Next Generation Emulation banner

1 - 20 of 53 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
159 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Why a phisolophical inquiry to life in an emulation site? Well just like emulation is just a dimension of your gaming life gaming is just a dimension of your life. Many of the members of this forum are highly intellectuals individuals who had thoughtful intriguing thoughts of life that are worthy of being posted in the internet. This thread hopefully gives them a opportunity to enlighten us with their wisdom and knowledge. Anyways this is an open discussion section if one can make a thread about a woman cutting a man's sex organ, a cat starting fires, a man eating fetuses, and about dunglish surely a philosphical inquiry to life thread can be made.

What do you mean by philosophical? Philosophy is define by logic and reason. All post in this should be philosophical in nature. PLEASE DO NOT DISCUSS RELIGION. Yes religion involves logic and reason but also faith. St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas for example were great thinkers but not philosophers rather theologicans since they used faith in their works. On the other hand Aristotle and Plato because they used only reasoning and logic to reach conclusions were great thinkers and philosophers.

What topics should be discuss in this thread different philosophies nihilism, relativism, epicureanism, other major philosophical positions along with meaning of life and other topics regarding life such as justice, peace and war, and civilizations and societies. Note that while discussing this topics refrain from discussing religions. As such discussions leads to chaos, anger, insults, and the moderators locking the thread.

To begin the discussion I will start with my views during my life about life. At first in my early inquiries into life I ended being a skeptic. Although humans know much about physics biology psychology and many other things I thought to myself there is no way not even for the smartest people in the world to know everything about life, the universe, and everything. It was wise for humans to divine the work amongs fields because of the complexity of the universe requires so. Some people do science others manual work other governmental work because no one can do everything. Even within fields such a science the momentual task of gathering knowledge has to be divided into other fields physics, biology, chemistry, pshycology. Than even within those fields the work is futher divided in physics there is quantun physics, astrophysics, mechanics, etc. Without knowing everything we cannot get the answer to life, the universe, and everything. As enter the adult work I encountered the harsh reality of the life of humans, the suffering, the broken dreams, the mortality of humans, the anguish from diseases, the torment of poverty. Even more I read the Hitchhikers Guide to the Universe. I became aware of the absurdity of the universe and the pointless existence of humans. I became a cynic. I became aware of the insignificance of humans. Later on as became into contact with others I realize that they had a different outlook to life. I was intrigue by this. As I though more of this I became a relativist. How people see the world I thought depends on the circumtances they encounter in life a person who always had everything would be happy and would be optimistic and believe life is a gift on the other hand if a person always was struggling facing troubles he could think life was a burden. I could explain many things using relativity. It was not until I read Lucretius' On the nature of things this converted my thinking. Now I face life with a certain type of epicurean view. I have a materialistic view of the world in which there is no supernatural forces, I know that the most I can achieve is a tranquil mind, to take pleasure in life, and do not fear the nothingness I should become when the inevatable must happen to me.

Whats your philosophical view of life?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,933 Posts
Well then I guess this gives me a chance to repost this. (Incase no one got the message)

Katsuya said:
I have to say I’ve had a different experience…

When we were training our master’s assistant was a woman (she was also a master). And she showed us what true skill is. No mater how strong we thought we were. In the end she would always show us the truth. It did not mater how many of us she took on (I myself faced her one on one numerous times. But only twice with others)

I don’t think I can describe with words how magnificent her abilities where. The only one who could possibly equal her was our master. From them we learned without the unity of mind, body and sprit. Strength is nothing.

When the time came to receive our final belts. I was reluctant to accept. I did not feel worthy. But she told me that while I may not have reached their level of expertise (I was not trained since birth :) ) The heart of a master is not forged at once but is tempered over time. It took me a moment fully to understand. Only three students (extremely talented!) Received special kind of belt (I don’t know how but I was one of them) the special symbol on my belt was courage. I accepted…

Well, what have we learned? We start as raw materials (mind, body and sprit) as we go through life we are forged by the choices we make into the individuals we are. Like blades we are designed for different ways of life. Some for hunting, some for cooking, some for killing, and some for healing. And just like blades sometimes we go against our nature.

Any blade can be used to kill, but it takes a special kind of blade to heal.

So, how does all this crazy Katsuya memory talk (CKMT ;) ) relate to women in combat roles?

