enduring the debt that is required for some. While money technically buys a degree, there are far cheaper ways of attaining, theoretically, the same knowledge. This is called, in an article I wrote, the same result problem. Having a degree doesn't necessarily make you knowledgeable in fields that are not relevant to your expertise. I can tell from personal experience that my counterpoint was once disregarded over the premise someone with... a biochemistry degree, had made. This is despite the fact that biochemistry had nothing to do with the discussion. In other words, our biased understanding towards degrees can hinder a productive exchange of ideas, by disregarding valuable insights over a person's lack of certification. This further demonstrates how having knowledge can ironically serve as a barrier to the learning of further knowledge, as presented by Socrates. Nonetheless, degrees are highly valuable, and there's nothing wrong with that, by default. But when it gives you a higher standing just because you chose the orthodox path to knowledge, that should be unacceptable at times when the other unorthodox methods can be just as practical for others. That is true in the fields of the humanities, too, where information can be attained and learned independently. Especially when it comes to the humanities, a person can be intellectual even without a single course under their belt. This is demonstrated in philosophers belonging to the metaphorical "Sorcerer" faction. And obviously, to claim that you are omniscient in the field you did one or more degrees in, is an absurd notion. Why? Because that claim can be proven wrong somehow, someday, by someone. Despite one's mastery in a field, one in theory can never reach omniscience because there could always be more to learn. I used to be a philosophy student, and even though I did well in my studies like I always did as a student in general, I halted it indefinitely in the name of both my savings and my mental wellbeing. The orthodox way was too stressful. I find myself learning as much as renovating Philosocom articles ruthlessly and researching sources for that effort. I don't want to have a degree at the cost of my finances and mental state, when I can be both a philosopher and knowledgeable at a far lower price. I also don't do it entirely alone, as I have reviewers to help me look both ways at the article's subject, and summarizers, thus refining an article even further through the function of combined effort. This is just one of the reasons why degrees aren't always obtained, even if you have the means to do so: The fact that we can do things, like murder, doesn't mean we should, even if other examples are good but come at a high price. We need to use foresight to properly understand the toll of sacrifice we'll have to endure as a result of the activities we choose to pursue. Stress gathers up within our bodies, for example, thus hindering our overall health if we don't do anything to reduce it. Should there be too much stress, we might become fatigued on a more-chronic basis. To better preserve our health, we need to understand that health is a capacity which can be reduced the more we ignore it. Your savings can be used otherwise if the same knowledge can be learned more cheaply. By doing so you save not only money but also much needed health, which can be compromised by increased stress, which leads to fatigue. We should also remember that formal education is only one way of attaining knowledge or even wisdom. Nowadays, that also includes books you can read at the library or order online. The same destination, after all, can have multiple paths, and not every path suits every traveler. If the desired path does not suit you, no one should make you feel bad about it. I'm not a doctor or a professor, but I know that if I put in the time and effort, I can become just as educated as an academic, even if it won't be completely free. So can you, if the academic world is not for you. You can better understand my educational deviation by reading "The Philosopher" page. When you are a public figure, the worst thing you can do is become pretentious. And, when it comes to "pretentiousness", remember that Socrates, who had no degree, was only a stonemason. A pseudo-intellectual can be one even if they are academic, as ironic as it may sound. Much of being a true intellect has to do with one's relentlessness to learn and even question their own knowledge. Diogenes, as well, was a poor man who lived in a barrel. He was an intellect worthy of contemplation despite being an eccentric homeless man. A true intellect would know a chance of learning when they see it, and will attempt to seize it. I feature guest posts on Philosocom for a reason. Therefore, philosophy does not require you to have a degree in order to be a philosopher, even though it would certainly help. We need to make this distinction between necessity and benefit. The academy is no longer the exclusive keeper of knowledge. One of its points is to open you up to more job opportunities via the certificate that is their degree. I would not trust a physician who has no professional education of any kind, but can we truly say this regarding every profession that can be studied academically? Socrates had no academic background, for example, and that did not stop him from being regarded as the founder of Western philosophy. You can find examples of other notable, non-academic philosophers, like David Hume, on your own. While Hume studied law, he gave it up in order to study philosophy and study in general, even outside of higher education. Like me, he did not graduate from university. Mr. Nathan Lasher's Feedback To me, education wasn't anything more than an experience. I value the time because, oh, how it applies to me now. The same way I have utilized the university of life. I use it as a basis for understanding. That is all. College got me to learn to think differently about things. I do however see Mr. Tomasio's point that it is a bit useless as far as anything, because my education has never prepared me for any job I have had, it has all been on the job training. All college does is let people know you are a good learner. Why, unless it's something like a doctor who requires specific knowledge, you don't require a degree for anything you want to do. Like what my education has taught me is how to think more logically about things. College is pretty much the admissions for specialized career fields. You can however gain such knowledge without college. All college really does is supply you with a career requirement. Colleges only possess one good application. Don't ever attend college without a game plan. Think of it as pre-emptive job training for what you want to do. Most higher professions require this start to possess them with your higher up special training you will learn on the job. All you get in college is a good foundation for the basics. Most people aren't as concerned with your degree title, exception being doctors or any other high-end job like that. They are only concerned with what you attended, and your general education supplied you with enough basics which they can use as a basis for understanding.

As a sentient feeling species, our sense of morality and ethics is clearly superior to any possible version of God. No moral or ethical God would ever deem to create such beings born to suffer, knowing in advance just what would happen. There is no darker act than to create suffering to suffer -- Mr. John Duran (Background music) Morality is possible even without the belief in divine existence and intervention. The following are the possible sources in which morality can come from, with giving some personal examples as well as an atheist (and agnostic) myself: 1. Egoism: Doing things out of self-interest is not necessarily immoral, as long as the actions themselves are beneficial to oneself and others. It is only natural for us to put ourselves first, as adults need to learn how to take care of themselves without the help of others. For example, preparing a meal and eating it by oneself is an example that proves there is no necessary connection between self-interest and immorality. Additionally, egoism is important for our independence as mature people. I, as such, used to help random people when they requested it, because seeing others benefit can also makes me feel good. Therefore, this could be a self-interest in helping others... One that is based on good feelings, not necessarily (or completely) bad ones. (For more on it click here). 2. Harmony: a good sense of harmony between people is imperative for optimal cooperation and safety, and evil is unnecessary. Those who claim that good cannot exist without evil and evil cannot exist without good -- how would you explain pure deeds of good and the pure deeds of bad? One time I helped someone in a supermarket. She was too short to reach for some product, so I reached it myself and handed it to her. Now, please explain to me what evil existed in this deed. If I were to refuse her request to help her, she would probably be angry with me or say bad things about me as I passed by. Why would I want others to be told bad things about me, let alone in my presence? The same went back in my office-working days. When I did even small deeds, such as lifting boxes to tables of secretaries who are too weak to do it on their own. The fact that my contribution to others creates a good sense of harmony is sometimes sufficient for me to commit altruistic deeds. (For more on it click here) 3. Productivity: For me, productivity is a prime priority, because the products that are being created are a reflection and a representation of our inner merits. This is why I like writing in a very workaholic way. I like to produce things, especially when it comes to writing. The Morality and Atheism behind it is that my products can benefit others and even help them on the philosophical and practical levels, without any religious context or faith being necessary in it. Being in constant action at times makes me feel good about myself and worthy. This is why I sometimes wake up early in the morning and drink coffee, just to write, instead of potentially sleeping more. 4. Karma: While I don’t believe in an energy called “karma”, I do believe in the wisdom behind it: If I shall help others, it would be more likely they would help me in return, and if I will do bad things to others, they might do the same to me in the future. As I said before, evil is not necessary (unlike the very few times it might be). Thus, I do as best as I can to be in good relations with everyone I interact with. (For an article on Karma click here) 5. The Law: Usually, the law is what enables us to function in life with a possibility of optimal sense of safety. Think of what your countries did to you: gave you different services, provided you or your family with employment, protected you from criminals and terrorists, granted you civil rights, and so forth. An earlier example was a while back, when I saw a girl being beaten by another girl in the middle of a park. (An extra work on law enforcement can be read here). Everyone watched and most did nothing, with few people trying to reach her physically, only to be blocked by the beating girl’s followers, guarding their leader from society. There were people watching this scenario from the safety of their homes, choosing to do nothing. I am unsure if anyone else called the police but me, as I backed off, refusing to see this horrible act as entertaining. As naive as I was back then, I already knew the law was there to protect me and others from possible dangers. Thus, I thought to myself “why should I step away if I can call the police? The police’s purpose is to protect and serve us, the citizenry?” No divinity would necessarily intervene at such display of injustice. And finally, 6. Family: I personally view family as one of the biggest values in a moral man or woman's life. If not the family that you grow up with, then an adopted family. If not one's adopters, then it could be one's "tribe" or romantic relationship.... You know, people, or even one person, you can be yourself with, and fearlessly. People that are willing to understand you. That's especially true in my eyes when the family/clan actually took an active part in your growth and education, as well as supporting the cultivation of your moral compass. Conclusion: We can conclude from all of this that atheists can act good as well, and that religion does not have to be the only source of morality. Let us not advocate the negative stereotypes and generalizations that are usually associated with atheists and atheism. Instead, to foster a greater understanding of morality, we should develop the habit of looking both ways.

(Note: I once claimed that all importance is subjective. I now realize I was wrong... Partially wrong, that is!). (Background music) The Strawman's Fallacy is a common logical fallacy that happens when a being or thing is either distorted or exaggerated beyond proportions, for the sake of rhetoric. For those new to the site, rhetoric is the art of convincing the other side. Many fallacies can be used for the sake of rhetoric, especially for an audience that does not know them, but I digress. It is called a "strawman" because you essentially take a different version of reality, and present it in a way that is supposed to imitate that reality's original version. It's just like an actual scarecrow that is used to imitate an actual human being in order to keep birds away from a farm. Since the birds are not aware that the scarecrow isn't a real human, they are deceived by this fallacy. (And fallacy, for that matter, is a concept that impairs our understanding of the truth.) In order for the strawman fallacy to work, I suggest the idea that we must recognize objective value/importance. Because if something has actual importance, that is independent of our perception, then Strawman's fallacy has every right to exist. On the other hand, if nothing had objective value, this fallacy would've been irrelevant, as things would always legitimately be prone to subjective importance. Because if an actual scarecrow would've been regarded as a human being capable of physically defending itself from a bird's attack, then it would contradict the original meaning of this fallacy: The meaning that argues for an objective difference between an actual guard and a downgraded, deceiving version of one. Surely there is an objective difference between the two, correct? A difference that is independent of our subjective experience (a scarecrow only gives the illusion of defense). Physical examples of this fallacy exist in military warfare. By using decoys, we can outsmart the enemy faction, as they focus fire on the pretentious force, while we can outsmart them. These are examples because they cause the attacker to distort the decoy's own importance in their mind. Thus, you can even use this fallacy on yourself without any awareness. In contemporary reception of my writings, I'd like to argue that some readers may make a strawman out of them, by deeming them less-than-relevant because they felt that they were disrespectful, condescending, and so on. That's not even the point of philosophy, to please the audience in any way. The point is to research the truth, and everything else is minor in comparison. To minimize something's importance because of a subjective experience is therefore an incorrect estimation. And a strawman's fallacy cannot exist without incorrect estimations. I'm talking in terms of objectivity, here, as philosophy was never about people-pleasing. If it were about it, Socrates would avoid asking so many questions, and thus, bothering the citizens of Athens. When we dare to know, we may also dare to cause unease, unintentionally or otherwise. I, personally, have no intention to disrespect anyone on purpose. And I cannot control people's sensitivities. Thus, I now see little reason to be concerned with their ridicule. It's all because they miss the point of a philosophical text: to reach the truth. The strawman's fallacy may be combined with other fallacies, such as the ad-hominem fallacy, where you literally make a metaphorical strawman out of someone, and present them as the real thing. Combine this fallacy with the ad-populum fallacy, and you can make a mockery out of something or someone, purely because they are popular. I guess the stereotypical hipster may use this recent combination. In order to overcome this fallacy, we must aim to see things as they are. We must put ourselves in the eyes of a crow, and raise the possibility that the guard might be nothing more than a fabrication and not an actual threat. And to do that, we must not be so scared by the scarecrow. Succumbing to our subjective experience can mean that we will be deceived by our very own subjectivity. Objective importance does not have to be absolute in order to exist as such. Instead, it can be more rational than otherwise, and be based on conditions. For example, if I only have apples to eat, and don't have anything else to eat, eating apples is more important, right now, than eating food that I don't have (it's just an example). In this case, apples do not have absolute importance, but they are objectively important at the time, for the sake of one's survival. Thus, even if they are not that important in general, they are that important, now. We may degrade the importance of apples, using the strawman's fallacy, and fantasize about far tastier food. However, doing so would undermine the objective importance of apples to our survival in this specific anecdote. This is why I don't think we should put that much emphasis on our subjective experiences. Reality is not subjective, even if our perception of it, is. Both maturity, rationality, and professionalism stem from the recognition of reality, as external to our personal thoughts and feelings. And sometimes, of course, that reality may be more important than our experiences. This isn't to say that subjectivity is not important at all. It's to say that objectivity is imperative for the strawman's fallacy to work. Otherwise, what would it matter to the crow, if the scarecrow is a strawman or an armed guard, that could shoot it down? Their fear, or lack of fear, is an indication of external reality, thus its objective importance in this case. Anything else in this scenario, from the crow's side, doesn't matter. What matters, in this case, is its safety and survival. And for that to work, it must distinguish between the objective value of a strawman and that of an actual man or woman. Case dismissed. Afterthought: In order to reduce this fallacy from happening, here are some tips: Listen carefully to the opponent's argument. You need to hear them fully in order to know what they're talking about. Ask questions to clarify the opponent's argument. This will help you to understand their position better. Make sure they know that the questions are not rhetorical, but sincere, in order to be understood. Be willing to change your own mind. If you find that the opponent's argument is stronger than yours, be willing to admit it. It shouldn't damage your ego if you are sincere in knowing the truth, in this exchange of ideas.

"If your priorities revolve around profit, you have failed as a human being. Capitalism isn't progress, but conditioning" -- John Duran "When no bush of the field was yet in the land and no small plant of the field had yet sprung up—for the LORD God had not caused it to rain on the land, and there was no man to work the ground" - Genesis 2:5 Human connections are best treated like grounds to build farming fields in, and never, never industrial factories. That's if you are interested in the heart of the person in front of you, and not in your own selfish interests. Capitalist mentality, which is not geared towards human wellbeing and fulfillment, should not be applied to deep and honest human connections. That's because the heart is best not to be exploited for your own gain. No. The heart is to be nurtured like the farmer nurtures his or her crops. You should not place "factories" on hearts, but you should pour rain on them, and watch as the heart grows bigger and bigger. You need to give them time to grow, like a farmer needs to wait for his crops for harvesting. Factories are there not to nurture and develop the ground, but to exploit it in accordance to their own conditioning that does not align with the local factors. However, the environment around it may fail to adjust to the factories' exploitive nature. And adjustment, or adaptation, is how things and beings survive and endure. The factories would pollute the skies with smoke, taint the waters with toxic waste, and decrease the health of the people around them. As such, those who love are not to be exploited as if they were a business venture, as if they were grounds for industrialization. For them to open their heart to you, you must tend to it like a gardener tends to their flowers. The gardener needs to give said flowers time to grow and blossom. Should they feed the flowers with too much water, they would choke and fail to grow as the best versions of themselves. Surrender your capitalist tendency to turn profit when it comes to human emotion or "soul" as some of you may call it. It deserves to grow. Not for exploitation! Not even for you to enjoy it through grooming, (and I refer to its original meaning of preparing to another state of being)! It deserves to grow for its own sake. And the best way for you to love someone's soul is to let it grow by its own accord. Without much restrictions. It needs to digest and reflect upon your words and upon the experiences you shared together. It needs time. You mustn't hasten it too much, or it will fail to grow. Human beings are just like that, like crops to be fed and grow. What we call "the Rat Race" is too much for many of us because this "race" exploits us for money and production. Those who fail to be productive and profitable workers will either end up unemployed, on welfare, or wandering in the streets. But when you are in a deep, honest, and intimate connection with someone, you must let them be themselves or they will suffer. They will suffer because it is the industrial, external world that forces them to repress themselves in the name of survival. But when they are alone with you, they deserve to go unrepressed. They deserve to express their emotions, even if these are uncomfortable to you. They deserve to act, even, in an insulting manner if they are hurt, because it is within the warm embrace of love that they are allowed to be themselves. We deserve to express anger, deserve to express anxiety, and be human. To be flawed and recognized for our flaws; if not by the industrious nature of this capitalist world, then by the people who exist in one's private world. The apartment. The chat room on social media. The place you go to be alone together, etc. This is why privacy is imperative in such connections, connections that are not professional by any means. Connections that are not there to serve as functions of something greater. Connections that do not depend on conditionality; the same conditionality that exists in the workplace, in the office, in business meetings and factories... The one that causes us to be miserable and depressed. Why? Because we are expected all the time to be things we are not by genuine desire. A place of business disregards your authentic self. Connections based on love, even if not romantic, are expected the best FOR you and not FROM you. For love-based connections accept you for who you are. You shouldn't be conditioned all the time. It is in the company of those who accept you for who you truly are, where you can grow and emerge like a beautiful flower, and prepare for the pollen of the bees. Progress is done not by maximizing benefit. It is done by being humane and taking consideration of all parties involved.

