HOPIUM DEFIANCE DEFINED
All hope abandon, ye who enter here!
— Dante Alighieri (1265-1321)
HOPE IS AN ADDICTION AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH
HOPIUM DEFIANCE DEFINED
All hope abandon, ye who enter here!
— Dante Alighieri (1265-1321)
The titled responsion sounds like Dante's version of Hell.
BIOLOGY SAYS DIFFERENT
Hope springs eternal in the human breast: Man never is, but always to be blest.
— Luis de Góngora (1561-1627)
The titled responsion is a biological apologetic of sorts. What's your perspective?
The back and forth at play here is extinctive at best and schizophrenic at worst. Buying into a social narrative, a story without ending, takes us to places beyond the addictive fiction we follow. The pathology is the inability to distinguish fact from reality, separated from the string of thought that confines the self on the identity of a ship from Theseus. Will you walk the "plank" of this pirate-inspired paranoia?
Hope springs eternal in the human breast. We cannot deny it and avoid it, but sometimes, it is not enough. It does not fill a hole in the heart. For hope to fill the heart, something more is needed—something tangible and concrete.
ENOUGH WITH THE FOUR-LETTER WORDS
Fear cannot be without hope nor hope without fear.
— Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677)
The titled responsion is dialectical; the comparison and contrast derive counterfactuals of, perhaps, a false dichotomy. Do you see the difference?
I purchased a magazine the other day. Inside the magazine was another article about ladies on the Cape who have "remained inside misfortune" and are solid inside their anguish. One of the statements posted inside the article in strong yet silent tribute was, "Fear can't be without trust, nor trust unafraid." Thanks to Baruch Spinoza, the realization of this fear factors into our individual streams of consciousness. What remains is up for discussion.
What the hell is this expected to mean? I can see somebody setting this inside a chronicled setting trying to make a "significant novel," giving this some importance according to an occasion before. A war, an extraordinary fire, an episode of some illness, or an individual misfortune in the subject's life. A biographer would state this was from his idea in a "blue" period in his life. Or, then again, some other avocation. A development of negligible connections.
This is an extremity on the off chance that we take a gander at the words. We have become so theoretically bumbling that this extremity seems to have some screwing incredible profundity. (I surmise if one moved from a to b, and that was every one of the ones did, the development between the two would start to be the day's feature.) I can't perceive any, can you? It is only a distraction of dread and expectation, a more than (and not as much as) situation driving nowhere fast. Presently/time on the here/space. Dread moves to trust, and trust moves to fear. This is the visually impaired. It is a condition of partition; it has been utilized to choke observation to stop articulation as life. Our memory "bot" picture minds are unequipped to see past this di[e]-mensional introduction!
Life would/will be a total articulation, all including and all-encompassing. What else is there in like manner sense? This announcement is, by configuration, restricted. This announcement is comprised of thought, conviction, and supposition, it has no substance and underpins enduring that isn't simply the recompense of life to communicate. Expectation and dread can't be a genuine articulation of life by the idea of their impediment. They are the limiters and being sold as the real world!
Extraordinary.
Furthermore, our magazines are reversing this. This article is about the EMOTIONAL/EMO condition of the mother! WTF
By the way, I am intentionally leaving out all references to the source article. The reason is that it doesn't matter, and I don't want to provide any more eyeballs on this drivel.
REMOVING HOPE IS DIFFERENT THAN REMOVING FEAR
There is no hope unmingled with fear, and no fear unmingled with hope.
— Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677)
The titled responsion is fear-full, at least partially so!
Expectations, desires, or our perspective on the future are at this statement's core. We don't trust the past, nor do we (by and large) dread it. The equivalent is likewise generally valid for the present.
Just the future routinely holds the twofold-edged blade of expectation and dread. Trust in what may be acceptable or alluring, and dread what may be awful or undesirable.
However, when we think about the future, there is a harmony between expectation and dread. We ought to do genuinely well because we don't let dread or expectation rule unopposed.
Why is balance significant?
However long we stay to a great extent in the present and don't harp exorbitantly on the future, both can be quieted. Furthermore, if we plan for the most exceedingly awful, we can relieve the effect of the less attractive results. Plan what can be may be, and we trust never becomes and afterward finish, modifying varying.
However, balance is a precarious word in this specific situation. I don't imply that we should have equivalent proportions of expectation and dread, even though you may discover that to be valuable to you. The fact is to discover what works for you. Do you need the dread to rouse you, or does it cause you to freeze and sit idle?
What's more, who cares about hope? Is it accurate to say that you are so blinded by it that you overlook the possible issues or issues which could make you neglect to achieve your objective? Or then again, have you been scorched by "trust" so often that you have no utilization for it by any stretch of the imagination? How can it change for various circumstances?
A large portion of us will be somewhere close to the limits. In certain parts of our lives, we will be more cheerful and dreadful in others. A few things will dazzle us with expectation, and others will incapacitate us with dread. Finding your equalization point will assist you with the future, just as assisting you in dozing around evening time.
Where would I be able to apply this in my life?