We are designed differently and for different things. But in the end it’s up to you to decide what you want to be. Not the government and not anyone else! Only you can make the choice of who you want to be and what you want to be!

So... what blade are you?

(Sorry if anyone thinks I’ve gone off topic. If anyone reads this (no one probably will) tell me what you think.)

-Signed K.O-
(Related to this thread http://www.ngemu.com/forums/showthread.php?t=59361&page=2&pp=20&highlight=bush)
 

·
Retired
Joined
·
8,882 Posts
I'll be brief now, although I'll see if I can expand my views later.

First of all, I’m a rationalist. Reason is the only epistemology for me.

I’ve been an atheist for 10 years now, and I’m a thorough materialist. As for free will, I’m a compatibilist.

I don’t subscribe to any particular philosophical doctrine, though, and just borrow what I like from each one. But existentialism (esp. Nietzsche and Sartre) has been one of my biggest influences.

And I’m also a Transhumanist. I believe that we must use technology to improve ourselves and the world around us, always taking into account people’s rights and desires. To further qualify myself as a Transhumanist, I’ve to say that I’m a Singularitarian, and I believe that the creation of the first real Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) will change our society in an entirely unpredictable way. As a Singularitarian, I look for ways in which this radical change may be beneficial for our species (and all sentient beings, for that matter).

Politically speaking I currently veer toward the Left, but I’m no radical (and certainly no communist).
 

·
Retired
Joined
·
8,882 Posts
Since your other thread about the meaning of life was closed, I'm going to post this link here.

It's about the Charles Darwin Memorial Lecture 2005, given by Arthur Caplan. It's called Is it wrong to try to improve human nature?

Note: It's only available thanks to Google Cache ;)

Gaurav, I think you should read this one ;)

EDIT: Now I'm just waiting to see cooliscool popping up with some useless complaint about how useless are threads like this one :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,449 Posts
Well, I became an atheist after my last talk with God:

me: "So God, what is the meaning of life? What is my purpose?"

God: "I never thought human beings would make it this far. Kudos."

As far as my philosophy of life is concerned, I'm still debating what exactly I should do. On one hand, I have a good heart. That is to say, I would like to use my life to benefit the human race. On the other hand, I am very selfish. Sometimes I think I would like to leave my mark on history by doing something incredibly evil (no one ever forgets Hitler). Since I don't believe in an afterlife, it is one of the few ways I could attain a kind of immortality.
 

·
Knowledge is the solution
Joined
·
7,168 Posts
wow, amidst the "rerun threads" fever we are having lately, a good one appeared. Kudos to the creator.

Now on to the topic.

AS almost everyone already knows, I'm an atheist, however since everyone is most probably already tired from the topic, I'll leave it at that :p

Same as Boltzmann, I'm a Singularitarian, and I used to be a Transhumanist. However, since radical changes brought forth by a real AI are more likely to happen earlier than those brought by the first real posthumans, I now tend to lean more on the Singularitarian view. (which doesn't mean I oppose the Transhumanist world, however, for the reasons I've mentioned here and in other posts, my stance is as it is.

I'm kind of a materialist as many atheist do. However, I'm selfish enough for wanting to be remembered by the following generations, so, while it is most likely a pipe dream , I'm trying to dedicate my life to AI researching (me becoming famous enough is the pipe dream, for those that are already thinknig about twisting my words ;p)

On a social level, I used to think that I only had a "I'm nice with everyone" mask while internally cursing the world for stupidness. However, at some point I guess I forgot about the cursing part, and the mask slowly became part of me. While I'm far, far away from being a saint, I seriously try to help those I care about (namely, my sibblings and a few friends :p), while still trying to be nice to the rest of the world. I guess this stance, while slighly pathetic, has it's advantages. I have no enemies, and everyone is nice in reply, albeit I can sense many masks trying to make a fool out of me ^_^

Hmm... on the political stage, I'm kind of a center-left man. Albeit full of holes, I think that a Capitalism moderated by a Goverment is currently the best economical option avaible for us. And yes, I still believe that a benevolent dictatorship is the best goverment posible, albeit a little utopical
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
159 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 · (Edited)
Boltzmann I think you are too optimistic you put too much faith on science and humans. While science has done a lot of good in terms of improving life and increasing our knowledge it has it limits. Science cannot give meaning to life after all is a method to discover information not a belief system or philsosophy. Event if we through science improve ourselves curing diseases making ourselves smarter faster stronger healthier etc. it does not produce happiness. Is it really worth living hundred of years without any sense of meaning . And all technologies made by human are not the answer since because they will be made and use by humans all the faulty traits of humans will accompany the technologies.