(Background music) Article Overview by Mr. C. Kingsley and Co. "Rubinshtein's Philosophy on Physical Training and Agony" is a well-organized and thought-provoking article that explores the intrinsic link between physical development and personal empowerment. It delves into the concept that cultivating physical strength enhances one's ability to perform tasks independently, fosters inner resilience and character, and offers a holistic perspective on self-improvement and the management of agony as a catalyst for growth. The article is well-organized, transitioning from the fundamental philosophy of development to practical applications and broader implications on personal and societal levels. The discussion on "vital agony" versus "harmful agony" provides a nuanced understanding of discomfort as a necessary component of growth, encouraging readers to reframe their perception of pain and challenges as opportunities for development rather than mere obstacles. The article integrates practical examples, such as comparing physical training to maintaining a household or the analogy of military strength, effectively illustrate abstract philosophical concepts, making the ideas more accessible and impactful. It emphasizes holistic development, connecting physical training with mental and emotional strength, emphasizing the importance of a balanced approach to self-improvement. The engaging writing style of the article resonates with individuals seeking purpose and direction in their self-improvement journeys. Overall, "Rubinshtein's Philosophy on Physical Training and Agony" is a valuable contribution to discussions on self-improvement, resilience, and the holistic development of individuals. A primary Philosophy on Physical Training is development. Development is the notion that one is getting better at something, and therefore, is becoming more powerful than before. The more you work on developing yourself, either physically or otherwise, the more powerful you can become. The more power you have, the more potential you can gain and then apply. In the realm of physicality, being strong physically means that you can do more things independently of external, hired help. This, in turn, can save you money. Thus, physical power is one that can save you other forms of power, such as finances. In exchange, you keep that finance and get to spend it elsewhere. If it weren't for your physical prowess, you would depend on one or more hired hands that you could use without. Hence, why the development of physical power is the development of your inner resources. The growth of one resource can allow the growth of another resource, plural or merely singular. The human body is a center of much promising potential. Physical exercise is an exercise in unleashing that potential within you. Neglecting your body means neglecting that potential, making it underdeveloped, and making you dependent on external sources of power unnecessarily. The body is a tool that you own. In a sense, it is your most basic asset, more than any technology. Developing it further extends its promising potential beyond its current practical territory. Physical exercise is a skill like revamping a philosophy article. The more you do it, the better you get at it. The better you get at it, the less painful it can be for you. Therefore, it is a reasonable interest to develop your body to reduce or even eliminate pain that may be included in physical tasks. Not developing your body means exposing it to weakness, and the weaker you are, the more likely you are to suffer critically and unnecessarily. Strength, physical or otherwise, is also a source of defense from such agony. To protect yourself from such agony, you must endure the agony that is required for development. Be afraid of that vital agony, and you will fail to invest in protection from harmful agony. Vital agony is one that contributes to your development, while harmful agony is one that hinders it. There is no life that is devoid of discomfort, and thus, from the potential of agony. Live a life that is devoid of vital agony, and you will expose yourself unnecessarily to future, harmful agony. This includes any other area that is not physical. That's because vital agony nurtures strength, and strength builds character. In order to have good character, both in strength and virtue, you must entertain vital agony. Physical exercise is the exercise of tolerating vital agony on the physical level, and that tolerance can be applied to other departments of our lives. The carefree hedonist who avoids agony may find themselves suffering from harmful agony as they failed to build strength against it. Strength is not only used for offense but for defense as well. As such, the emotionally strong person would be one that can use their emotions practically, like the physically-capable man or woman. Being emotionally strong does not mean, necessarily, that you are an impractical drama-inducer. No. Strength is also expressed in the wise allocation and application of resources. This is why wisdom is an expression of strength. For example, the stronger military force is not the one that is larger in quantity. After all, such forces have been defeated throughout history by smaller armies. Thus, strength is not measured in intensity or quantity alone. It is measured by its ability to exert its power in order to either control or influence. What is the practical point of a man or woman on steroids who does not have the power to clean their homes because they are on overdose? What is the point of a large military force that is also hungry and tired in the middle of battle, against a smaller force that has been well fed and rested? Fun fact: Asceticism is derived from the Greek word "askeō," which means "to exercise" or "to train". The ascetic trains the power that exists beyond their own willpower. As such, a good ascetic is one that can operate independently of willpower. They develop a specific power that can be exerted despite many situations. This is what makes them very disciplined. Combine reason with asceticism, and you can operate in this world as long as your actions are reasonable, with little else required for that intention. With little inside of you (desires, temptations) standing in your path. Training is more than just developing our bodies—it's the maintenance done in the name of health and iron will. Training is needed even regardless of one's unwillingness. Do you take the garbage out of the house? This is a prime meaning of training—to clean ourselves also from negative traits such as clumsiness, childishness, and slothfulness which threaten our physical well-being. Do so regularly, and the "house" that is your body will be clean from these traits, like a literal house. In the absence of training, the body will unnecessarily deteriorate and can become a liability in our paths in life. Maintaining it through training would mean that it will get less in our way, and be more than an asset. Like a pet, it requires regular attention and caretaking. But unlike a pet, we're necessarily dependent on it as well When we neglect our body, our positive values may become hurt as well; values that can be used for departments outside of pure physicality. We can become fatter and more tired, and at times even less disciplined as well. It can affect interpersonal departments, like when socializing. Like when looking for a partner, and so on. It has little to do with our own body image, and more of using our bodies to advance in life regardless of our perception of it. Rubinshteinic philosophy holds practicality as one of its supreme values. The ultimate point of practicality is to survive and thus to thrive. Thus, treating our bodies like practical tools can further our survival in life, and allow us to better thrive. All our actions begin with our bodies and we cannot do anything without using the body first. Even our minds are part of it, so we can't even think without using our bodies. Developing the body means developing the very center, the very foundation of all our actions. A good foundation should be able to support more successful and promising actions. This is why a healthy mind can definitely exist, at least more than otherwise, as a result of a healthy body. And of course, we need our minds intact in order to allow good cognitive actions. How can a philosopher be a good thinker if their minds are distracted by constant ills and harmful agony? These can damage the clarity and rationality of their thinking. This is because there are constant interactions between body and mind, whether or not the mind is purely physical. The metaphysical essence of the mind does not matter as much, because practically, it only matters that the mind is a product of the body. Even if it exists independently of the body, it cannot operate independently of a body, rendering it ineffective when bodiless. (By "mind" I may also refer to "soul"). As we train, our muscles grow and become stronger by resisting gravity and the objects we hold. This is because our body is here to be adapted to the environment it interacts with. The more interaction, meaning, the more it resists its physical surroundings, the stronger it will become in the name of surviving in the environment it is put against. Human beings have become the conquerors of Earth mainly because of their ability to adapt to their environment. This is why developing the body is excellent for the purpose of adapting. The muscles build themselves accordingly. They are our extensions and they are there to assist our living. If you wish to become stronger by training, you have, first of all, to resist your urges that are used as obstacles and excuses. Second, you need to accept the importance of vital agony in the name of its untapped benefits to your interests. I believe many people give up on training because of the inconvenience of pain and sweat. However, pain and sweat are a direct indication of development! Development is based on overcoming former states, AKA, growing out of them. A tower is built by stories overcoming their lower levels. The self is therefore built on overcoming its former versions. It cannot develop without successfully overcoming what it used to be. For muscles to develop, they must overcome their former, weaker states. When you race and beat your previous time scores, you know that you have overcome your former records, and thus, the former versions of your body. With the hedonistic values that our Western society possesses, we become weaker and more fragile, almost to the point of self-injury by unhealthy substances. All in the name of feeling good. Ironically, such good feelings can lead to harmful agony in the long run, in the form of poorer health, and its consequences Fun does not have to be the primary source of motivation. A good source of motivation should be justified by its practicality. Good feelings are not as practical as survival and maintaining our health. What would happen if training stopped being enjoyable? Would you neglect your body because your counterproductive feelings told you so? Unfortunately, many people would do so. Treat your training as if it were a habit and a duty, and you can survive better by being in better health. In return, you can also operate better in life. All in all, training is a means to an end. It is a "necessary evil" used to maintain and/or improve our physical power. And physical power is a "necessary evil" in itself, because in this world, the strong rule over the weak, and the mighty dictate what is deemed right, what is deemed normal and desired. As such, being physically big and strong can help you overcome certain types of adversity, even if by display or behavior alone. Since I'm a big and strong man, people very rarely interfere with me in real life. They know, even by intuition, that it is unwise to meddle with me. The sad truth is that people of smaller sizes may have it harder in life. So, at least by being more muscular, you can make certain people keep their distance from you, like a scarecrow may do to pests.

(Philosocom's Subcategory on Manipulation) (Social Media Directory) (Philosocom's Directory On the Virtual Realm) (Philosocom's Directory on Technology) (Kingdom Directory) (Background music) The Internet Then and Now: A Shift from Exploration to Manipulation Just 20 years ago, in the 2000's and even in the 90's, the impact of algorithms wasn't very high, and the internet was a place of exploration and knowledge. Nowadays, the internet has been utilized for the manipulation of the masses, and to the spread of fake news and propaganda. As such, the popular sides of the internet have been used to exploit and to addict. I believe the internet of today has been hijacked by corrupt manipulators that are there to keep you addicted and constantly engaged for the sake of revenue and political manipulation. Furthermore, the dead internet theory suggests that AI bots are largely taking over the virtual landscape, with many websites being largely, if not entirely, AI generated. And in the rapidly changing environment of the internet, where AI bots take over and create what is called "AI slop", many websites' owners stop posting because maintaining a website is too much work that isn't necessarily profitable. The Reign of Algorithms and the Concealment of "Hidden Gems" A "hidden gem" is a term defining something great that remains largely undiscovered. In the online world, where algorithms rule and dictate what internet surfers are seeing, many hidden gems are left undiscovered and unvisited in favor of those that pay money to promote their content online. The algorithms are heavily biased towards what is popular, far less towards what could be fascinating. Many hidden gems are left hidden because the purpose of large websites, like social media platforms, is to keep you sticked and addicted to surfing said platforms. That goes for google, which also works using algorithms, and mainly advertises websites that spend a lot of money on being advertised in the first place. Algorithms narrow down online content and create a form of a maze/hill to keep you trapped within popular platforms in the name of generating revenue and selling your data to third party users. There are many hidden gems because popularity is but one of the hallmarks of injustice in the world -- shallow content that is meant to keep you occupied and addicted, is prioritized over deep, unique content that is meant to help you think differently. The Nature of Hidden Gems: Passion Over Profit As such, hidden gems are most often than not, a product of passion, by people strong enough to keep on sticking to their own truths in a largely biased, algorithm-based environment that invades your privacy so it could cater the most addicting content for you. And with many hidden gems in the virtual landscape existing, I am sure I am not the only one who works out of passion instead for profit, like it is often done. I look at those who are sellouts -- who sell their unique selves for profit and ask myself, are they satisfied with what they're doing? Maybe sell out their originality and creativity to survive, which is a legitimate cause, but is it worthy to live a life that is merely there to pay the bills? I don't want to give in to the hollowness of reality. Had I been a sellout myself, I would have had more money, but I would be far hollower and emptier than I already am. I believe most people hate their jobs. Hidden gems are for those who love to work. In the AI revolution, many jobs are already being replaced, leaving many people jobless. In such a rapidly changing world, it is the opportunity of many to deviate from the traditional world of working in soul-destroying jobs in favor of chasing their passions. While the AI revolution takes away jobs and will continue doing so the more it is advanced, I believe that many hidden gems will keep on appearing in the virtual landscape, and work that is done solely for the sake of money will be replaced in favor of passion-based projects. And should there be a universal basic income implemented as a result of the AI revolution, there will be even more hidden gems, and people will be free from wage slavery, free to chase their passions and do what they want the most. Hidden gems are product of people who deviate away from society, which is there mainly for the obedient and the submissive, to follow their own passions. I believe the more people will be disillusioned from society, the more they will create their own alternative frameworks. Those who believe money isn't everything in life, I believe, are likelier to build hidden gems online, which is most often than not a creative effort. Finding Hidden Gems: A Call for Critical Thinking and Exploration There are many hidden gems in the online world as a result of heavily biased algorithms. All you have to do is to find them using search engines. Using critical thinking, one can sway away from the popular aspects of the internet, the "mainstream" aspects, and dive deep within the realm of hidden gems. Had the internet not be full of algorithms that bias your view, internet users would've needed to utilize their cognitive abilities to find what they want to find, and the internet would've been used like it would 20 years ago: for the sake of exploration and research. Hidden gems are, however, hard to find unless you dedicate the extra work necessary to find them. Hidden gems are hidden for a reason -- because they are left out in a world built on the competition for profit. To be able to find hidden gems will require you to overcome the dependency over algorithms and use your own independent thinking to find content. I believe technology should serve us, and that we shouldn't become slaves to technology. I believe technology is there so we could enjoy from it, and not to be enslaved to it. As far as I see, nowadays technology is used to enslave people, to keep them addicted and manipulated by bots and by people with ulterior motives. If we want to benefit from technology, then we should use it in a way that helps us feel satisfied and gratified, not merely addicted and enslaved. For too long have we learned to conform, and the more we conform, the more we serve the interests of those who wish to profit off from us, exploit us and manipulate us for their own gain. I believe it is high time that we learned to break free from the toxic cycle of social media, and explore the internet in a way that helps us feel passionate and that fills a spark within us. And that is where hidden gems come in -- they are able to fulfil that spark within you if only you would stop being enslaved to algorithms and begin to use the internet like it was intended to originally -- to serve as a respiratory of exploration, wonder and adventure, instead as a tool meant to exploit you and your time. Philosocom: An Example of a Hidden Gem Philosocom is but one of these hidden gems that just refuses to keep up with the times, instead resorting to having its articles expanded and serving as a platform for many esoteric subjects in the world of contemporary philosophy. This website doesn't have algorithms that bias your ability to navigate it. Instead, it works like a library, having many subcategory directories that are meant to help you navigate this massive esoteric platform. Philosocom is an example of work that is based on passion and not profit. I am a very passionate writer and I want to be always strong so I will keep this website ongoing and serve as a form of an "enduring pillar" in a rapidly changing world. My aim as a website owner is to create unique and original content in a virtual world that is getting shallower and more unoriginal. I still believe that even in our shallow world, creativity and unique content still have their place, and that passion shouldn't be killed in favor of profit. I think that a life meant solely for profit is a hollow one and that is why I dedicated many years to Philosocom, while not earning much from it. I do it for the satisfaction and because I want to be useful to the world. That is why I keep doing what I do and keep my passion alive. My mission with Philosocom is not only to contribute to others but to also live a life fulfilled, and I think a life fulfilled is one where you are chasing and accomplishing your dreams on your own terms. Philosocom is a platform for those who have the passion of exploration in them. Of people willing to not give up on their inner child as adults, and venture out into many interesting and unique articles, made to help you think critically -- and differently. I believe what I'm doing is vital to making the world a better place, and as such I will keep at it. Creators of hidden gems have to stay strong and not give up even when it's hard, to not surrender their hopes and dreams in a world where it is the caterers who make more profit. The Philosophy of Hidden Gems: Wonder, Curiosity, and Challenging the Status Quo Hidden gems are there to spark wonder, just like philosophy itself. The common thing with hidden gems and philosophy is that both spark wonder, curiosity and exploration. Unfortunately, most people, I believe, lose their curiosity when they become adults, choosing the easiness of comfort over the fun that can come from challenging exploration, both online and offline. But if you go on this journey of finding hidden gems in your free time, you might find avenues that you would otherwise not touch. Will you overcome yourself and explore this site, or choose the comfort of catering algorithms that make profit out of your visitor analytics? That is for you to decide.