We should each discover the parity which works best for us. Furthermore, where that point is likely could be distinctive in various conditions. That implies you need to know what will work best for you. Moreover, you should search inside yourself to find that parity point.
That may not seem fun, so focus on the pleasant you'll have next time when you can adjust everything, have the perfect measure of expectation and dread, and use them to accomplish your objective. You can make anything sound like work if you word it inaccurately. Attempt to make it fun.
Consider all mind-blowing pieces where your expectation isn't even with your dread, just like the opposite. Shouldn't something be said about sentiment? What about visiting the head of a tall structure and watching out, or even down? Shouldn't something be said about flying or taking a vessel ride?
When your sole expectation is to get out alive, your dread is presumably somewhat high, correct? Also, if your sole dread is that you bungle what you intend to state, you may be excessively cheerful at that point. If you go to and fro between them, you most likely need to get off the enthusiastic thrill ride, correct?
Consider something where you have a lot of dread. Do you know why? Do you get it? For what reason is it so incredible? What do you do to strengthen that conviction and dread in this way? What fears have you vanquished before? How could you defeat that dread and see the movement every day?
On the off chance that you are incapable of persuading yourself to decrease your dread, you can search for books, discover other people who have diminished that dread, or who may have the option to assist you with discovering more want to adjust the dread. What works for others probably won't work for you, so you must locate your way.
Shouldn't something be said about the occasions you are excessively confident, without a legitimate proportion of dread to adjust things? Do you climb things since they are there? That is incredible on the off chance that you can get down securely. If not, you should figure out how to decrease the expectation and locate a sound measure of concern or even dread for balance.
We, as a whole, have motivations for expectation and motivations to fear. When we have a lot of one without a great part of the other, we are out of equalization. Beneficial things seldom originate from such awkward nature. What are you going to change about your expectations and your apprehensions?
Then the child has chemo, which the FDA concedes has no adequacy, yet has put billions of dollars into and fears losing benefits, so it doesn't change a training it KNOWS just for languishing.
The business benefits.
The mother is "blessed" for her capacity to withstand languishing.
In the interim, the kid is being killed: He is most likely in extraordinary torment.
What is this?
This is such a wreck.
Too many "valuable" radiances around here. An excessive number of memory screens as brain, a radiance, the ideal mode for symbolism burden. To much overlooking what very exists as all that is seen is the valuable "corona".
Sound like a natural story. Does anybody see a closeness?
Take a gander at the artistic creations of holy people with their radiances; why should a corona persist when we can eradicate this virus? Why not look at this as though it is a science fiction picture? It resembles the comic book pictures we have today where people are in space wearing things on their heads to breathe in another atmosphere. Maybe those old artworks of holy people, who were the main ones painted in the light of the fact that the chapels had all the MONEY to pay the specialists and normally painted what upheld their benefits, were of holy people that outsiders quite vanquished! Is it so outlandish to accept that there is a between-dimensional corona around the entirety of our heads, set by some outsider race/between-dimensional presence? Is it so outlandish that we have been customized? I mean, why have a corona? What might the motivation behind a radiance be?
Could this world be sucked dry, squandered, and manhandled, be the wellspring of vitality for something different? For what other reason would this planet be so manhandled, the assets so mishandled?
On the off chance that this was your genuine home, and you were esteeming your home, okay, you have no desire to deal with it and SEE it? However, imagine a scenario where you were exotically closed down through a framework that halted your routine physical erotic nature. Imagine a scenario where a corona restricted your reasonable capacity and every other person to where you all concurred.
What I portray is really what exists. Try not to take my statement for this; set aside the effort to search for yourself, and I mean, honestly, look. You will begin perceiving how there are endless things that bode well!
There is so much data now that even a little exploration can guide one. Furthermore, individuals are standing up and talking, experts and specialists.
Somebody with PC access can proceed to investigate options, not have their child experience such practices TWICE.
These individuals have the assets to pick another approach to deal with this circumstance; they have the opportunity to research.
Their child is not required to experience chemotherapy; he is currently 19.
Particularly for somebody who has been advised to look fresh and examine choices. In the aspect of the world this individual lives in, with the measure of instruction this individual has, with the measure of data accessible, there is no reason for that kid to lie in a clinic being given chemotherapy.
Only a little examination would have uncovered how adequacy is determined and how the business manhandles individuals. Indeed, even a quick look would have prompted an acknowledgment of how this framework functions.
It doesn't sound good to me, and I need to understand this because there is no presence of mind.
That the mother is acting in a magazine like a screwing virgin mary, coloured hair and all, acting like she has incredible profundity, where what she is doing is lauding her feelings in a demonstration of personal responsibility and self-glorification, while her child is lying in a medical clinic bed being manhandled for cash is extremely wiped out.
This isn't quality; this isn't fortitude; this is weakness and obliviousness.
This is the love, the war boat of a bogus god.
Wake Up. Get some perceptual profundity.
Biology Says Different
Hope springs eternal in the human breast: Man never is, but always to be blest.