The Captain you just reminded of my days when I read the catcher in the rye with your signature. Thats a great book. It made me think which is always good. Unfortunately for me it put more questions into my mind then it gave me answers. Also you can leave your mark in history by doing something incledibly good and achieve immortality. And if you do decide to do something incredibly evil tell us about so we can get out of the way.

Proto I think is normal for humans to want to do a great deed and be remembered. I wish you well on your journey to achieve such a deed. However I agree with Lucretius when he stated "the greatest wealth is to live content with little, for there is never want where the mind is satisfied." Peace of mind and tranquility thats what I seek. I find that by knowing I have done the most possible taking into account my weaknesses and limitations.
 

·
Nu...
Joined
·
472 Posts
There is no meaning to life - Life simply is. I agree with the usage of technology in order to make life better, and that technology can accoplish near anything.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
356 Posts
I don't believe my infinitely great grand father was a monkey, that this theory of evolution though correct to a degree has been over exaggerated to say the least. I say this because nothing that occurs naturally that has been proven beyond doubt has ever had a touch of 'error' in it, or trial and error. It's living things that make the errors but the environment it was put into had enabled that to happen for true balance to occur. So if as Darwin thought that evolution required some sort of trial and error to occur, then the situation right now would be totally different, I mean that there wouldn't be such a well balanced echo system.

But some may argue that point and say since we as humans are living beings and are of course capable of error why do we not fit into this 'perfect echo system'. The reason is quite simple, we are the only living creatues that exist on this planet that has a will. Animals try to get by but humans not only do that by they go for a certain extra piece of comfort.Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say the theory of evolution is all wrong, I believe in natural selection but I don't believe it is a random inevitable thing that shall eventually work it self out. I believe there is somesort of working mechanism behind it that is greater than what we could ever hope to even begin to comprehend.

Another reason why I don't believe in evolution is that something can't come out of nowhere, that is I can't believe that a bird will say, suddenly develop gills to breathe under water no matter how many billions of trillions of years you give it, because right now it doesn't have the mechanism in it's biological make up at all. Though fish may one day zillions and zillions of years from today fly because some already can jump out of water (can't remember the exact species). Perhaps an emu may one day zillions of years from today be able to fly, because it has wings so it can also be said that perhaps once they could fly.

On another matter - the corruption of humans, I believe it is a natural out come given that the human desires for more so as a result may take corrupt means in achieving. THat is why I believe in a higher power, to be afraid of knowing if I do wrong upon a fellow human being that I may pay the consequence in a later life. Because once you are at the top (i.e. president) you must be afraid of a higher power,
Some argue demcracy see's to that but the idea of democracy is that you will be afraid of a collection of lower powers, that is the people. Well personally I would like to see a genuine combination of both.
 

·
Retired
Joined
·
8,882 Posts
Hannibal said:
Boltzmann I think you are too optimistic you put too much faith on science and humans. While science has done a lot of good in terms of improving life and increasing our knowledge it has it limits. Science cannot give meaning to life after all is a method to discover information not a belief system or philsosophy.
I never said that science gives meaning to life. Why people can't read my ****cking posts before speaking?

I didn't even wrote the word "science" in this thread. Why did you bring it up?

Hannibal said:
Event if we through science improve ourselves curing diseases making ourselves smarter faster stronger healthier etc. it does not produce happiness.
This is a non-sequitur.

Hannibal said:
Is it really worth living hundred of years without any sense of meaning . And all technologies made by human are not the answer since because they will be made and use by humans all the faulty traits of humans will accompany the technologies.
This is not true. Our technologies do not share our shortcomings. We're the ones to employ them in wrong ways, but they are not bad per se.

culubalo said:
I don't believe my infinitely great grand father was a monkey, that this theory of evolution though correct to a degree has been over exaggerated to say the least. I say this because nothing that occurs naturally that has been proven beyond doubt has ever had a touch of 'error' in it, or trial and error. It's living things that make the errors but the environment it was put into had enabled that to happen for true balance to occur. So if as Darwin thought that evolution required some sort of trial and error to occur, then the situation right now would be totally different, I mean that there wouldn't be such a well balanced echo system
You're as scientifically ignorant as I suspected. Go study some science before making a fool of yourself like this. This is not even good english, to say the least. What a poor excuse for an argument.