Article Overview by Mr. J. Igwe and Co. The article "How To Understand the Self Beyond the External World" explores the philosophical theme of individualism and the nature of the self in a compelling and thoughtful way. It challenges societal assumptions about individuality by introducing the paradox between the mainstream notion of environmental dependence and the argument for environmentally-independent traits. The article is well-structured, guiding readers through the thought process in a logical and engaging way. Positive aspects include conceptual depth, philosophical engagement, and structure. The distinction between environmentally-dependent and environmentally-independent traits encourages readers to think beyond the traditional view of the self and challenges societal assumptions about individuality. The examples discussed, such as contemplation, dreaming, and bodily functions, are relatable and allow readers to engage with the concept of the independent self. The article also references behaviorism, rejecting the idea that mental states are equivalent to external behaviors, giving it a strong philosophical grounding. The mention of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) adds a practical dimension to the abstract discussion, showing how individuals can reshape their interaction with external influences. In conclusion, the article offers a fresh, individualist perspective on self and autonomy, challenging readers to rethink conventional views on environmental influence and individual independence. ********** It can be lonely when you disconnect from the matrix, although we remain on the same planet and everything around us looks the same, the distance becomes even greater. -- Mickey Eilon (Background music) Words On Individualism As many know, since the beginning of my philosophical journey towards self-actualization, I have always been drawn to the theory of individualism. I even developed my own ideology, which presents a more radical form of it. However, despite the insights I have reached during my contemplations, I have never found anyone who fully agrees with me. Nevertheless, this does not stop me from aspiring to ascend further and further from the depths of mainstream-agreed assumptions, so that I may seek to explore greater horizons of thought. One of the current, overall-agreed-upon assumptions (as there is no such thing as an “objective opinion”) is that the individual is a product which constantly stays in a state of dependence on the environment for his or her existence and consciousness. And it, unfortunately, can come to the point that he or she is always dependent on the environment for just about everything. Hence why unnecessary dependence is faulty. I find this assumption, although highly convincing, quite problematic when compared to the definition of the individual. A concept which is widely used in English and, I assume, in other languages as well. Who exactly is the individual? And why can the claim that the individual is always dependent be considered illogical? Well, it is because the definition of the individual (A distinct, autonomous being) in addition to the said mainstream assumption creates a paradox. Is it logical that a free, autonomous being is an entity which constantly remains in a state of dependence on other objects, other than itself? This fallacy may lead to a very drastic, and even underestimating conclusion: that the concept of individualism is a lie which needs to be reshaped in accordance to our globalized, interconnected society of our world. Evidence of the decline of individuality is clear, and may unfortunately become more pronounced as our technology advances. Decreasing privacy, high levels of social anxiety, reinforcement of conformity, and constant attempts to avoid loneliness rather than facing it head-on are all important examples that may indicate that, unless addressed and handled, these trends may jeopardize these virtues of individuality in the future: * Autonomy * Liberty * Independent thought * The courage to venture beyond the various conveniences of our collectives. In this article, I will attempt to prove that individuality is not a lie, but a logical and convincing assumption, even if it may awaken controversies. A Proposed Aspect of the Self After some thought, I came up with the idea that each and every one of us, besides our environmentally-dependent traits, may also contain environmentally-independent traits, which consist of an inner self. To understand the world, we must Understand the Self as well. In accordance, I hypothesize that the elementary definition of "self" may be the collection of its traits. Before I proceed with examples of such possible traits, I will give the required characteristics for a trait to be considered of the second type (AKA "Independent"): The trait must be able to operate regardless of the environment. This is what we strive to achieve in this article: the possibility of a trait which can exist with no dependence on a specific environment for it to rely upon. The trait can be "autistic," or in other words, inner-directed. As an advocate for individualism, I claim that we all have our own inner lives, which do not depend upon other entities for them to exist and to persist. It is important to note that this does not necessarily mean egoistic, although it may be regarded as such. Even when one introspects in solitude, it doesn't always have to be about the person themselves, even though every person is the creator, and perhaps master, of their own inner lives and whatever happens inside them. Similarly with emotions. The trait can exist without external display. The philosophical approach of behaviorism, which claims that a mental state is identical to a certain behavior or to a set of behaviors, has been proven to be false, regardless of the support it used to have. This proves that the states of the self can exist without external projection (AKA behavior), which may depend upon interaction with the self's environment, and that interaction is not necessary for such a self to exist. 4. The trait can be created by the means of mono-action. Unlike interaction, mono-action, as the name implies, is an action which is created solely by one individual, and does not require further cooperation with other entities, for it to happen. With those circumstances in mind, I shall give a few possible examples for potentially autonomous traits, which, of course, exist in various degrees and qualities among different people. They are presented here as actions: 1. Contemplation: An individual can be contemplative regardless of the environment or space they are in. Whether country, era, or place you are placed in, you can still be contemplative. This is why there are thinkers, mystics, philosophers, and the like all around the world, at all given periods of time in history. In addition, contemplation is obviously an internal action, which does not require external projection of any sort, and it can be done independently. 2. Dreaming: There is no living being which does not dream. Whether it is day-dreaming or night-dreaming, we all have dreams, which can exist and function without anyone but the individual themselves to be aware or engage in it. One can say it is always fundamentally inner-directed, and if an external eye were to simply watch us sleep or day-dreaming (not including exploiting advanced technology), it wouldn't have any idea what we are dreaming about. Of course, it is done autonomously. 3. Bodily functions: All organisms share some common functions in general, to a certain degree for each individual entity. Metabolism, physical activity, sensuality, ability for reproduction, and even death. Although they are based on something, every organism is in constant activity regardless of environment. Even if an organism dies due to a certain environment, it is still a bodily function that occurs generally. Each one of us has our own metabolic rates, heartbeats (or no heartbeats if we're dead), physical capabilities which can exist without external demonstration – all to a certain degree. It is important to note that I am not discussing specific bodily functions, but those we have in common on one side, but to a certain degree and merit – on the other. Some of us may lack some bodily functions which the general population has in common, such as hearing, seeing, and the like, but as said those are just specific functions. Final Words The entirety of this article has been written in an attempt to conclude and reveal the following, that a person isn't necessarily or entirely the product of their environment and the socialization they receive, and that there is a sense of self beyond the sphere of society's framework. In other words, interpersonal interactions aren't necessarily the only factor in the determination of how an individual's sense of self would go and evolve. There are also other reasons that grow from the second category of the self, the environmentally-independent traits, which build the autonomous sphere of the self. There is still an element out there that is often minimized in value, by those who advocate the dominance of society in our lives. That element nonetheless exists, even if that aspect of ourselves isn't as dominant as socialization and its effects on us are. Please note that there are traits that were not covered in this article, and that is because I am not sure yet if they fill the criteria I myself have proposed. Either way, we can even further this argument by claiming that we are more than passive blank slates. We are "slates" that, with methods such as Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), can try to channel the influencing stimulation we receive from the External World, AKA, from society, further strengthening the possible fact that we are not completely and passively prone to the authority of external interaction. Much of it, in fact, depends on us and on our ability to endure, receive, and interpret the communication we receive from the outside of ourselves, without letting that communication dictate everything within us.

(Disclaimer: The guest posts do not necessarily align with Philosocom's manager, Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein's beliefs, thoughts, or feelings. The point of guest posts is to allow a wide range of narratives from a wide range of people. To apply for a guest post of your own, please send your request to mrtomasio@philosocom.com) (Background music) (Philosocom's John Igwe and Co. Articles) (Philosocom's Directory On Uniqueness) In a world of diversity, where everything is mostly distinct from one another, should nature or God be questioned in this sense? Could there be a special reason behind the existence of diversity? It's impossible to say for sure, but it becomes clear that the features present in diversity play a significant role in our society, for good and for bad. This brings to mind the assertion that "society is a whole where all elements are interrelated." Could this be the reason why we should accept others for who they are, even at the peak of diversity in conception, beliefs, understanding, and more? Accepting others for who they are involves embracing their unique qualities, understanding their perspectives, and showing empathy. It's about acknowledging differences, being non-judgmental, and allowing others to be themselves without trying to change them. It's essential to foster an environment of respect, openness, and understanding. Acceptance of others is vital for creating a more inclusive, compassionate, and harmonious society. It fosters understanding, promotes diversity, and encourages individuality, contributing to a more tolerant and supportive community. Acceptance allows people to feel valued, respected, and comfortable being their authentic selves. Accepting people means embracing individuals for who they are, respecting their differences, and welcoming them without judgment or prejudice based on their background, beliefs, or identities. It's about fostering an inclusive and understanding environment. Accepting people for who they are is also essential for several reasons which may include: Promotes Diversity: Acceptance fosters a diverse and inclusive society where people from various backgrounds feel valued and included. By valuing and accepting diversity, communities and societies can benefit from a wealth of perspectives and experiences, leading to richer and more robust environments. Encourages Mutual Respect: Acceptance promotes mutual respect by acknowledging and honoring differences rather than letting them divide us. By encouraging acceptance, we can build a foundation for mutual respect, leading to more harmonious interactions and a more understanding society. Emotional Well-being: When individuals feel accepted, they experience a sense of belonging, leading to improved mental health and overall well-being. By promoting acceptance, communities can contribute significantly to the emotional well-being of individuals, fostering healthier and happier societies. Reduces Conflict: Acceptance helps in reducing conflicts and prejudices, fostering harmony and cooperation among people. Acceptance serves as a powerful tool in mitigating conflicts by promoting understanding, tolerance, and cooperation among individuals and groups with differing perspectives or backgrounds. Encourages Growth and Learning: Embracing different perspectives and experiences allows for personal and societal growth through learning from others. In conclusion, accepting others for who they are involves embracing their unique qualities, perspectives, and differences without judgment or attempts to change them. It's important because it fosters inclusivity, promotes understanding, and cultivates a more compassionate and diverse society. When we accept people for who they are, we create an environment where individuals feel valued, understood, and respected, allowing for mutual growth, empathy, and a more harmonious coexistence. It's never an easy task to accept others for who they are, but we should always remember that tolerance would grow if we realized we are in everyone and everyone and everything is in us. Reference: https://www.conovercompany.com/empathy-accept-others-for-who-they-are/

13 Years -- An Article Against the Education System (Philosocom's directory on education) (Philosocom's Directory on Luck) Article Overview by Mr. O. C. Isaac The article, "13 Years -- An Article Against the Education System," is a powerful critique of traditional schooling. It is deeply personal and authentic, making it relatable to readers who have also struggled with the education system. Mr. Tomasio unique philosophical depth and distinctive writing style add to the dramatic effect of the piece. The article emphasizes resilience and self-education, challenging conventional notions of formal education and offering an alternative perspective on intellectual growth. Overall, the article is a bold and unapologetic critique of the education system, infused with passion and individuality. (Background music) Sometimes I regret being an outstanding student. I regret that I have always listened in my classes. And I regret being a heavily-disciplined, Rubinshteinic soldier to such, such an incompetent system!!! It isn't because I don't like learning. No! To this day, I am an autodidact. I always been, always will! It's because, in retrospect, school studies may have harmed my mental state. To what was later diagnosed as a general anxiety disorder. It made me more disabled than I am now. Do you think this is rational to do such thing to such a moral student? I will NEVER forgive them! It is moral to forgive, but I will not be compensated! 13 years. 13 years of shouting. Of repressing my emotions. Of keeping certain thoughts to myself because their expression was not accepted by the teachers. Because these teachers are WEAKLINGS! WEAKLINGS, COMPARED TO A MAN WHO SAVED HIS GRANDMOTHER FROM HERSELF AT THE AGE OF 10! Regardless of the subjects I learned and excelled in, the central lesson I learned there, was to shut up while someone else is shouting. Even if 99% of those terrible screams were not directed at me, my autistic consciousness felt like they were penetrating my internal organs. Moving them violently, making me want to give up on being alive. Their experience on a daily basis was one of the most scarring things in my young life, and one of my most horrible periods in my life. That's especially true when I struggled daily, not only with others. With myself, too, out of a fear that these screams would be directed at me. Because if they would, I would be likelier, in my former weakness, give up on everything, and depart this mortal realm. If they would scream at me, then, the time would come when I could no longer suppress the worry in my mind. A time when the subconscious will convey an overloaded state. A burden that will eventually cause me to lose it, traumatizing that school with all of its several hundred students studying there, annually! Yet, I never lost control for I was too calculated to not be weak, as I mentally survived everything there, and trained my secret plans in ruthless, ruthless ascetic walks across entire cities, so I won't be weak against such injustices! The other students didn't care that much, for they were too weak to resist. They took the frustrated screams of the teachers for granted, despite the fact it made them depressed as well! That's how it is when the outside sound doesn't play such an extreme role in your life. Not as it did for me, without any desire on my part. I was too sensitive! And all weaklings are prone to face their own despair early on, without necessarily finding hope in said despair! No! I refused! I refused! This is why I am alive to this very day! As nowadays I am leading a massive article empire with little to no emotion. I am too strong for most people as a result! Too strong and too aggressive that I can do so many things with my own power, per the Zanetti philosophy. Yet, I choose to spare this world of my rage. I prefer to be with greater virtue... instead.. And... retain my good heart... regardless... Sometimes I think the more you're an outstanding and hard-working student, the less willing you are to face the democratic reality of this world. A world that isn't confined to your school's reasoning. Even during the school period most high school students were usually terrible students at the institution I went to. At the same time, they were exemplary citizens of democracy, as they allowed themselves to be themselves more often, at the silly risk of getting severely traumatized each time, far, far more than I did. I, the highly competent soldier of my late master Numi, felt imprisoned, depressed and self-repressed. Yet despite the anxiety I had, I was also an outstanding student, overcoming them all! From 6th grade to 12th grade, I received excellency certificates! In 11th grade I also began studying philosophy in university. Yet I purposefully failed university because I did utterly despised the small talk during the courses! I came there to learn! Not to make friends! Not to kill time on nonsense! Yes, I loved learning, but it wasn't until hindsight that I realized I didn't need an educational institution to help me! Why? Because they were so utterly incompetent, and focused on oppressing me than teaching me! As a child, I taught myself exemplary English from video and computer games, more than all my English lessons taught me together. More and more I realize, objectively just how much of a genius I am! I did written several unpublished books, and hundreds of articles on the website I've set up alone! Independently I ran a massive, international apprentice organization! I am a self-taught philosophy master of 17 years, starting learning philosophy mainly by myself from the young age of 10! Beyond getting a high school diploma, being there was an utter waste of my physical and mental health! I wouldn't say getting that silly diploma was necessary for an asocial, stubborn man as as myself... Yes, school helped me with reading or writing, too, but what else? If I had to learn anything, I learned things by myself like a one-man-army would! And here I am, without a conventional framework either way, ever since 2017... A full graduation certificate and several philosophical courses at the open university in my hands. I am considered disabled because I saved people from themselves and DESPISE social interactions. Living mainly alone with rarely anyone to talk to, handling most of my relationships virtually... Unsuccessful experience of office-volunteering, where I felt like I was Sisyphus himself.. And a possible chance of not being fit to work conventionally for all of my life. That's school for me! Isn't it wonderful? ISN'T IT? ISN'T IT LOVELY THAT ALL MY WORK PAID OFF? Anyways... I'm still trying to figure out whether my exemplary excellence was worth all the effort I put in and all the peace of mind I had sacrificed. I mean, it really looks like the return I got was.... less than fortunate? To all those I learned from as a student. I've loved you all for being my teachers. You did what you believed was for the benefit of the students. Well, I guess I loved you, but will never love you again, and will never forgive you for the pain and suffering you caused me. Even if you did so forcibly, you did your job, and you did it badly, and you got paid for traumatizing me. Go and receive your stupid trophies and NEVER TALK TO ME AGAIN. I would be most grateful if you would never bother me, stupid, stupid teachers who taught they knew what they were doing! And despite all your contributions, I wonder if I ever needed all of you. I wonder... if could've been a happier, more peaceful person today, if my nation didn't force me to be in school. Why would my nation care about me? The nation left my grandmother in her cries, leaving ME to save her! I dedicate my empire to her, my true master! "Education is the path to success," many will argue. The education Numi, my parents, and myself, gave to me, was better than any other teacher had ever given me. Trusting these institutions was unlucky for me, even though my education was compulsory! My parents, and Master Numi, taught to express my feelings, even if they were unwanted. I was taught politeness and dignity, even above all the virtue of honesty. That is while this stupid education system taught me to mask my emotions and keep my distress to myself! I taught myself to learn and explore from the love of knowledge and wisdom. Not out of anticipation and anxiety to get a good grade, but out of love to knowledge! Out of THE LOVE OF WISDOM! Most importantly, what the education system taught me, was to keep things to myself, and act in secrecy. This in turn, taught me to FEAR, not to BE HAPPY. Finally, like a PTSD war veteran trying to utilize his mental scars, I wonder if the school has done me more wrong than the other way around, as it should have done. And, well? I am biased to believe that yes. They did a lot more harm than they should've. Nowadays I independently understand the philosophy of mathematics... more than I understand actual math.... Perhaps because of my educators, I have been sentenced to a life of below-average wellbeing, a bit similar to Nietzsche's poor health condition in his time... Education is something to grow from, not to recover from..... Not to take medication because of it... Not to need psychologists because of it... I feel guilt and shame towards the education system. It's bad. I am glad I will never have to go there.... ever... ever again... I am glad I let go of it... I am so... glad... Those in this world who claim to understand me, despite my mysteriousness, are nothing more than distractions for the monster inside. The monster that grew inside me for 13 years of my (currently) life. The school days will be remembered by many as happy and joyous years. Years of fun, excitement, and pleasure. I just wanted to learn. It's all I wanted to do... And all what I will want to do... For the sake of rectifying this silly world... mask my emotions and keep my distress to myself! I taught myself to learn and explore from the love of knowledge and wisdom. Not out of anticipation and anxiety to get a good grade, but out of love to knowledge! Out of THE LOVE OF WISDOM! Most importantly, what the education system taught me, was to keep things to myself, and act in secrecy. This in turn, taught me to FEAR, not to BE HAPPY. Finally, like a PTSD war veteran trying to utilize his mental scars, I wonder if the school has done me more wrong than the other way around, as it should have done. And, well? I am biased to believe that yes. They did a lot more harm than they should've. Nowadays I independently understand the philosophy of mathematics... more than I understand actual math.... Perhaps because of my educators, I have been sentenced to a life of below-average wellbeing, a bit similar to Nietzsche's poor health condition in his time... Education is something to grow from, not to recover from..... Not to take medication because of it... Not to need psychologists because of it... I feel guilt and shame towards the education system. It's bad. I am glad I will never have to go there.... ever... ever again... I am glad I let go of it... I am so... glad... Those in this world who claim to understand me, despite my mysteriousness, are nothing more than distractions for the monster inside. The monster that grew inside me for 13 years of my (currently) life. The school days will be remembered by many as happy and joyous years. Years of fun, excitement, and pleasure. I just wanted to learn. It's all I wanted to do... And all what I will want to do... For the sake of rectifying this silly world... mask my emotions and keep my distress to myself! I taught myself to learn and explore from the love of knowledge and wisdom. Not out of anticipation and anxiety to get a good grade, but out of love to knowledge! Out of THE LOVE OF WISDOM! Most importantly, what the education system taught me, was to keep things to myself, and act in secrecy. This in turn, taught me to FEAR, not to BE HAPPY. Finally, like a PTSD war veteran trying to utilize his mental scars, I wonder if the school has done me more wrong than the other way around, as it should have done. And, well? I am biased to believe that yes. They did a lot more harm than they should've. Nowadays I independently understand the philosophy of mathematics... more than I understand actual math.... Perhaps because of my educators, I have been sentenced to a life of below-average wellbeing, a bit similar to Nietzsche's poor health condition in his time... Education is something to grow from, not to recover from..... Not to take medication because of it... Not to need psychologists because of it... I feel guilt and shame towards the education system. It's bad. I am glad I will never have to go there.... ever... ever again... I am glad I let go of it... I am so... glad... Those in this world who claim to understand me, despite my mysteriousness, are nothing more than distractions for the monster inside. The monster that grew inside me for 13 years of my (currently) life. The school days will be remembered by many as happy and joyous years. Years of fun, excitement, and pleasure. I just wanted to learn. It's all I wanted to do... And all what I will want to do... For the sake of rectifying this silly world...