If it were a year ago, I'd write a 3-pages long post just to explain why you're wrong. But I'm quite tired these days, especially since I know that you won't get it anyway. I'll wait for some kind of "idiot evolutionists" remark...

BTW, I gather that your wisdom told you to reject evolutionary theory, right?

culubalo said:
Another reason why I don't believe in evolution is that something can't come out of nowhere, that is I can't believe that a bird will say, suddenly develop gills to breathe under water no matter how many billions of trillions of years you give it, because right now it doesn't have the mechanism in it's biological make up at all. Though fish may one day zillions and zillions of years from today fly because some already can jump out of water (can't remember the exact species). Perhaps an emu may one day zillions of years from today be able to fly, because it has wings so it can also be said that perhaps once they could fly.
Have you ever read an evolutionary biology textbook? Reading is the best cure for ignorance, you know.

A good place to start is Talk.Origins

----

What a bunch of brain-dead n00bs we've been getting here as of late :rolleyes:

EDIT: I'm considering leave this place for a while again, seeing how I'd to fight with one n00b about gravity, and now I've to defend evolutionary theory from completely silly "arguments", and how another n00b accuses me of saying that science gives meaning to life. What the **** I'm doing here?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
356 Posts
You did not even read my post in its whole

You're as scientifically ignorant as I suspected. Go study some science before making a fool of yourself like this. This is not even good english, to say the least. What a poor excuse for an argument.
Perhaps, but thats only because I am learning that people like you said the same to those in the past who claimed the world was not flat but round. People think they know everything, it's only when they discover something do they realize how little they actually knew. I believe that this is crap and it probably is crap.

BTW, I gather that your wisdom told you to reject evolutionary theory, right?
I quoted before:
they say knowledge without wisdom is a pen without ink
Where here do I imply/state that I am wise? I refuse to answer till you stop with the sarcasm.

I don't care about the so called 'science' you present to me. Science is merely mans opinion of the world around him, and it has been proven time and time again to be dreadfully wrong, unless it has been proven inconclusively right. Such as the fact the earth is round, or that the earth isn't the centre of the universe.
 

·
Retired
Joined
·
8,882 Posts
culubalo said:
You did not even read my post in its whole
The rest of your post wasn't worth replying.

culubalo said:
Perhaps, but thats only because I am learning that people like you said the same to those in the past who claimed the world was not flat but round. People think they know everything, it's only when they discover something do they realize how little they actually knew. I believe that this is crap and it probably is crap.
Your evidence is truly great. Why don't you write a doctoral dissertation with it?

My conclusion is "I believe that this is crap and it probably is crap." Brilliant arguments. I'm convinced by your intellectual greatness. I shall award you a Ph.D.

culubalo said:
Where here do I imply/state that I am wise? I refuse to answer till you stop with the sarcasm.
I'm never sarcastic, oh Wise One :bow:

culubalo said:
I don't care about the so called 'science' you present to me. Science is merely mans opinion of the world around him, and it has been proven time and time again to be dreadfully wrong, unless it has been proven inconclusively right. Such as the fact the earth is round, or that the earth isn't the centre of the universe.
Yeah, right. And reality is all in our minds. Computers and airplanes are a collective illusion too. Who cares about science, anyway? They're all "idiot scientists".

Who cares for science, when they can have your wisdom, right?

Maybe your wisdom will cure cancer some day :lol:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
356 Posts
Your evidence is truly great. Why don't you write a doctoral dissertation with it?

My conclusion is "I believe that this is crap and it probably is crap." Brilliant arguments. I'm convinced by your intellectual greatness. I shall award you a Ph.D.
No my conclusion is that at best the theory of evolution is flawed on some major aspects which have been substituted by unfeasable theories backed not by scientific evidence but the imagination of the human mind.

Yeah, right. And reality is all in our minds. Computers and airplanes are a collective illusion too. Who cares about science, anyway? They're all "idiot scientists".

Who cares for science, when they can have your wisdom, right?

Maybe your wisdom will cure cancer some day
When I watch the parliament in action here in australia, I can tell who is on the losing side of the debate because they fall to sarcasm. Someone said 'once you have tried your hardest you only have sarcasm left on your side'

You try and delibrately not understand me because you to a degree agree with me.
I never said (as you know) that the result of mans understanding of his surroundings such as airplanes are non existant.

No wisdom shall never cure cancer, I never said that it could. I said that knowledge is good but without some sort of wisdom behind it, it falls into controversy.
 

·
Retired
Joined
·
8,882 Posts
culubalo said:
When I watch the parliament in action here in australia, I can tell who is on the losing side of the debate because they fall to sarcasm. Someone said 'once you have tried your hardest you only have sarcasm left on your side'
I'm resorting to sarcasm because I got tired of fighting ignorance like this. It's not worth my time, because I know that some people are too dense to get it.

If you read my past posts (over a thousand of them, I'm sure), you'll see me fighting with the scientifically ignorant masses, and writing posts that have more than 2 or 3 pages. All for nothing, because they just disregarded what I wrote.

When someone starts saying nonsense in real bad english (like your remarks about evolutionary theory) and saying that they don't care about science, I regard them as beyond hope.

That's why I'm putting you on my Ignore List from now on. You can feel victorious now, Wise One :bow:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
356 Posts
I'm resorting to sarcasm because I got tired of fighting ignorance like this. It's not worth my time, because I know that some people are too dense to get it.
You should have known that I wasn't because I was acknowledging what you where saying and even agreeing with you sometimes at the cost of my own original ideas.

My dear, the sarcasm you presented was just stupid on your own behalf regardless of how much you disagree with me, otherwise you should have stopped before all that. I wanted peace sooner than you did, said I agree with you to a degree and that the core problem between us was deeper than that but you didn't accept it and went on. Then you resorted to sarcasm, not because of my pressing on but because of yours.

I apologize for teh bad typing but my keyboard is totally crap so i try to type with as few letters as possible...

'edit; incase you read this before you ignore me, I won't be ignorning your posts because I enjoy the depth to which they go (other than the sarcas,)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
159 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
I am sorry Boltzmann. Yep you never said that. By the way the best way to deal with people who have such deep beliefs that they wont change is to ignore them and not respond to them. It only encourages them.
 

·
Knowledge is the solution
Joined
·
7,168 Posts
My dear, the sarcasm you presented was just stupid on your own behalf regardless of how much you disagree with me, otherwise you should have stopped before all that. I wanted peace sooner than you did, said I agree with you to a degree and that the core problem between us was deeper than that but you didn't accept it and went on. Then you resorted to sarcasm, not because of my pressing on but because of yours.
Even though I don't agree with the level of sarcasm Boltzmann is using as of late, I cannnot help but sympathizing with him when posts like yours appears. Trust me, he has nothing personal against you, but he has replied to almost identical positions a thousand times over.

I cannot explain this as well as he could, but since I've neglected the forums lately, I'll make you an especial favor. :nod:

@Hanibbal: You were wrong and flawed when you said that science was a magical box of anwers. If we were to put it in the metaphors you seem to like so much, science is not an end, but a way. In more practical terms, it's an iterative method for continiously perfecting our view of the universe, by building models that can predict the universe behavior with a progressively increassing accuracy.

@culubalo: You were flawed when you said that our ancestors were monkeys. As Boltzmann and netghost have repeated to death and beyond, all we had was a common ancestor. You might like to read a text that has been posted countless times ("evolution is a fact and a theory"). And you might like to read one of Boltzmann's threads about what a scientifical theory really is before saying something like "it's just a theory")... and please, read texts on evolution that go beyond junior high school level before saying things that evolution changes come out of nowhere
 

·
Coffee Demon
Joined
·
2,907 Posts
Hannibal,

We understand your intentions, and we credit you for attempting such a topic. However...as you can already see..It is difficult to maintain such topics without some sort of flaming, anger, or insults....

To the rest,

Prove us wrong....Get this topic on track, and lead the discussion in a truly open minded civil manner. To not do so will simply create another closed topic.

The original question was "What is YOUR philosophical view of life?" and not "Debate or question another's philosophical view of life"

Do what you gotta do.................
 