(Background music) Introduction I hail from a specific, secular culture that, while not distinguished in its lineage, advocates traits that can be indeed associated with nobility: politeness, kindness, consideration, tolerance, and clear language—qualities that command respect in any society. Therefore, it would be only natural that I would firstly, if not only, define the decency of an individual in accordance with the way they behave, more so than any other type of measurement. While I was once taught that there are people, such as us, who are of a 'higher quality' than others, I have come to disdain such an arrogant expression. My Code Towards Morally-Low Behavior However, treating others like abusers and people who normalize threatening as legitimate are such exceptions, because why would I have a moral reason to treat such people as good as people who never abused or threatened me? Here's my code, regarding such exceptions: I will not be decent towards those who traumatized me. I will even be more indecent towards them if they think they deserve the respect I share to other human beings, despite traumatizing me. I will not be decent towards those who think threatening me is okay just because it is beneficial to the requests they may be asking of me. Using my flashbacks for your own gain is immoral whether or not you're aware you're doing just that. Ignorance is no excuse for misdeeds. And it does not matter that none or few understands. Objectivity exists beyond our perception. And I'm too vengeful to forget any harm made to me, which was plenty already. I will not be decent towards those who think it's a good idea to waste my time with petty arguments, when I can dedicate that time to working on Philosocom, and/or resting for the next task on Philosocom. Wasting people's time involuntarily is an example of harassment. I will not be decent towards those who dehumanize me. I will only discard any of those conditions if I absolutely have to in order to get something I need, done, which is imperative for me to have. If required me to apologize, that is something I am capable of doing, should I be convinced that it is the moral thing to do. And yes, I am willing to be convinced in the name of the truth. The point of not tolerating indecency is to not enable or encourage its continuation. The Rationale A decent person is someone who consistently demonstrates gratitude, whether through words or gestures, when someone does something kind for them. They avoid using profanity or speaking aggressively unless absolutely necessary, or unless they speak to the morally-low (like people who physically abused them, or exploited their traumatic past). Violence, except for in self-defense, is not a characteristic of a decent person in my judgment, unless there are compelling reasons for it. Universal respect to human beings is fundamental because we are, before all, human beings, and that might as well be the only thing common amongst all human beings. To dehumanize anyone, even if they are morally-low themselves, is morally-low by itself, and also the strawman's logical fallacy. To be physically harmful to the innocent just because we were victims of harmful folk, does not justify our harm of these innocent people. Retaliating against those who harm us, and remembering what they did to us, to the grave, is a far better execution of justice. That's because justice is about getting the equivalent of what we receive. And to resume being worse like those who were worse to us, is not justice, but injustice, normalized. Nay. What we should do is to refuse being as awful as others were to us. I place minimal, if any, emphasis on a person's race, socioeconomic status, or beliefs and/or faith when evaluating common decency. True decency should transcend most, if not all, discriminatory scales. It is expressed not by these scales and not even by impressions, which can easily cover one's true acts. Decency is only expressed by the things we did, and by the things we might do. Since many of us are poor at making long-term decisions, indecency can quickly be a trait of ours, because we fail to optimally understand the impact of our actions. As such, one of the reasons I don't like this world is because people don't understand what they're capable of and what the actions they're doing are capable of. By the same token if I am in a taxi driven by an eccentric, I will not judge them based on their origin, despite the unfortunate negative stereotypes associated with whatever label they're "part" of. This unfair bias towards one's own social categories is one of the reasons why I avoid most of humanity. Anti-Semitism, for instance, manifests from indecent and unfair judgment. Most Jews do not choose their religion; they are born into it and are afterwards labeled as such due to their ancestry, regardless of their personal beliefs or satisfaction with their Jewish identity. I have no reason to view anyone who see reason to act morally-depraved as a decent person. No matter how much they would market themselves as good people to the world, none of this will change the fact that they abused voluntarily and that voluntary moral depravity has no regard for ethical conduct. Much health in our relationships can be gained and preserved if we didn't mistreated each other so much. Instead of acting morally-depraved I prefer avoiding. Therefore, as long as you exhibit proper manners and are a respectful person, that might suffice for me to consider you a decent individual. Of course, the other criteria is to not abuse me in any way just to make requests or demands. While I cannot control the actions of others, I sincerely hope that people would extend their respect beyond criteria that can unfairly discriminate; Respect, as human beings. Not carriers of different tags and labels. And I hope they wouldn't have to abuse others just to get what they want from them. I do wonder if that is too much to ask. I am willing to improve my morality and that is why I also focus on ethics in my philosophical career. However, this basic priority of mine is not something most necessarily share. A Practical Approach In a world marked by injustice, some individuals face unfair treatment due to factors beyond their control. However, in a better world, I envision a more-noticed attitude that encourages the fair treatment of all individuals, regardless of their inherent or acquired characteristics. We should see people as human beings, and anything else, later. This approach represents the most realistic and desirable way to interact with all human beings, regardless of who they are. It is fair that we be decent to anyone who has no ill-intent towards us, AND who has done nothing wrong to us. Only when these two are combined, then we have all the more reason to be decent to another human being. Decency is expressed by act, and the lack of ill-will does not justify a horrible action such as fostering a victim's mentality. I don't want to be malicious. I know what I am capable of, and I fear it. So I isolate myself physically from the world. Because the world lacks the long-term understanding to realize what it's doing to me. And what it might make me be, even further.... No one needs to meddle with me. Cycles of suffering and trauma can be ended while avoiding battles; much suffering can be reduced with empathy and love. Conclusions Ultimately, the compelling reason to embrace decency lies in the inherent goodness of virtue and the horrendous effects of evil, normalized or otherwise. Evil can be made by even the most kind and polite of people. Goodness offers benefits to oneself, others, or all parties involved. Hence why goodness should always be prioritized over evil such as causing harm to others voluntarily. Therefore, the pursuit of goodness transcends all, because there is nothing more beneficial, overall, than to cause and spread goodness. And that is done by being a decent human being. Spreading good can only be done by doing good deeds, and staying clear of deeds that defy good -- From exploitation to oppression -- regardless of your intentions. And the best way to avoid harmful deeds is to reduce interactions with people, which I do to this very day.

(Articles on death: https://www.philosocom.com/post/furthermore-on-death-and-reincarnation https://www.philosocom.com/post/death-as-but-a-utility-a-practical-philosophy https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-deaths-of-the-corner-people On Philosocom's True Master... My Mysterious Late Grandmother, Esther Drucker https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-multi-layered-shadow-box-poem https://www.philosocom.com/post/salvation https://www.philosocom.com/post/you-chose-grief https://www.philosocom.com/post/face-your-fate https://www.philosocom.com/post/afterlife-without-gods) You should not lament over the inevitable. -- Bhagavad Gita (Background music) The Naturality of Death Death, a finite end of the mind's engagement with the illusory realm, is a natural state. The body, a vessel for consciousness, becomes obsolete when the mind's connection to the animated reality is severed. It then joins the inanimate objects of the external world, devoid of thought or sensation. The illusory realm, often mistaken for the whole of reality, is the realm of the mind. It is the ceaseless chatter, the shared thoughts that bind us to our fellow beings. The world, however, is not merely existence within this life-made illusion. Rather, it is a conscious engagement with the true nature of reality, a realm beyond the limitations of the mind. Beyond the lively chatter of biological existence, the universe exists in a state of profound silence, of profound void. Only through the interplay of forces, of matter and energy, does sound emerge. The electric roar of machinery and technology, these are human-made disturbances in the cosmic symphony. Otherwise, the cosmos remains a silent, eternally desolate expanse, akin to the tranquillity of the grave. Other species throughout the stars are, too, biological and mechanical expressions of animated chatter. Mere chatter we learn to see as concrete, in order to survive. Life and Death as On and Off-line States Imagine your consciousness as a fragile network connection. It is connected via something called the "Mental Dimension" is like the vast internet, a realm of information and experiences. A strong connection allows you to access and interact with this "digital universe" with greater freedom of action and desire. A weak connection limits your access and can even lead to disconnection (AKA premature death). The connection weakens through the naturality of trauma. Just as a slow internet connection can be caused by poor hardware, viruses, or interference, your connection to the Mental Dimension can be weakened by unhealthy habits, negative thoughts, and harmful stimuli. Becoming mentally stronger is how you improve the anti-virus from within. Choosing positivity over negativity, helps as well. By nurturing your mind and body through practices like meditation, exercise, and a healthy diet, you can strengthen your connection and improve your ability to navigate the digital realm of consciousness. Conversely, exposing yourself to harmful content, such as toxic relationships or addictive behaviors, can damage your connection to the mental realm, shared by humanity through intersubjectivity. It's like downloading malware that corrupts your system. By avoiding these harmful influences, you can protect your connection and ensure that you remain grounded and centered. You can also subvert trauma and the pain of rejection, to build your mind to be stronger. Stronger than the desire to die. The stronger your connection to the Mental Dimension, the more fully you can experience and participate in "the digital world" of consciousness. Just as a high-speed internet connection allows you to stream videos, connect with others, and learn new things, a strong connection to the Mental Dimension allows you to access your full potential and live a fulfilling life. Mentality is, essentially, virtual, and our experience of the world is simulated like your computer simulating these words you read. The only escape from it is in the unknown death. To Enduringly Live, To Enduringly Seek The warrior's path, though filled with glory, is often short-lived. The peaceful seeker, however, endures by avoiding conflicts which could disconnect him or her from their inner light, necessary to stay further from evitable death. It is in the balance between rest and the active pursuit of purpose that true fulfillment (or the fabric of happiness) could be embraced peacefully, without the need to cause much harm and ill to one another. To seek risk for the sake of thrill-seeking is to unnecessarily minimize one's potential in the long term... Why risk your life so much when you can live in stability? Cultivating a peaceful mind not only strengthens the connection between your inner world and society, but also preserves one's vitality and desire to be alive. Conclusions Each being is a vessel of potential, a seed able to either bloom or wither. To live a life of purpose is to nurture that seed, to cultivate its unique gifts. The inner light is not to be withered, or death will become sooner than expected. That light is to be kept through ethics, and thus, life itself is kept. The limited time we have on this earth should be spent realizing our potential, leaving a lasting imprint on the world. For those burdened by despair, know that death is inevitable. Death's definition will eventually come regardless of your endeavors. There is no reason to hasten its arrival when so much potential remains to be realized. Embrace the journey, cultivate your inner light, and discover the beauty that lies within any of us. Beauty to be had, to be enjoyed, to be actualized.... and to be overcome.

(Philosocom's Subcategory Directory on Freedom) (Background Music) Logic, Laws, and the Power of Choice Unlimited freedom, as tempting as it may sound, is ultimately an illusion. We exist within the bounds of logic and scientific laws, dictating the realm of the possible. Fantasies of teleportation, for instance, remain firmly in the realm of fiction, limited by the constraints of our current technological understanding (Although subatomic teleportation was only achieved with 1 particle). However, within these established frameworks, a vast ocean of possibilities still lies open for exploration. You are, within reason, free to choose your path, to shape your life as you see fit, should you overcome the influences and pressures of your free will. Yet, with this freedom comes a profound responsibility: the awareness of consequences. Unaware of the ripples your actions create, you risk not only self-harm but also the destruction of the very liberties you seek to enjoy. On a societal scale, it is also one of the reasons that regarding other people's rights is our responsibility as well, if we want to preserve the overall freedom in our societies. As such, in the long term, respecting people's freedoms is in your best interests for your own to be considered as well. This is where the law emerges, not only constraint, but also as one that allows us to be free to a greater extent. If anything, the law should be broken when we are imprisoned in dire settings such as a concentration camp, not when we are freer than the average forced worker in Qatar. While technically possible to transgress the law's boundaries, the consequences can be swift and devastating. Think of the law as a sturdy guardrail along the highway of life, preventing us from careening off the edge and into the abyss. Perhaps, ideally, that's how the law should be, as the abyss in this metaphor symbolizes anarchy, which could lead to civil wars in a society (as represented by Libya's example after Gadaffi's death). To callous disregard the law without compelling reason, be it a conflict with one's conscience or a proven unjust law, is to cause your own self-destruction in the long run. As you reach adulthood, shedding the legal mantle of "juvenile," your freedom expands. No longer are your choices primarily dictated by parents or guardians, no longer are you compelled to follow the prescribed path of formal, oppressing institutions like schools. This newfound autonomy can be exciting, but it also demands a deeper level of self-awareness. With greater freedom comes the weight of greater responsibility. That includes responsibility for your own freedoms. So, while absolute freedom may be a mirage, the windows of possibility within our real-world constraints are vast and wondrous. Explore them with courage, choose your path with wisdom, and remember, even within the boundaries of logic, science, and the law, the power of choice remains in your hands, whether or not your choices will be wise, whether or not they will succeed. Freedom: Boundaries, and the Power of Solitude Freedom is not a solo act unless you go somewhere truly remote and live in a self-sufficient way. But by doing so you will lose the freedom of being able to regularly talk to people, which is a loss of freedom of its own. With every choice you make, you dance within a complex web by logic, science, and the law. These are the firm boundaries that keep your waltz from veering into chaos, which is in a way, the closest thing to absolute freedom, but not something you want to achieve if you want to live in peace. Whatever choice you make will always be conditioned, and won't last forever either way. But none of those should prevent you from trying to truly actualize yourself. Sadly, even money casts its shadow on liberty, allowing celebrities, who are often richer, gain more freedoms in the form of privilege. Under corruption, those who have more power and money may also get their way more than others, while actively reducing others' liberties by their corrupt ways. These are darker forms of freedoms, when the increasing freedom of one or more factions reduces the freedom of another. In a way, the holistic approach, while morally beneficial, can call for a personal reduction of liberty in the favor of collective consideration. Since it's not as present in more-liberal societies, they could in theory breed antisocial behavior, which can be expressed as a disregard for others' rights. That includes rights that involve liberties. But within the realm of your capabilities, and unrestrained by these constraints, you can become bold and assertive as you can be ruthless as well, which reflects on either side of the freedom of expression when communicating with anyone. Should you choose wisdom as well, you at the very least be aware of the consequences that linger in the future you're making based on your decisions and on their success or failure. In Rubinshteinic Individualism, solitude becomes the stage, where your freedom spins without the need for compromise, restraint, or the judgment of others, hence the benefit of mastering more the art of being alone. Living alone, playing loud music (with the risk of neighbors complaining but at least not roommates), or walking naked within your own apartment, are but a few ways solitude liberates us from the disapproving eye of others. Singlehood, even at the price of skin deprivation, also allows freedom when your other choice is conditional love. In the absence of true love, singlehood at the very least casts off the restrictive chains of romantic co-dependency. When you are strong enough you might as well love yourself and rest at that. Additionally, freedom of action blossoms in the absence of "shoulds" and "nevers," leaving you to paint your canvas with the vibrant hues of self-determination. Yet, companionship can also be a place to be yourself, and not a shackle necessarily. While limitations may arise in the intricate choreography of relationships, these can be nuanced, negotiated, and even embraced. The question, then, becomes not whether freedom is limited, but whether the limitations enrich your life, adding depth and texture. In a sense, not everyone wants to be free. It's one of the reasons the state is also a business (AKA social contract). Finally, freedom resonates differently in each soul. The difficulty in that lies in letting people go and be who they want to be and what they want to do. Some thrive within the constraints of tradition and societal norms, while others yearn to be in solitude far more, and are thus asocial. A wife in a conservative community, choosing to nurture her family over a career, paints a different kind of freedom, one defined by dedication and sacrifice. Perhaps, if anything, "freedom" is not only the lack or absence of restraint, but the value which symbolizes our desire to be what we truly want to be: Becoming our ideal selves. Navigating the labyrinth of freedom is therefore a personal journey towards the future you want to lead, without letting restraint or pressure standing in your way. It's about understanding the boundaries, wielding your choices with awareness, and finding the rhythm that resonates with your very being, in hopes that you will finally do what you really want to do in life, uncompromised by external forces who want to take that away from you for whatever reason. As such, with money being a very important part of that, and with living becoming expensive, that is far from easy to do for most people, beyond living from pay-check to pay-check. Whether you're in the vibrant solitude of your own canvas or within the intricate dynamics of relationships, remember, the power of freedom lies not in the absence of limitations, but in the way you choose to dance within them; a way that you deem the most resonating with you. Beyond the Comfort Zone While some find freedom blooming within the familiar confines of their community, others crave a wider stage. Young people, for instance, may yearn to leave the nest, trading hometown comfort for the vibrant unknown of a distant college. This pursuit of potential, this need for a larger space to breathe, can bring them face-to-face with conflict. The values woven into the fabric of their community, represented by concerned elders or traditional expectations, may clash with their desire for autonomy. It could be possible that said authority figures in their community are not fully aware that their selves exist beyond their framework. Those who believe they have a stronger claim to freedom, a right to step beyond the boundaries set by their society, must be prepared for this dance of conflict. Even being a philosopher has its social risks. Embracing the life the individual envisions, the life they believe they deserve, will likely involve navigating a waltz of opposition. When it is in the name of concern, that can even be a good thing. Either way, they must be ready to defend their choices, to explain their motivations, and to face the consequences of their decisions, just like anyone else. The fact that they might be more free-spirited than others does not negate them from being able to take responsibility for their actions. Either way it is the moral thing to do. Even if conflict is inevitable, and even if that tradition opposes your ambitions, we should realize an acknowledgment that the path to individual freedom is rarely a solo journey. It may involve conversations, compromises, and even a willingness to modify one's own desires in the face of valid concerns. Getting power, when not done for the sake of power itself, is done at the sake of achieving a higher goal, unattainable by the individual alone. Those who live and die by power may understand this more. The key lies in understanding that freedom thrives not exclusively in isolation, but in the intricate interplay between individual aspirations and the collective good. The choice to push beyond the comfort zone, to embrace a life that aligns with your deepest needs, is a personal one. It requires courage, self-awareness, and a willingness to engage with the complexities of human connection, so people will intervene less, and even assist, more. For some, the dance with conflict may be a daunting prospect, but for others, it is the very rhythm of their liberation.

(The Subcategory Directory: https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-philosophy-of-cyberpunk-what-we-can-learn-from-the-sci-fi-subgenre-by-mr-igal-shenderey https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-dangers-of-a-mind-net https://www.philosocom.com/post/on-mutually-assured-destruction https://www.philosocom.com/post/why-i-left-whatsapp-the-fallacy-of-progression https://www.philosocom.com/post/functionality-of-biology-and-robotics https://www.philosocom.com/post/honest-thoughts-on-the-industrial-revolution-and-how-to-reduce-its-influence https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-internet-modern-technology-materialism-and-freedom https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-internet-and-how-to-eradicate-boredom https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-contemporary-importance-of-public-transportation https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-bane-of-the-sensitive https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-sin-of-new The Rubinshteinic Guide to Deal With Longing https://www.philosocom.com/post/traditionalist-path https://www.philosocom.com/post/hidden-gem) (Background music) The Evolution of Accessibility in Technology Do you remember when computers were complex machines operated by an elite few? Likely not. By the 1990s, when I was born, computers had already become widely accessible, a trend that continues to evolve. What once required specialized knowledge is now usable even by young children, with countless examples around us of how technology has become second nature in people’s lives. This transformation is due not just to the devices themselves but to the constant development of user-friendly interfaces that make even complex functions accessible to the average person. This trend of making technology accessible has not only simplified our lives but has also democratized opportunities. A person with basic tech skills can access vast information and achieve things previously considered impossible. But this accessibility invites broader implications for expertise, creativity, and even the way we relate to each other. The Democratization of Skills and Knowledge A fascinating result of this evolution is the democratization of skills. People today can produce art, music, software, and even movies, without years of training in those fields. I’ve personally experienced this with music, as I’ve composed pieces despite lacking formal training, thanks to accessible digital tools. In an earlier era, these tools would have been limited to professionals... This raises questions: If technology allows us to perform specialized tasks with ease, what happens to the value of expertise? Are we, in some ways, replacing deep knowledge with shortcuts? There’s certainly a loss when skills become automated, yet there's also an incredible gain—an expansion of what’s possible for everyone, regardless of background. The potential in this democratization is profound, but so are its implications for individuality and authenticity. Technology as an Extension of Self Devices like smartphones, laptops, and televisions have become more than tools—they’re extensions of ourselves. They hold our memories, facilitate our relationships, and even shape our emotions. As a result, technology is not only integral to our functionality but also our identity. Many of us, myself included, find it difficult to imagine life without these devices. They aren’t just conveniences; they’re essential to how we experience the world. Yet, this dependency has its critics. Some argue that overreliance on technology can make us miss out on real-world experiences and harm our relationships and health. Skeptics might argue that we’re losing touch with the world around us. But considering the vast potential in technology, I often find myself asking: with so much available to us in the digital realm, why would we turn away from it? This isn’t a dismissal of the critics but rather a reflection on the powerful allure and practical necessity of modern technology. Pros and Cons of Technological Simplicity While simplified technology grants ease of access, it also introduces concerns. By enabling even the untrained to produce sophisticated work, are we risking a cultural complacency? When access to knowledge and tools is just a button away, we may miss out on the sense of achievement that comes from dedicated effort. It’s a trade-off—while we benefit from this unprecedented access, we also lose some of the depth that comes from a hands-on, comprehensive mastery of skills. On the other hand, simplicity can empower creativity by lowering barriers to entry. A generation ago, one needed advanced skills to compose music, create art, or publish writings. Today, anyone can do these things, often with professional results. This shift promotes diversity and encourages people to share unique perspectives. However, as more tasks become automated, we might wonder whether society is becoming passive, letting technology do much of the thinking and doing on our behalf. The Future of Education and Learning In this landscape, the purpose of education itself could change. Schools might shift from focusing on rote knowledge to fostering critical thinking, creativity, and adaptability. If technology can provide answers, then perhaps education should teach us how to ask the right questions. The value may lie less in what we know and more in how we use knowledge creatively and responsibly. This change doesn’t only affect formal education but also the individual pursuit of self-knowledge and expertise. In a world where technology fills in our gaps, we might become less concerned with specialization and more with versatility, ready to adapt as technology continues to evolve. Imagine a future where learning isn’t about information retention but about applying insights and navigating new landscapes with ethical and innovative thinking. Technology as a Catalyst for Societal Change The simplification of technology is not just a technical matter; it’s a force reshaping society itself. When everyone has access to the same tools, unique talents are celebrated, but some feel the loss of the personal touch that comes from traditional skill-building. This new norm makes us question what it means to be original or authentic when millions share the same tools. Philosophically, we might view technology as a double-edged sword—one that grants us the power to achieve greatness but also blurs the line between what’s genuinely “us” and what’s merely technologically enhanced. This issue will likely continue to deepen as technology advances. How do we honor individuality and avoid losing ourselves in the sameness that accessible technology creates?

How Religion and Democracy Struggle -- Philosophy of Religion Directory https://www.philosocom.com/post/thoughts-on-prayer https://www.philosocom.com/post/thoughts-on-the-shinto-religion-and-its-philosophy https://www.philosocom.com/post/queries-on-the-influence-of-religion-as-manipulation-by-mr-m-svartgold https://www.philosocom.com/post/understanding-the-relationship-between-philosophy-and-judaism-by-mr-john-igwe https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-problem-of-some-religions-in-philosophy-from-a-functional-standpoint https://www.philosocom.com/post/human-in-religion-poem "The Cult of Kefka" -- Nihilism as a Spectrum Embracing Wu Wei in the Modern World: Taoist Wisdom for Today's Challenges (By Mr. Joseph Bright) How to Determine the Existence of Gods https://www.philosocom.com/post/tikkunolam https://www.philosocom.com/post/jesus https://www.philosocom.com/post/dear-god (Background music) Introduction: An Historic Overview Most of the world's countries are democracies. That is even though democracy often suffers by the corrupting trends of the world. Within each country, its own unique fabric of interactions and interplays between values, under the guidelines of norms and cultures. To quote Simeon Strunsky: People who want to understand democracy should spend less time in the library with Aristotle and more time on the buses and in the subway. When a central authority isn't busy oppressing its populace, what it allows is a more multicultural growth of alternative frameworks and organizations. Without its oppression, many people can become leaders in many fields, forming their own businesses, institutions and virtual empires. Additionally, it allows people to venture out from the orthodox matrix of society, deviating and growing in ways unique to them. Whether your country is more capitalistic or more socialist in its politics, under democracy it matters less freedom-wise. A more democratic nation often turns a blind eye to many things, and as a result the average citizenry can get many freedoms, such as the freedom of expression, the freedom to vote, and so on. These freedoms would have been considered privileges in earlier times of human history, who were mainly dominated by kings, sultans and emperors. Understand that despite the dystopian concerns some people might have today, many people today live in freedoms greater than in any period in human history. As such, the only absolute monarchy today, where the king has absolute authority, is just a small, landlocked African nation. Blessed be the fact that most monarchies today are constitutional, or in other words, severely limited. When Religion Corrupts Morality is of the highest importance – but for us, not for God. — Albert Einstein When religion is introduced into official rules, there is a competition with democracy. That, however, applies only when the laws of said religion threaten the freedoms introduced by democracy. Furthermore, religious manipulators could use the very freedoms they are given to commit acts of malice. When these figures of authority become part of state authority, the corruption turns from a civilian matter to more of a public issue. When religion is corrupted by such leaders and their helpers, that is when people might find themselves disillusioned with institutional religion, and instead turning to spirituality and to research of the arcane. Skepticism Under Democratic Fabric When questioning their own faith, people may utilize the power of choice of whether to keep staying within religious norms or go their own ways. Often, major religions get their own sects as a result. Under the framework of democracy, deviating and even creating one's own religion is easier. In the online world, one can find many, many cults. Furthermore, some may even consider fandoms to be cults. Cults are basically small, alternative organizations that pose as societal outsiders. Living below the radar, they are of course known as secret societies. Secret societies/cults/whatever other synonyms, can range from a gang of hooligans, to organized crime, to unrecognized street performers. Their contemporary negative connotation is a quasi-specific term, meaning cults are not necessarily these shady fanatics serving a charismatic love-bomber. The mere image you may have of them negates the fact that even a pirate ship or even a hobbyist micronation can be "a secret society". Sometimes you are secret because you will always have it hard being accepted into society in the first place. That is why so many deviations outside of general society can be considered morally-grey by default. Depending on your perspective, they can be either anti-hero or even anti-villainous. So much as you can see, happens when your democracy allows you to deviate from your own religion. Not only from your own religion but also from traditional norms whom may be questioned by many. Philosophy and Disillusionment God is not separate. God is our very being. He has not to be attained, only discovered. He is hidden in us; there is no need to go anywhere else to find him. -- Osho Philosophy starts from within. As philosophy examines life, it gives life meaning. As such, examining philosophy is also about examining life itself. One might philosophize, "Why do we even need a public religion to force us to do or avoid things regardless of our consent?" The more we question the very public ideas that are part of our lives, the more we may find ourselves deviating from it. Indeed, while tyranny might stem from democracy, democracy is often where philosophy prospers most! As we question tradition, religious or otherwise, we might find ourselves on an unintended path of self-discovery, where we discover who we are not only in our questions but also in our actions. As you can tell, philosophy is also a way of life and goes beyond mere academic discourse. You might find religions and philosophy weirdly intertwined as a result as philosophy is what allows individual and collective deviations in the first place. Philosophy is not a mere ideology as it is a tool meant to examine ideology. Of course, an ideology can also be religious, when it comes to the matters of the divine. Philosophy may not only examine and critique ideologies and religions, but also may create ones, as seen in the cult of Pythagoras. The State As a Distant Authority As you can tell, state intervention in philosophy and religion is not a requirement. As such, Japan, despite its interfaith of Shintoism and Buddhism, remains largely atheist in its population. Religion is something that can be practiced even without being the mark of the state. In other words, you don't need state funds or support to have you perform the rituals, the holidays, the traditions, and the prayers required in your own religion. When the state is a distant authority, instead of an intervening, oppressive one, people are more free to do as they please under the obliviousness of society. I don't see why I, as an irreligious man, have to cater to state religion beyond my attempts to survive in ordinary society that cares little about me as an individual. I see less and less reasoning to seek global recognition when I can simply be recognized for my immense philosophical work by those who find it relevant to their lives. The Biological Imperative: Survive! Therefore, due to the problems between many religions and the freedom of democracy, there is no perfect solution to create full harmony between these two values. What should be used instead is the understanding that we need to survive if we want to live the life we want to live. If you cancel your official religion, it will upset the population of that religion, and if you cancel democracy, the state will become a theocratic dictatorship without the ability to vote for a party or regent. Perhaps we shouldn't resort to any extreme! Perhaps we should focus on respecting our different ways of life! In one way or another, they would always have to collide with one another. That is because we never exist in a vacuum and to quote Epictetus: Some things are in our control and others not. Things in our control are opinion, pursuit, desire, aversion, and, in a word, whatever is our own action. Things not in our control are body, property, reputation, command, and, in one word, whatever is not our action. In rulership, be it within the state or outside of it, you cannot please everyone. Attempting to please is not something philosophers often do in general, meaning that being a philosopher already is a social risk in your respective nations. A Factor Of Democratic Deviation: Being Misunderstood Either way, the state may fail to understand that it alienates some of its population. Forcing on them the same limitations that religious people place on themselves anyway is also a cause for deviation. In dictatorships, deviation from orthodoxy is far harder and can be heavily destructive for both the loyalist factions of the state, and those who rebel against it. For me, the idea of using physical violence against someone just because he thinks and believes differently than you is absurd. I prefer to avoid the battle, as Sun Tzu would suggest. If the religious are disciplined enough to follow their own path religiously (no pun intended), then why should that path be imposed on the rest of the population? The very fact that it does makes people want to deviate from it in the first place. That is even when the state with an official religion, is also a democracy. Democracy permits, while religion limits. When freedom is allowed while a specific religion prohibits it, the authorities need to decide: which value do we prefer most? Conclusion When you allow people to be themselves, however, and deviate without concerning of their practice of rituals, you can allow yourself, as state official, to focus on issues of far greater concern: The military. The welfare of the citizens. Finances. Your own free time. Thus, when freedom is preferred over religion, the true value of freedom can be recognized and appreciated... As the more freedoms we all have, the less we can be concerned on public matters, and be more ourselves, instead. Like neighbours who cannot force one another to move, these two values need to just get along with one another. There is, you see, there is no hope in sight, choosing one and cancelling the other. What we should never, ever cancel, is our ability to live in harmony and in inner peace.

The Subcategory: Analysing My Fatigue: The Need for a Positive Dream The Drained One -- a Poem Exhaustion Days Life as an Exhausted Man Stress and Exhaustion As a Philosopher -- How I Refuse to Relent The Horror of Rumination -- A Critique of Philosophizing Shadow of Veronica -- An A.I. Story of Eccentricity and Fatigue Away From The Hermitic Philosopher -- A Very Mysterious Storytime Through A Former Friend's Perspective On Being Severely Misunderstood Over the Years -- The Tempt of Misanthropy (And How To Reduce It) The Existential Isolator (Poem) Accepting Reality III: How I Liberated Myself From 15 Years of Pain A Return to the Darker Past https://www.philosocom.com/post/architecture Introduction The Reaping Fatigue Era was a personal era in my life from 2018 to August 2023 where I became fatigued to the point of being a physical handicap. It also negatively affected my cognition, even though I still managed to write a lot... I solved the Reaping Fatigue Era by using two methods: Accepting reality, and developing a neuroplastic method. This poem was written in an extreme state of mind where I thought my lifelong legacy is at risk due to not having a solution on the horizons. As said, I brought up solutions of my own, as no one cared enough to help me with it practically. The doctors were too uncaring to assist me quickly, so the condition deteriorated. With a "new me" that I developed, I returned to thinking far better, along with researching existing and new articles on Philosocom. And indeed, the quality of my articles have improved ever since.... And I did it for my readership). ******** The Poem Imagine having so many ideas to write about, Imagine so many possibilities that wait for you, To reap them and enjoy their abundance, from north to south. Now imagine the vast majority of them taken away, probably for good, By a neurological disorder that does not care for thee. That is, you see, the incurable fate of me. Imagine wanting to write about something, and though you have the time, You lack the energy to even think deeply, so you resort to rhyme. It does not care whether you're a paragon of justice or full of crime, It can make you live on welfare's dime, Making you a slave to taxpayer's work time. Days pass by, and even though you want to write, The lack of energy turns you into a wingless kite; That which is made to fly across the skies, And yet, you lack the energy to do so, only left on the Earth, to strive. It is not mercy nor pity which I seek, For I only wish to be remembered like the old philosophers of Greek. Death is something I only want as a symbol of accomplishment, So I will wait for it patiently, as for many other things, I can't. I refuse entertaining mockery due to many a disability, I care less if it happens, for it is a realistic inevitability. As long as I can still write, the idea of death I don't want to entertain, Maybe another time I will have enough energy to properly write again. There is a great competition in this niche, of that I am aware, But as long as I am too weak to write articles, it's difficult to even care, For life with this reaping fatigue is sort of a nightmare, But perhaps another time I will write a new piece, in my lair. The Reaping Fatigue is a reaper which makes it too little to deliver; The idea of a greater life, and thus a bigger ego, makes it near impossible, to rationally consider. For some reason I was punished by a chronic disorder that streams like a river, A flow that drains energy that could've been used for something bigger. But you have my word, as a philosopher and as a mister: As long as I can still write, I will consider a new article to be written and thus published nearer. Should I permanently, of writing, be too weak and even weaker. Then... I will rest in hope my fatigue will not become my own grim reaper. Escaping this mortal world is not something of which I am a believer, So, in that case, I will just re-share until death will linger. Even though there are many days which of new writing I wish to be your server, I just need to face the truth and resume my duty as a re-sharer.