·
Knowledge is the solution
Joined
·
7,168 Posts
Well... last time I checked this was a discussion forum. And no, I don't remember that the union of different monologues made a discussion possible. But we will try to remain civilized nevertheless ^_^
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,576 Posts
Nice thread, Hannibal. Let's hope it lasts longer than the last one. ;)





First off, I don't like to categorize myself, nor my views. While categories help explain one's views (who hasn't heard of a buddhist?), people often pair the knowledge they have of such a category with an earlier impression they had of someone with similar views or simply what they have from hear-say. They will often have their judgement ready before you're done proving yourself. In general, people can't help prejudice having the best of them upon hearing such a category. With the exception of atheism, my choice has always been to say that my view resembles a belief or philosophy. Nowadays, I handle atheism in the same manner. And why shouldn't I? Most of my beliefs have been formed before I even heard the words or names of the philosophies that are often associated with them.

What's more, is that we're not always behaving the same. I can be cynical at times, but that doesn't make me a thorough cynic, nor never cynical at all. I can be skeptic, but that doesn't make me skeptical on every matter. We're often delusional on the consistency of our beliefs or philosophies and/or our denials of them, just as easily as other people are when they assess our behaviour. Show me a skeptic that is skeptical at all times with everything he comes in touch with. Everyone knows bias... until one becomes aware of it. :p





As for the specific philosophies you mentioned.. I have something to say about 2 of them. Sorry DW, but he also asked to debate some of these, although no-one in this thread has advocated them as of yet. ;)

Epicureanism is a form of hedonism, so there's really not much to discuss about that, IMHO.

Nihilism is a waste of thought to me, as is relativism, which are so inherently flawed that I cannot help but question the sanity of their respective fanatics. Both deny reality as is, yet established truths and facts could not prove themselves over and over to all of us were it not for the existence of fundamental absolutes. You cannot establish society on relativism, just as you cannot explain relativism in society. Instead, we communicate through electronic mail and telephone, we drive our cars, and we share our knowledge in over a dozen of mediums. Advocating such beliefs is indirectly denying we can do all that, because the absolute facts these services find their foundation in wouldn't exist.

I have expressed my thoughts on the absurd lack of reasoning behind it in at least 3 seperate threads on NGEmu. While I respect (as in: to each his/her own) one's views on this, one must also respect my views and reasoning that speak against it, as it had claimed my own beliefs to be untrue in the first place. Nonetheless, I expect no offense to be taken by those who advocate beliefs like relativism, or I would say that the message they thought they had read was his/her relative interpretation; I meant something completely different upon writing it. :p





As for my views of life.. my life can be seperated in 6 different phases so far, each representing changes that made me view life through different glasses. There are 3 words I choose to describe myself everywhere that are descriptive and common to all 6 phases. Irreverent Analytical Arsehole. Irreverent because I never revere or venerate that which is analytically irresponsable and inconsequential. Analytical because I seem to be most zealous to the application of logic and reasoning, more than anything else, more than anyone I have ever met, and often in favor of emotion. Last and very much least, arsehole, because I'm an apathetic selfish git, or as the organizers and participants of altruistic endeavors prefer to call it: monstrous, inhuman, despicable. :rolleyes:

I've been through several stages of arrogance, I have experienced major depression and fear of nothingness, and I have been through a personal hell. Such influencing experiences contributed greatly to who I have become. My views resemble atheistic belief since I was 6. I have chosen to pursue self-awareness adamantly since I was 13. I also believe in universal causation, value individuality greatly, and have a great contempt for injustice.

The fifth phase of my life had a severe cost, yet served a purpose; In the sixth phase, I re-evaluated and realigned all of my values and principles, my knowledge of human nature had grown extensively, and my self-awareness had surpassed a bar I had set of which I'm not so sure most others have reached. I became attached to certain principles of the Bushido (Meyo, Chugo, Makoto), and according to another, I represent Gaurav.




But right now, I only care for one philosophy. :D As a fellow SC2-fan once put it:
"I love the Ur-Quan. I will grow up to be one. I try to hang from the ceiling and cleanse as many people as I meet. Long live the Ur-Quan!" :lol:



Boltzmann said:
Gaurav, I think you should read this one ;)
You realize you're making me postpone The Blank Slate over and over again, don't you? I'm not even done reading the study on self-assessment. :p
 
1 - 20 of 53 Posts
Top