Art by Mrs. Esther Drucker Nowodworski (RIP, Rubinshtein's Grandmother) The Heroic Directory https://www.philosocom.com/post/trying-to-understand-a-narcissist-s-rationale-captain-quark-character-analysis https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-flawed-philosophy-of-the-hero https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-philosophical-reason-as-to-why-i-play-the-bad-guy-in-certain-games Granny's Ambition (A Poem) https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-heisenberg-of-philosophy-within-a-shadowy-intellect https://www.philosocom.com/post/the-multi-layered-shadow-box-poem https://www.philosocom.com/post/elementary-to-me-poem https://www.philosocom.com/post/mike-ehrmantraut https://www.philosocom.com/post/toledo-sword https://www.philosocom.com/post/static-shock https://www.philosocom.com/post/life-as-a-hero (Background music) Alex Mos's Synopsis To classify someone as a hero or a villain is often a matter of perspective. The subjectivity of good and evil deeds is especially apparent in politics and wars. Collective allegiances, affiliation bias, and the long-term consequences for different sides shape diverse views on the righteousness of one's actions. You can become a hero if your contribution to humanity is significant and recognized by others. Promote a noble cause by working in a highly appreciated field and consider volunteering. Be a role model for others and a decent person. Individuals are considered heroes when they significantly impact the world and are remembered for their contributions. They serve a greater purpose than themselves, such as justice, altruism, and freedom, and are also inspiring leaders. If someone wants to be a hero, they must maintain a respectable and honest reputation throughout life. The author doesn't see himself as a hero but aspires to do selfless good in the world, inspired by the noble character Lazlo from a game. (2025 Note: For the sake of my sanity, I will not save more people than I already did. 7 is enough for me). Heroism and Villainism in a Complex World The relationship between heroism and villainism is often far more intricate than a simple good versus evil dichotomy. This complexity becomes especially apparent in arenas like politics and war, where motivations, consequences, and perspectives can be questioned as well as lambasted. Freedom Fighters or Terrorists? Those fighting for independence can be praised as heroes by their people, but branded terrorists by the opposing side. When it's prone to subjectivity, a subject worthy of redemption, who could be the one right in this regard? Founding Fathers or Tyrants? Historical figures revered for establishing nations can also be seen as oppressive rulers who subjugated others. Military Heroes or Butchers? Military leaders celebrated for their victories may also be criticized for the casualties inflicted during wartime. Wouldn't you consider one-man armies as impressive, but school shooters as deplorable? What if they're two sides of the same coin? These blurred lines highlight the difficulty of objectively labeling someone a hero or villain. Perceptions are shaped by collective allegiances, affiliation bias, and the long-term impacts of actions of different sides. Even violence against a seemingly "evil" force like the Nazis can be a source of debate. Should we, in our actions, enable the same aggression we condemn? Is it the right thing to do, or a way to express a natural evil? Leaving a Legacy Through Good Deeds As long as you don't fight or shoot people for a living, you too can get the chance to be considered a hero, as long as you fulfill the following criteria: Be significant: You do not have to be globally famous like a celebrity, but you do need to be known enough in order for your deeds to be recognized by someone. Some are recognized during their lives, some after their deaths. Nonetheless, a person who, on a daily basis, feeds pigeons isn't necessarily a hero. Your significance can come from many sources, such as a certain position, certain deeds you have done throughout your life, your goals in life, and so on. Promote a noble cause: Do or work in a field that is considered highly appreciated, but it doesn't have to be luxurious. Being a kindergarten teacher for the autistic can technically make you a hero, at least in the eyes of those whose subject of autism is very important to them. Volunteering in certain places, such as third world countries, is also possible and even encouraged. This is also an important life lesson. Having a cause can help add meaning to your life. Present an example: Be a model for whatever is considered good and valued. People will not only remember you for the deeds you have done, but also for who you were. Be polite, listen more, and appreciate the existence of others in your life. As long as you're a decent person and not a jerk, this should be the least of your worries when becoming a hero. Why should one become a hero? Because those who are considered heroes have a chance to be remembered not only for the rest of their lives but also far after their deaths. With such remembering, one can leave a great impact on the world, and if you care for both your own image and for your contribution to humanity, the hero's path should be considered regularly. I had one "friend" throughout my childhood and early teen years; his name was Lazlo and he was a video game character, that I literarily used to identify him with me (even though, of course, I knew I am not him). To this day I consider him to be a role model for me. One that is brave, kind and gets the job done. That is the ultimate way of becoming a true hero -- by becoming a role model for others to study and follow after his or her image and example. One, therefore, doesn't have to have superpowers, or strength or even high intelligence -- all a hero needs is to do good and to serve as a proper example to follow by. A hero is also one that serves a greater purpose other than themselves; their inner sense of duty has to multiply itself and be within other people as well; they serve as triggers for good that spread throughout the planet. Because of that, a hero must be an "authority" of some sort, one that people would look at, admire and respect his or her intentions. Without a sense of servitude, a hero can fall into the pit of narcissism. Thus, he or she is both a "master" and a servant. -- the "master" of those who follow them, and the servant of whatever is good -- justice, altruism, equality, freedom and so on. And the more serving they are, the less they would prioritize themselves. That is if they are willing to be more heroic. Finally, there is a great obstacle in the path of heroism, related to the issue of reputation. Those who want to preserve their good name after their deaths, must make sure that they won't do anything that is greatly frowned upon, such as sexual harassment, and other crimes that involve harming others. Michael Jackson, while not necessarily a hero, got his name stained by his p****philic intentions. Because of that, his reputation will probably never be the same, despite his contributions to music. If you're a politician, make sure you won't take bribes or do anything corrupt. Your corruption can be both discovered and forever stained by your legacy as a public servant. Conclusions We can say that once one achieves the status of a hero or any other grand status, achievement is insufficient. After achieving much, you now need to preserve it through your deeds and decisions throughout your life. Even if you're to die like a hero, your secrets might be ultimately discovered, and there's nothing you can do other than not committing these secrets in the first place. A hero may be more honest, as honesty is a virtue. As for myself, I don't view myself as a hero, but I do aspire to do good in this world, even if I won't necessarily get something in return. Merely because I basically have all I'll ever need to live. I was merely taught to be a good human being and to avoid the exact opposite. If I ever wanted to be a parent, I'd try to teach my children to do the same. I was also inspired by that character, Lazlo, to be good, as he has never done a bad deed (canon-wise, of course). Mr. Nathan Lasher's Feedback I believe heroes and villains all exist on a spectrum with our actions determining which way we lean. Nobody can be defined as one or the other by them simply being who they are. Your actions determine which you are so therefore only you can decide if you are a hero or not. Can’t be a hero or a villain if you don’t do anything. (Apart from the world about to be blown up and you decide to do nothing) You can be a hero as much as you can be an action. Heroes and villains are those who act. You aren’t a hero because you say you're a hero, unless you're Donald Trump, because who knows what is going through his mind, you are a hero because your actions say you are. [Being a] hero is all about nonverbal communication. What you do is more important than what you say. You become a hero by acting like a hero. Actions are the best defense against people saying otherwise. Being a hero is nothing more than accumulating the right characteristics. The more characteristics you gain the more likely that people will notice it. Anyone can be a hero if they so choose to be. But who wants to live with that kind of pressure? Nobody can fathom what it would be like to be perfect like that. Plus most humans tend to occasionally do bad here and there. What makes the anti-hero such an attractive concept? [There's] no pressure as you aren’t the type of person who people would expect it from. Added bonus is that it doesn’t mean you aren’t capable of taking actions and surprising them. If people understood, you really are the one who creates yourself. You create yourself by actions. Simple as that. You want to be the best in the world at something? Start by having the same actions and habits of a person who would be. Imagine what first place would look like and do the actions which are required to make it a reality. Life is all about action. If you want to be someone, start by taking the actions of the person you want to become.

(Background music) (Philosocom's Subcategory Directory on Despair and Surrender) The Great Man... is colder, harder, less hesitating, and without fear of 'opinion'; he lacks the virtues that accompany respect and 'respectability,' and altogether everything that is the 'virtue of the herd.' If he cannot lead, he goes alone... He knows he is incommunicable: he finds it tasteless to be familiar... When not speaking to himself, he wears a mask. There is a solitude within him that is inaccessible to praise or blame. -- Friedrich Nietzsche Solitude as Sanctuary, not Surrender A life of solitude, while controversial and unacceptable to some, can offer peace and serenity. However, those trapped in counterproductive mindsets may not grasp the potential bliss of serenity found in being alone, a concept I've explored as "Bdiduta" ("Solitarus") in my native language quadrilogy. (Solitarus/Bdiduta essentially signifies the love of and acceptance of solitude as a viable life path). In response to an article I wrote about solitude, a commenter equated it with succumbing to the power of the External World, labeling it "defeatism." Let me, through logic and personal experience, explain why a solitary lifestyle isn't inherently defeatist, even if it might occasionally be. Here's why solitude isn't necessarily defeatist: Refuge from Negativity: Solitude can offer refuge from the external world's noise, pollution, and stress. Perhaps it is not wise to waste your health on a society that does not regard nor understands the long term implications of stress. Inner Exploration: It can be a time for introspection and self-reflection, paving the way for personal growth and development. Pursuing Personal Dreams: Freedom from societal expectations allows one to pursue one's own goals and aspirations. This isn't necessarily egoistic, when these dreams can hold an altruistic value. Even a quest for vengeance can hold the same value. Of course, solitude can also have a negative side, leading to loneliness and depression. However, it's crucial to avoid letting solitude tip into isolation. When chosen for the right reasons, solitude can be a positive and enriching experience. A sanctuary to what you can control and not necessarily surrender to what you cannot control. By shedding light on the misconceptions surrounding solitude, we can empower individuals to embrace its potential for peace, growth, and personal fulfillment. After all, "Solitarus" about isn't defeatism; it's a conscious choice to craft a life aligned with one's own needs and desires, whether or not it goes against the external world's desires and expectations of you. For your life belongs to you, in a world largely devoid of slavery (even though, according to the global slavery index, slavery is still a problem worldwide). From Loyal Dog to Luminous Beacon: Transforming Betrayal into Brilliance The gnawing silence from once-familiar faces feels like a betrayal carved into my soul, as different people experience pain differently. Each "unfollow" and "unsubscribe" wasn't just a digital blip, it was a shard of ice piercing the warmth I'd naively built around them. During the times where I was far more sensitive, these weren't fleeting internet features; they were people I'd held in high regard, as I was too empathic to not disregard (making high empathy a liability to an extent). And yet, perhaps that shared history wasn't enough for them to offer the same respect, not even a flicker of the loyalty I'd showered them with. Empathy isn't without its individual limits, and can be depleted over time like a fuel tank. To vanish without a whisper, to abandon a bond forged over years, is a cruel form of ghosting, normalized under the contemporary era. For some, it feels like being stabbed in the back, left bleeding in the dark with only the unanswered questions for company. Haven't they seen the pain etched into my desperate need for answers? Or do they simply not care due to the modern factors of apathy? The burning feelings of betrayal ignited a fire within me, a mix of hurt and defiance towards the man I once was. I might've been left in the dark, but I'll become my own light, a beacon that the world can't ignore. A beacon that can help others with insights. No longer will I beg nor depend my mental state on affection or chase the uncertainty of love and friendship, as a necessity for my mental state. No. I'm done seeking validation from those who couldn't or don't want to see my worth. I'm done being thirsty for love. I will live either way, fueled by my hunger for work, power and contribution to humanity. I will live despite the pain, and I will use adversity not for victimhood but as a source for greater strength. In the shadows of my solitude, I will build an article empire, worthy of global relevance. My victory over years of pain, both physical and mental, will benefit all who wish to be benefitted. No longer a dog, I become a Rain, Pourer of articles. Revenge Through Reclamation This isn't about revenge alone; it's about reclamation. I have an entire life to prove them wrong, to show them the magnitude of their loss. I'll build myself into a beacon, a testament to the resilience that blooms from the ashes of betrayal, caused by those who were too cowardly to stay and help. My energies, once yearning for their approval, will be channeled into a purpose that burns brighter than their silence. I don't care for them anymore, because they refused caring for me. Whether or not they will understand, matters not to me. Instead, I'll channel my days to building a life that worships work, a life that screams of a man that mainly wants to contribute to others, and little else. They may have forgotten my loyalty, but the world will remember my growing, renovated legacy, long after both of our deaths. I refuse caring for those who have no desire to care for me. I did so too much, and it was a waste of my time and energies. Through my solitary work I will use the past not as a grudge but as a fuel for a life full of devotion to others. Because writing is a most solitary activity, also designated for self-discovery. When people use solitary activities to transform themselves into stronger, more capable beings, they are not defeatist escapists. No. They are people who seek to nurture power from within, in order to endure the hardships of life, more easily. And no matter what I will have to go through in life, I choose endurance. And through my ascetic practice, I will reclaim the honor I once had at my days as a student. And this time, I will let no one stand in my path. Not even my skin hunger. Either way, I see no reason to result to victimhood's mentality easily.

Article Overview by Mr. C. Kingsley and Co. "Grasping Human Nature Flaws and Universal Humanity" is an insightful exploration of the complexities and imperfections of human nature, focusing on various inherent flaws such as blind faith, unchecked passions, egocentrism, emotional dependence, addiction, and self-sacrifice tendencies . The article is universally relatable, making it accessible to a broad audience. The article offers thought-provoking insights, encouraging readers to reflect on aspects of human nature often overlooked or ignored. It challenges the notion of blind belief and suggests that knowledge should take precedence whenever possible. The exploration of passion, ego, and emotional dependence encourages a deeper examination of our own behaviors and motivations, fostering a deeper understanding of oneself and others. The use of concrete examples and relatable scenarios makes the article engaging and understandable. The section on emotional dependence uses everyday experiences to illustrate how attachment can be a double-edged sword, helping the reader connect with the content. The inclusion of quotes from Dr. Christopher Johnson adds credibility and depth to the discussion on addiction, framing it not just as a personal failing but also as a coping mechanism with an evolutionary basis. The article balances realism and optimism by emphasizing the potential for growth and improvement. The conclusion is motivating, urging readers to work on their flaws and suggesting that self-discipline and rationality can help overcome these limitations. This approach prevents the article from feeling overly pessimistic and instead leaves the reader with a sense of hope and a call to action. The article delves into philosophical and psychological concepts, such as the nature of the ego, the role of desire, and the implications of mortality. This depth adds a layer of sophistication to the piece, making it more than just a surface-level critique of human behavior. Mr. Tomasio's writing style is both engaging and accessible, with rhetorical questions, direct addresses to the reader, and varied sentence structures keeping the reader's attention. The occasional humor, such as "Hehehe... suffering, by the very things we desire," adds a personal and relatable tone to the article. In conclusion, "Grasping Human Nature Flaws and Universal Humanity" is a compelling exploration of human imperfections that encourages introspection and personal growth. ********* "Its Our flaws that make us Human, not our perfections." -- John Duran (Subcategory on Flaws) (Background music) Introduction After contemplating much, I've found plenty of flaws in our human nature (nature being who we are intuitively; our natural selves). I have thus attempted to create a list covering the most I can remember. See this as some food for thought: · Faith: We tend to be more drawn to beliefs than facts, and facts won't necessarily change our beliefs. We can easily believe in something without the means necessary to know it’s real, i.e., without doing research. And, thus, we easily fall into blind belief and live in complete illusions or half-truths. Furthermore, some of us praise the concept of faith, when it is far better to know, than to believe. That's true at its best when it's actually possible to confirm the factual validity of our faith (not necessarily religious faith). After all, why is there a need to believe, when one can try to know? Faith is no proper substitute for knowledge and shouldn't be treated as such. And for those who don't have time or power to research, we can at least keep an open mind. · Passions: We can easily be the slaves of our own desires. Because of them we're able to be manipulated, deceived and lose our freedoms. It's all because of this inner burning inside of us, whose fulfillment gratifies us for the short term, and whose dependency leads to greed. Although it is a desire, it is also a variant of suffering, like wanting to drink something after hours of not doing so. It's not to say that it does not fulfill a certain functionality, like the one I mentioned earlier (short term fulfillment). When we are passionate about things beyond our realistic reach, our suffering is both long and intense. That's even if such torment can be easily avoided by avoiding the worship of fantasies. But the monotony of realism, although provided as security, is too boring for the ideals which we cannot achieve. · Egos: Let’s admit it, it can be hard not continuously having our egos be patted by others, as long as we depend on external validation. The more we pat our egos, the more limited we become in our perception of the world around us, as we focus on ourselves more, and on the agony of others, less. And when we see that someone or something is better than us, instead of learning from them to be better and improve, we can easily get jealous and become depressed because we realize that we are not the number one at something. The egos can be the gates of delusion, of making us think we are bigger and more important, in the grand scheme of things, than we actually are. However, it is a necessary evil, for without a sense of self, there will not be a good sense of self-esteem as well, and this could lead to us underestimating ourselves and our potential. On the other hand, those willing to commit harakiri to repent for their sins are, in a way, too good for this ego-driven world, if they are ready to sacrifice their own lives in the name of a morality greater than themselves. · Emotional Dependence: Our need for attachment can exist as a double-edged sword. Because of this need we can easily trust and be attached to someone else, to the point they may have control over us in which we are not aware of. And so we are deceived by our illusions of safety and, sometimes, autonomy, while in the reality we are enslaved by a higher, yet hidden, authority. Be careful not to bond to those who do not deserve your trust. The biggest strike it can bring to us is when the object of emotional dependence dies. It's something which is, you know, only natural in this finite existence. It's the ultimate tragedy of romantic love, and one that can be solved through rational self-love. It is sad not because of the experience of death, but because you know, resurrection is impossible, and thus, they will never come back. Attachments are there to be broken by the executioner that is time. For time is a great teacher, but one that kills all its students. · Thirst For Power: While power is necessary for the general order of the social construct, it is easy to become addicted to a concept many of us see as success (and thus, positive). As we climb the ladder, we are introduced to a new drug that may eventually defeat our conscience and make us addicted. This is called corruption, and sadly, it is not rare in our world to have people defying their sense of justice over the good feeling of having authority, wealth, and social luxury. Speaking of which: · Addictions: Human nature is built in such a way that it can be easily addicted to certain substances. In fact, anything that makes us feel good, can addict us. Habits and people, too. The more addicted we are, the less control we have over our lives, as we give way to the source of addiction to satisfy us. That, is while in practice it can cause harm to ourselves and, at times, others. Addiction, however, has its evolutionary role. According to Dr. Christopher Johnson: One thing I tell many of my patients is that their addiction — in the very early stages — likely developed as a coping mechanism to protect them from painful emotions or as a practical strategy to enable them to handle extremely difficult life circumstances. In other words, their addiction developed in order to help them survive. · Suffering Tendencies: Have you found it grim that the most powerful species on Earth, the human race, which dominates the planet,can easily suffer from high self-sacrifice rates? But what role does self-sacrifice play in the grand scheme of things? One that goes beyond esoteric purposes such as redemption or terrorism? What good does self-sacrifice bring? And I'm not even speaking about soldiers who hugged grenades to protect their comrades. If everything in existence is planned from the very beginning, why, then, would there be a plan for the voluntary end of life? Of course, we have free will, which is expressed by our freedom of choice. And it is, in the end, our decision. The decision to continue, or the decision to find ourselves in a metaphorical state of darkness. But the conscious choice seems to be very counter-productive to the biological imperative of survival, just like being addicted to something that could reduce your overall lifespan. · Lack of Awareness: Many of us can easily forget the general picture we are set in, and therefore we might cause problems and make mistakes that could easily be prevented if we just waited a little before taking action and thought the best we could about the various consequences our actions may lead to. It is even worse when we deliberately choose to remain ignorant when we have the opportunity to be more knowledgeable than we currently are. Knowledge therefore has the power to prevent unnecessary suffering once applied for that purpose. · Emotional Drainage: If I didn't suffer from emotional exhaustion, I could become a better writer than I am today. I could write pages after pages of books, articles, and poems every single day if only I had all the ideas I needed. Far more than the massive amounts I already did. This is why, unfortunately, I am aware that I need to stop, and confine myself to rest. Just think of all the productivity we humans could have if we didn’t suffer from such exhaustion! We would become better writers, industrialists, engineers, and so forth. Consider how much further we could have progressed as a civilization than we currently are! Conclusions These are the major flaws I have learned about so far while writing this article. We humans, by the power of these flaws, are very limited, easily-manipulated beings. We can easily become slaves to just about anything, and most especially to that which brings us gratification... Hehehe... suffering, by the very things we desire. This does not mean, however, that we cannot improve and be stronger and more capable. These flaws can be worked on. Improve in the fields that deserve our efforts, should we train our bodies and minds hard enough, in discipline and/or asceticism. We might find out that we are more capable than we think we are. Develop your rationality! Develop your character! Work on these flaws and you might find life more bearable.

(Background music) The Illusion of Trend Conformity The perceived "need" to keep up with trends to avoid being left behind, is largely an illusion. As a Hebrew proverb states, "Not everything that shines is golden," and just because a new device or trend emerges doesn't automatically make it superior to its previous counterparts. It's crucial to distinguish between conformity, benefit and necessity. None of the three always relate to one another, if at all. Nowadays, conforming to trends isn't essential for survival, whether it's beneficial or not to do it regardless. As with the case of Nazi Germany, massive conformation eventually led to its own downfall. We won't be deprived of food, shelter, or other basic needs simply for refusing to follow the latest fad, unless we happen to live in a draconian, authoritarian state like North Korea, which then conforming can save your lives. But since there is no actual risk involved for most of us, this link between conformity and survival is likely a remnant of our ancient past, when humans lived in tribes, not nations. During these tribal times, social rejection could have severe consequences, including abuse, punishment, execution or even exile into the dangers of the wilderness. In far less civilized times conforming to the norms would indeed ensure your safety. Perhaps we fear missing out on trends because we fear rejection, a vestige of our tribal past where rejection could have existential consequences. While conformity still holds some importance in specific contexts like workplaces or the military, we certainly don't need to blindly follow trends like sheep to avoid societal repercussions. Not owning a smartphone, for example, won't lead to banishment from modern society. Beyond the Biased Lens of Hype Even in the realm of essential utilities like refrigerators and air conditioners, we may find devices that are decades old still work faithfully. That's while their flashy, contemporary counterparts might already be facing replacement, and generate much toxic waste to the world. This observation underscores my approach to acquiring new possessions: Never rush into a purchase simply because something is new. My trusty PS2 served me well for over a decade, bringing joy and entertainment for countless evenings. Only when its rustiness and worn-out controllers made it unusable did I finally upgrade to a PS4. Although there's a PS5, I'm content to wait another decade or two before considering it. This isn't about affordability; it's about embracing the potential longevity of existing technology. It's also about what I call "The same result problem". The trend of remastering classic video games for modern consoles seem to highlight this point. Games that once dominated the period can still be enjoyed and offer value, even if they've become less relevant in the gaming industry. Many of you, of certain demographics, might likely share this sentiment. Therefore, resist the urge to buy things solely because they're new. Newness doesn't guarantee optimal functionality or fulfillment of purpose. Often, older items already fulfill these needs perfectly. In fact, buying something new might even result in a less-than-desired product or one that simply duplicates the function of something you already own. I reject the notion that keeping up with trends is a requirement for social acceptance, although I'm not the one in charge of such affairs. Such pressure is not only unnecessary but also stems from a flawed perspective. If someone can't appreciate you for not blindly following trends, their appreciation is inherently flawed. That's because the individual is more than these trends, and is sure to outlast many of them. Such shallow view judges individuals based on external factors like "modernity" and "advancement" rather than their personalities. This biased perspective is fostered under peer pressure, promoting questions like, "What will people think if I don't conform?" Ultimately, we deserve acceptance for who we are, as individuals. If someone refuses to see beyond superficial details, can we truly call them worthy of our time, of our depths? Such individuals are, in essence, shallow. Why compromise our own pursuits to appease those who are intolerant of our intrinsic uniqueness? Other sources, may criticize shallow people due to other reasons as well. By recognizing the value of what we already have, and resisting the temptation of innovation, we can free ourselves from the tyranny of trends. And we can also embrace a more mindful and less wasteful approach to consumption. Doing so will ultimately allow us to prioritize genuine needs over fleeting desires, and be able to distinguish them better. Rethinking the Value of "Old" Even beyond concerns about conformity, a more pressing question may come to mind... Why do we discard perfectly functional technology, simply because it's not "the falsehood of trendy" anymore? Why throw away good and functional devices, clothes, and other products just because they're considered outdated? We must recognize that oldness does not equate to uselessness. In fact, embracing the longevity of existing technology (and clothes, for that matter) can contribute significantly to environmental well-being. And save us much needed money, of course, in a world that is only getting more expensive to live in. By discarding perfectly usable items in pursuit of the latest trends, we contribute directly to e-waste and pollution. Consider the environmental impact of manufacturing new devices versus utilizing existing ones. Replacing a functional computer simply to conform to social expectations, especially within a specific social circle like "geeks," or "neckbeards" is not only unnecessary but also negatively impactful to the environment. See how certain conventions can deteriorate the very Earth we live on, just for some validation. Is the fleeting social validation gained from showcasing the latest gadgets worth the harm inflicted on the planet? I think the answer is pretty clear unless you're as desperate as a simp. Consider the financial implications as well. Succumbing to the pressure of trends can often lead to unnecessary expenses, further highlighting the need for a conscious approach to managing your finances wisely. Why not explore ways to repurpose, repair, or even donate them to those who need them more than us? After all it's the altruistic thing to do. This mindful approach, both to the world and others, allows us to extend the lifespan of existing products, reduce waste, and contribute to others. Especially the needy and the poor. Moreover, it encourages creativity as we find new ways to utilize older items for contemporary use. Furthermore, retro technology and clothing are often cherished by collectors, putting in the practical importance of design and functionality, as still relevant as their contemporary counterparts. Embracing the beauty and functionality of older items is but a way to not waste money unnecessarily just for short-term excitements, at the expense of our wallets and our hard-earned salaries. Conclusions The pressure to keep up with every trend is often an unnecessary burden, making it, often, a waste of our time and stress. We must learn to distinguish genuine needs from the fleeting whims of fashion and social pressure to avoid not only unnecessary spending, but also being addicted to it. As individuals, we have the freedom to choose which trends we embrace and which we leave behind, without sacrificing our well-being or social acceptance. By prioritizing functionality and environmental responsibility, we can create a future where "old" doesn't necessarily mean "useless." And that is true already, aside from the fact that trends, and those who follow them religiously, ignore it. This shift in mindset allows us to break free, at least a bit more, from the cycle of endless desire and embrace a more mindful relationship with the world around us.

(Background music) “I wish you were dead!” screamed the desert hermit in front of no one in particular. Well, at least no one outside of him. A hermit’s life isn't not necessarily dull, nor lacking or boring, as some or many would claim. Living by your own for long periods of time can help you discover the inner richness of one’s consciousness and subconsciousness -- for the good and for the bad. This is why many people are not strong enough to be by themselves for the long term - who knows what hideous creatures may lurk inside each and every one of us, of our constantly chattering mind? “Why, why aren’t you all dead already?!” the hermit shouted from the comforts of his little hermitage. He had a bad time today. He wanted to use this particular day for philosophical contemplation, while being awake and aware. However things did not turn the way he wished them to be, and instead he begun to sense what he called “the Demons Inside Us All" or “the guardians of the locked neck”, or the "Order of Globus Hystericus" which started to arouse and stress his strong, traumatized muscles. He did not leave his entire family, friends and career to become a merchant for anxiety! He did it to evolve into a higher self. But these annoying pests of repressed demons seem to make him more awake, more than he shall ever be, always watching him, so it seems, like some sort of a big brother. If he wanted to be supervised he would have joined a joint monastery, where the monks live as a one big commune. He didn’t want anything of that. He had enough social activities in his childhood. This is the period, although young, where he shall permanently live as a desert hermit for the rest of his life. Anyways, it is too late to return back, as he lost the way back long ago, and generally has no idea where he is in comparison to the world's common identities. His social identity is non-existent now, so it is of no use now in this silent great desert, where the only sounds of living come only from yourself. As the day passed and the night begun to shine its darkness and stars upon the earth's sky, the frustrated, bearded hermit have declared that it is enough and he should sleep, for he needs to gather more water and supplies in long, long walks under the heat of the merciless sun that awaits him tomorrow. Fortunately he built his residence upon a high point, where he may find himself when lost and, hopefully not, under danger. And so his anxiety began to sink and sink into the unknown abyss of his subconscious, and thus the legions of demons have left his aware mind, for now, at least. Finally, when he begun to be in the kingdom of dreams, he encountered a certain maiden he has seen at some point of his young life. The dream itself wasn’t as much detailed as he would have hoped, but the inner projection of the maiden, all covered in blue robes of blue like the sea and the sky, simply said: “As a solitaire, if you wish for your inner demons to be dead, you first must be dead yourself, killing them in the process”. The young hermit, knowing that he chose his life directly because he wanted to live, has decided to spare his inner enemies, and to welcome them into his humble abode in the sea of sand. It seems that even in the most remote of places on the land, one always has neighbours, whether inside him or outside of him.... It was just like he knew from his former life among the civilization in an overpopulated city. the only thing one can do with noisy neighbours while staying alive - is to live in peace with them; to acknowledge, and accept their existence. Thus the young hermit remembered his past, and so he shall do from now on with the entities that lurk beyond the walls of his consciousness... In whatever an apartment he may never know who, or what, is going on in there. Around him and inside of him. And so, he has been reborn. Reborn as a greater seeker of the truth. An explorer of the mind and its powers...

(Philosocom Writing Directory) (Philosocom's Subcategory Directory on Potential and Hope) (Poem Analysis By Mr. C. Kingsley and Co. Below) The void, it does not go away, No matter how much you write a day. It tells you, that you must write more and more, In the name of prosperity, and to be of better worth. It does not stop, the voice inside the head, That tells you that all you wrote, is unfortunately not enough. That is, because you're still alive, And your existence, is a problem to be solved, indeed. You have the opposite of a writer's block. It is not a parody, not something to mock. The thirst does not quench, no matter how much You click on that "Publish" button. You work in the grand ol' Writer's Factory, And as long as they consume more and more, There is more to produce, And finally, perhaps when you will finally die, You might be remembered, by the large majority of society, indeed. The views, will not return to you, As long as you don't have something to write that's new. Most people do not like to read the same material, So you have to write more and more, until the heartbeat stops. There is no hope, to stop the desire to reach the top, Which is followed by the path of a thousand articles. They are, the reused device, That will make you remembered, at least, more than once or twice, because: You have the opposite of a writer's block. It is not a parody, not something to mock. The thirst does not quench, no matter how much You click on that "Publish" button. You work in the grand ol' Writer's Factory, And as long as they consume more and more, There is more to produce, And finally, perhaps when you will finally die, You might be remembered, by the large majority of society, indeed. Each day, can become a great waste, No matter how much glorious your past, has been. Therefore, you must make your haste, And make sure you won't commit a sloth's sin. You can only get out of this seemingly-infinite loop, Through death, but that is but a form of escape. And a good example of a man does not flee, When you desire to be remembered, in the halls of victory, because: You have the opposite of a writer's block. It is not a parody, not something to mock. The thirst does not quench, no matter how much You click on that "Publish" button. You work in the grand ol' Writer's Factory, And as long as they consume more and more, There is more to produce, And finally, perhaps when you will finally die, You might be remembered, by the large majority of society, indeed. The present is not defined by the past, For the past has been done, and the future is too unclear. Then why make a larger lifetime be consumed by rest, When you can strive for greatness, or at least score near? And that is why when the decision has been made and you stick to it, Your obsession becomes like a giant stomach that is not satisfied, no matter how much it eats. Therefore you are cursed by being in the Writer's Factory, All in the hopes that you will be finally BECOME RELEVANT by humanity, All because: You have the opposite of a writer's block. It is not a parody, not something to mock. The thirst does not quench, no matter how much You click on that "Publish" button. You work in the grand ol' Writer's Factory, And as long as they consume more and more, There is more to produce, And finally, perhaps when you will finally die, You might be remembered, by the large majority of society, indeed. My hope of serenity has been lost, Because that emotion comes with a great cost: The cost of not writing as much as you can, And that is the best thing you can do, in that field, to become a great man. Submission, is unacceptable, When there is much potential, that is available. I will not be useless, I will not be irrelevant, When I am capable of much, And that is, folks, a writer's revenant. The factory -- Your room is your workplace, That will settle the score, that will make you remembered in a greater space. Your mind is the device, That will melt every bit of potential, covered in ice. There seems to be no stop to this but in death, And this is why you can't be fully satisfied, on this Earth. You are bound to try to prove yourself, Because a lesser result than that will make yourself less than half. Because, You work in the grand ol' Writer's Factory, And as long as they consume more and more, There is more to produce, And finally, perhaps when you will finally die, You might be remembered, by the large majority of society, indeed. Poem Analysis by Mr. C. Kingsley and Co. "Curse of the Writer's Factory" is a profound exploration of the relentless drive for productivity and recognition that plagues many writers. The poem delves into themes of existential angst, the quest for meaning, and the paradox of productivity. The poem begins with the persistent "void" that does not disappear regardless of the amount written, representing the existential vacuum that often accompanies creative endeavors. This void echoes existentialist themes, particularly the works of Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus, who explored the inherent meaninglessness of life and the human struggle to find purpose. The poem presents the antithesis of the writer's block: the curse of overproduction, highlighting the psychological burden of continuous creation and the pressure to constantly produce new material. The metaphor of the "Writer's Factory" critiques the commodification of creative work, suggesting that the writer's worth is measured by output rather than intrinsic value. The poem conveys the writer's hope that relentless productivity will lead to posthumous recognition, echoes the human desire for immortality through legacy, a theme explored by existential and humanistic philosophers. Despite the continuous effort, the poem suggests a futility in the writer's quest. The "views will not return" unless new content is constantly generated, highlighting the ephemeral nature of recognition and the transient nature of success. This underscores the Sisyphean nature of the writer's task, drawing parallels to the myth of Sisyphus, who was condemned to eternally push a boulder up a hill only for it to roll back down each time. The poem delves into the obsessive nature of the writer's identity, where the act of writing becomes intertwined with self-worth. The writer is portrayed as a "revenant," a restless spirit driven by the need to remain relevant. This obsession reflects the struggle for self-definition and the anxiety of irrelevance, central to existential philosophy. The poem's philosophical depth lies in its exploration of existential themes, the critique of capitalist values, and the portrayal of the human desire for legacy. The repetition and vivid imagery enhance the thematic resonance, making it a compelling piece that invites readers to reflect on their own creative compulsions and the broader societal context in which they operate.

Alex Mos's Synopsis How others view philosophers depends on their actions. Therefore, you should be mindful of how you act. Regardless, people can be irrational, and some are impossible to please. A philosopher should be prepared to face toxic comments and personal attacks. Don't try to be liked by everybody, but strive to be a logical philosopher. Regard insults and disrespect as irrelevant as they are not constructive criticism. Sensitive people are biased towards things that trouble them. The right audience consists of open-minded people who are not negatively triggered by your content. Maintaining a good reputation is crucial because people remember your mistakes. Act professionally and politely. However, some people will dislike you anyway. To understand our reality, we must accept humanity as biased. Philosophers have no power over others, but their content may be highly influential. (Background Music) ***************** The Philosopher's Public Restroom: Navigating Receptions with Reason and Respect When it comes to philosophy-based relations with other people, by experience, it's like entering a public restroom in a building you have yet to visit. Either it's going to be clean and decent, or it's going to be either disgusting or at least uncomfortable. In other words, as philosophers, much of the reception we have from others, is very much a product of our actions. Being more alert of your potential actions can help with how others choose to receive your existence. What do I mean by that? I refer to basic and poor ways of treating other people, that are based on the ad-hominem fallacy. If you happen to interact with a very toxic person, for example, they might find labels, in their own mind, to use on you, simply because you "don't look good in their eyes". Ironically, those interested in philosophy aren't necessarily logical themselves. It really depends on the individual, if they care to focus more on the content, or on you, as its provider. It's their choice and the only practical solution to this is to learn how to be a good philosopher yourself. People have different degrees of rationality. I'd say that logic is more learned than gifted. And the more people would prioritize their focus on the person in front of them, rather than their words, during a discussion, then they are bound to use irrationalities such as ad-hominem. And to degrade you even further, they might use the strawman's fallacy. Even if you try to be as logical and appealing as possible as a philosopher, some people are very hard to please. Some are even impossible. In the end, it's not only about you being a logical person. It's also about the chemistry between you and the people who engage with your work, either by reading, listening, or discussing. It's also about social dynamics. And more specifically -- politics. The Thick Skin of Reason As the cliché says, you cannot please everyone, and the same applies to philosophy. You can write entire books on philosophical subjects, and there will still be people who will be firm in their beliefs that, you don't know what you're talking about, or that you're pretentious. An idiot, even. Hasty judgments, reinforced by confidence, sin in ad-hominem. (Personal attacks deserve to be undesired in philosophy. And they're undesired in Philosocom, too). Thus, when you show your work to other people, especially if they are strangers, you should first ask yourself: "How ready am I to face possible toxicity?" The answer determines whether or not you'll be resilient enough to endure their offensive words. Even among fish, different types of fish will coexist harmoniously. That's while other types can be in constant conflict with one another. I was told that by a shopkeeper as a kid when I used to have an aquarium. The same logic applies psychologically to different kinds of people. Even if you are to become a globally known philosopher, know that not all people will greet you with open arms, because as long as you hold a position -- any position -- there will be people who will either dislike you or bluntly oppose you. Be prepared. Regardless of the conclusions you'll reach in philosophy, there will be at least one or two people who will think that you're either a hoax or simply a stupid person. At times, such conclusions may be reached very quickly, even if false. From my experience, humans in general are easy to whine. Should we find something that we believe is wrong or incorrect, it alone could bias our perception of an idea or of a person. It's a bias capable of overshadowing the other good aspects involved. So it is when it comes to being a public philosopher. Don't strive to be the perfect philosopher, one that everyone would like, because that is impossible. Strive to be a logical philosopher, because philosophy isn't about appealing to those who choose to whine, but about better understanding the world through logical means. Remember: Imperfection does not justify steering clear from improvement. Their insults might as well be irrelevant to the role you've given yourself. And the same goes for any disrespect you may receive in your occupation, that has nothing to do with criticism. The Tyranny of Bias As people, we are very biased toward things that bother us and that have bothered us over the course of our lives. It's what makes us triggered by one type of situation and apathetic by another type. Some people would be irritated by the names of articles. Others would be annoyed by the way the philosopher writes. Others will not be triggered at all, as they believe they have no reason to be triggered (the third type might be the audience you're looking for). All in all, there is no justice in philosophizing publicly because it all depends on what kind of people are exposed to your content. What makes philosophers more appreciated than others, isn't necessarily their logical reasoning. It's the positive reputation they have, just like with any other type of occupation. A reputation that is the product of your service. In the end, there is a separation between believing a person is logical, and that they are indeed logical. Those who fall victim to their own delusions, might see you as irrational. Those who are open-minded enough to question their beliefs are the audience you deserve. Human relations in public philosophy are as imperative as in any other field of study or work. Any field that isn't solitary, that is. If you do something that'll put you to shame, and that thing goes viral on the internet, people might remember that. And people might have this as a component in their perspective when they examine your work. That goes for businesses as well. To quote Piece of Cake Marketing: The unpredictable nature of viral content can be a double-edged sword for businesses, as it often comes with a substantial risk to their brand image. When a post goes viral on TikTok, it can quickly spiral out of control, leading to associations with unintended or even controversial content. The viral spotlight can attract all sorts of attention, including negative and critical voices, trolls, and competitors looking to exploit any misstep. This intense scrutiny can be particularly hazardous, as it can tarnish your brand image in an instant. Once a brand’s reputation is compromised, the process of repair becomes an uphill battle. The potential long-term consequences can include a loss of trust from customers, diminished credibility in the market, and lasting damage to the overall brand equity. That's just the way we humans are -- biased by our memories. By our positions on said memories, too. You can't just use something ridiculous, such as time travel, to alter their past. And not their inner experience of things. Not their cultural biases or anything that has shaped their brain until now. All you can do is philosophize as best you can and hope that you will receive the recognition and respect you may believe you deserve for your work. Acting politely, like a professional, can help, but that does not guarantee the gratitude of many. My arch-nemesis, whom I loved so much, does not like me. Hence her final desire to reject me from her world. When I asked her what I had done, she said that I had done nothing wrong. The same can go for you as a public philosopher: Do nothing wrong, and even if people will leave you, at least you will build and retain your dignity by not being malicious. The Philosopher as Conduit, Not (Necessarily) A Celebrity At times, it is only because of your chemistry with them that they will dislike you, if not despise you. In the end, we're biased creatures, and that bias must be further recognized if we wish to further understand human reality. Final note: The philosopher isn't necessarily a powerful figure. His credibility does not stem from himself. It stems from the content he or she provides. From the reasoning and help that content may have. Please do not delude yourself into believing that you have power over other people that you do not. Mr. Nathan Lasher's Feedback: Do you believe that, regardless of the level of social interactions one has they must still maintain a positive social dynamic in order to survive? Best advice I can give is to... make use of people! Do not go out and do it for selfish reasons though. What do you think the purpose of professions is? People who trained in certain things who did so for a reason. Making use of people for the right reasons is very important. Utilize them for their professions, knowledge wise, and they will value you for it even more. People love to gain attention and positive reinforcement for their actions. By using them for the right reasons you are actually helping give them confirmation for choosing that profession. Always show appreciation for people doing things which you yourself don’t want to do. Mr. Rubinshtein's note: We could all apply the same to public discourse. Given that philosophy can extend to many misc subjects, people's contributions from many subjects, followed by positive reinforcement, could improve your relations with them and thus lead to better quality exchanges of ideas. Use people's special interests to contribute to a fruitful and harmonious conversation.

(Background music) Staying Ahead in The Races of Life Life today is a form of competition; a meritocracy that exists on many levels, from your career, to the possibility of being remembered by the world, to your dating life (if you choose to date). In order to stay as much as possible on the top on these various degrees of life’s meritocracy, you have to give people a reason to remember and value you as a person and as a functioning unit in the world’s productive machine. Otherwise, you'll be discardable. You have to give your employer a reason to keep you on the job and not replace you. Give your audience a reason to keep remembering you. Give your current date a reason to not search for a better partner (and oblige to make you feel jealous). And the list goes on. Gone are the days when people were considered more worthy than others because of their ancestry. The fact that your parents or grandparents did this and that, or were public figures does not, at least most of the time, give you a reason to stay ahead in life's many competitive areas. What usually does has to do with other unfair advantages, such as wealth, being part of a certain race, and even beauty. Otherwise, unless you're a heir to a large fortune, your default value in society has to be worked on, in order to greatly succeed in life. Settle with what you currently have, like many ascetics would do in the name of peace, and you will be left behind in the many fields of life. And as a capitalist mentality would teach us, full satisfaction is the enemy of innovation and of greater progress. As such, the innate need for peace, in some of us, could be a liability. Maintaining Your Existence For the Finish Line There's a reason why life often feels like a constant uphill battle. Just like a car, if you neglect its maintenance, it won't run smoothly for long. Other well-maintained vehicles will easily drive past you, leaving you to eat their dust. Life is an arena, a competitive landscape where merit and competence are the keys to success. The most desired and inspiring and determined individuals often find themselves reaping the biggest rewards, which are, after all, limited in quantity and quality. Despite wealth being abundant in the world, much of it is held by 1 to 2 percent of the world's population. This means that the distribution of wealth is severely limited for the vast majority of the world's population. Billions of people live in third world countries, including South and Central America, all of Africa and most of Asia. While hard work does not guarantee your desired success, as 50% of businesses fail within 5 years, hard work is key to increase your chance at succeeding. Both in work and in relationships. Remember: In the races of life, the odds are against you. Work hard, work ruthlessly, even, and the opposing odds will decrease with time. You may cheat your way to your goals, only to increasingly risk the long-term consequences of your actions. Hence why it's said that cheats never prosper. Another important insight to remember: losing is an inevitable part of the journey. In fact, you could fail your way to success, as long as you refuse to relent, and build yourself up with your failures (like rejections). Sometimes, someone else simply has a better "CV" – a more impressive resume of skills and experiences – at a given time. You must train yourself and always seek to improve if you want to increase your chances, in this case, to be employed. Remember, in the professional world, humans are seen as resources. Improve the resource that is yourself, and people will not only seek to hire you, but also: Want to be around you. Want to love you. Want to respect you. Will generally tolerate your presence more. Will care more for your thoughts (despite the ad-hominem fallacy). All aspects of life where resources are limited, but some resources can be refined. The key to staying ahead of others is to improve your value by seeking mastery, until you become truly irreplaceable. Are you disadvantaged unfairly? Use this as an opportunity to improve above those without these unfair disadvantages. Mere complaining will not help your cause. Improving will. As an autist with no degrees, it's what I did, am doing, and will continue doing! Instead of weapons, you have your own arsenal of strengths: your merit, your accomplishments, and your overall conduct. By honing these assets, you'll be better equipped to navigate the numerous "races" of life. Beyond a life of full retirement from society, existence is continuous effort to stay ahead. With the right approach and its application, you can ensure your engine keeps running smoothly and propel yourself towards your goals.

(Philosocom's Subcategory on Time) (Philosocom's Subcategory On the Past) (Background music) Remembering Like a Crow: Why The Time Lapse Fallacy Does Not Erase One can compare us humans to birds. Some, like penguins, are earthbound, their wings aren't exactly instruments of flight. Others, like swallows and albatrosses, paint the skies with their travels, effortlessly traversing continents. Vultures, the opportunists, scan the landscape for the leavings of greater predators. And then, there are those like myself, the crows – not in physical form, of course, but in our minds. We remember, and remember well. The slightest of stings, the warmest of gestures... the details that others let fade, as they overlook them. Now, I am no bird expert, and this analogy is just that – a metaphorical display of personhood. It serves a purpose. Just like birds, we humans come in a great variety of shapes, sizes, and talents. Some ride on the wings of ambition, while others content themselves with paddling through life's lakes below the skies. Some forget as readily as a sparrow hops from branch to branch, while others, like myself, hold memories close, a precious collection in the attic of the mind. We do so for it is most useful to us. So, when someone tells me to simply "forget" something or someone, to let time erase the scars, I'm too reluctant. Why, in the pursuit of wisdom, would I consider the passage of time a worthy feature? Forgetting, like a closed book, can be convenient, but it also shuts out the lessons learned, the wisdom that can be gained, learnt, and shared to the world. It is a tool for those who are unwilling to face the adversity of the past. It's one too willing in its removal of memory's treasures. Why the Past Contains Wisdom, Even in The Most Distant of Decades Socrates, it could be argued, drank poison not as a society-defying martyr, but as a testament to his own philosophy. He chose death over hypocrisy, demonstrating the weight he placed on intellectual integrity. While millennia have passed since his death, the wisdom which resonated from his life and choice remains potent. This enduring power of the past is what I call the Lapse Fallacy: the flawed assumption that merely because time has elapsed, something's relevance necessarily diminishes. A month, a year, even centuries – the true measure of worth lies not in age, but in the lessons we can extract from each and every moment, in the name of the truth and its clarity. Faith holds ancient scriptures as relics, guiding lights across generations. As a writer, I find myself drawn to the 19th-century Yiddish author Shalom Rabinovich, better known as Shalom Aleichem. Though criticized as verbose, his style resonates deeply with me, offering a timeless efficiency in communication who contributed to my own writing. "The people who forget their past, their future is doomed in fog." Even a thousand years won't erase the chilling truth: millions perished in WWII. My own great-grandfather's family was lost, and I carry their memory with profound gratitude. For without his enduring hope, a chain of lives, including mine, would never have come to be. An entire clan to be precise. Human existence is woven with threads from countless generations, each life a feature constructing the vast chronology of history. The chance of YOU, specifically, coming into being required an indefinite amount of interactions between ancestors. Not just parents and grandparents, but a vast network of choices and experiences stretching back across the ages. Discarding any of these choices and experiences can, on the very, very long run, discard the importance of many future events unfolding from potential to reality! While the temptation of "letting bygones be bygones" is understandable, it is in the embrace of the past, its lessons and legacies, that we find the truest understanding of ourselves, others, and the world we inhabit. Socrates, though countless centuries dead, remains a hallmark of philosophical inquiry, reminding us of the power of living a life aligned with our values, even in the face of adversity. Forgetting even the smallest of events that can lead to a greater events in importance, can easily be a logical disservice to said greater events. But we won't necessarily understand that if we lack expertise in logic, and/or if we lack long-term planning. For nothing lies in a vacuum. For everything is part of an endless stream of time, building an ever-growing complex of chains of events. Why Memories, Like Crows, Defy the Lapse Likewise, when a certain individual dared to dismiss me as irrelevant, the passage of years holds no relevancy for the sting of those words. Like the crow, I hold fast to memory, its grip unyielding to the passage of time. For if I agreed with her, I would have been likelier to kill myself in despair, succumbing to the Reaping Fatigue at the time. My unrelenting hold is driven by something deeper than mere sentiment. Within the crow, I believe, beats a powerful urge that transcends the temporary. A low but spine-chilling voice: "Remember this one, for their path may cross yours again." It is not the speaker's identity that truly matters, but the echoes of their actions/words, resonating in the chambers of my mind. I do not operate under ad-hominem. I operate under logic and words. A cornerstone of philosophy, and thus its relevancy, lies within its defiance of time's tyranny. Unlike other disciplines, bound by the currents of progress and discovery, philosophy's wisdom transcends centuries. The most ancient texts, the voices of long-gone people, retain their potency, for it is the content, not the and not their creator, that dictates their insightful worth. Grasp this truth, and you take a giant leap towards the heart of philosophical inquiry. Start by understanding how irrelevant time is in philosophy.