— Alexander Pope (1688-1744)
This famous aphorism highlights the human tendency to always seek happiness, despite the constant obstacles and setbacks that life throws us. This statement has been echoed throughout the ages, from ancient philosophers to modern-day self-help gurus. I can provide philosophical musings on the topic, with a dash of humour.
First, let's break down the quote. "Hope springs eternal" suggests that hope is an innate quality of the human experience. It is something that is hardwired into our very being. This is an interesting idea from a biological perspective, as it raises the question of whether hope is a trait selected through evolution. Perhaps, those who possess hope are more likely to survive and reproduce than those who do not. After all, hope gives us the motivation to keep going, even when things seem bleak.
However, the second part of the quote, "Man never is, but always to be blest," complicates things. It suggests that we are never truly happy or content and always strive for something better. This is a sentiment that many of us can relate to. We work hard to achieve our goals, only to find that once we reach them, we are still unsatisfied. We are always looking for the next thing, the next challenge to conquer. It's a never-ending cycle.
From a biological perspective, this could be seen as a result of our innate drive to survive and reproduce. We are wired to seek out resources and opportunities, to take risks and push ourselves to the limit. This is what has allowed us to thrive as a species. However, this drive can also lead to dissatisfaction and unhappiness. We are always seeking something more, but we never stop to appreciate what we already have. The use of "never" in relation to appreciating what we already have should be identified as a pessimistic anecdote. Nothing more. Is there value in this kind of framing?
How do we reconcile our innate hope with our constant desire for more? Perhaps the answer lies in finding a balance between the two. We can strive for our goals and pursue our dreams, but we should also take time to appreciate the present moment. We should savour the small victories and find joy in the simple things. After all, life is not just about achieving our goals; it's also about the journey along the way.
Of course, this is easier said than done. It's hard to find that balance, especially in a world that is constantly pushing us to do more, be more, and achieve more. But if we can learn to appreciate what we have while pursuing our goals, we might just find that happiness is not so elusive.
Our constant desire for more and our never-ending pursuit of happiness can also lead to dissatisfaction and unhappiness. The solution, perhaps, is to find a balance between our innate hope and our desire for more, to appreciate the present moment while still pursuing our goals. And if all else fails, we can always take comfort in the fact that at least we're not amoebas. They don't even have the capacity to hope for a better future.
Life is often compared to a tapestry, a rich tapestry of colours and textures woven together to create a beautiful, intricate pattern. But this tapestry is not always a happy one. It is often woven with threads of sadness, loss, and pain. Yet, as Gogol suggests, even in the midst of this sorrow, there is always a glimmer of joy, a bright thread that runs through the tapestry, gaily flashing past.
It's easy to get caught up in the sorrows of life, to feel overwhelmed by the darkness and the pain. But it's important to remember that even in the darkest moments, there is always a glimpse of hope, a spark of light that can guide us through.
From a philosophical perspective, this idea is reminiscent of the concept of the "absurd" in existentialist thought. The absurd is the idea that life is inherently meaningless and that our attempts to find meaning are ultimately futile. However, despite this, we still have the capacity to find joy and beauty in life. We can create our own meaning, even in the face of the absurd.
In a way, this is what Gogol is suggesting. Life may be filled with sorrows, but there is still a joy to be found. We may be unable to control the sorrows that come our way, but we can choose how we respond to them. We can choose to look for the glimmers of hope, the flashes of joy that run through the tapestry of life.
Of course, this is easier said than done. When we are in the midst of great sorrow, it can be hard to see the joy that is right in front of us. But if we can learn to cultivate a sense of mindfulness, to be present at the moment and appreciate the small things, we may find that joy is more abundant than we ever thought possible.
The idea is that life is inherently meaningless but that we still have the capacity to find joy and beauty in it. If we can learn to be mindful and appreciate the small things in life, we may find that joy is always just a glimpse away. And if all else fails, we can always take comfort in the fact that at least we're not ants. They don't even have the capacity to appreciate the joys and sorrows of life.
CATEGORICALLY IMPERATIVE
Once you label me you negate me.
— Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855)
The titled responsion refers to the categorical imperative version 2.0.
An "imperative" evocation of The Categories is both Aristotelian and Kantian. These metaphysical boundaries are fictively imagined and determined to provide a logical framework coupled with morality. Both examples highlight the imperative nature of our behavioural biology to assign imagined boundaries where there is nothing but a spectrum of life. It's imperative to use categories of metaphysics, from mathematics to morality, to live life in a way that doesn't transfer suffering to other conscious creatures.
ADDICTION WORKS THE SAME WAY
We cannot change anything until we accept it. Condemnation does not liberate, it oppresses.
— Carl Jung (1875-1961)
The titled responsion is addictive, acceptance is part of the healing process in addiction, or so I am told.
Acceptance is a relative term; if you juxtapose a complete and categorical acceptance with the dissent of man, the "evolution" of the human condition is partly subject to subjectivity. On the other hand, objective frameworks are ontological, and addictions are problematic.
PREDICTION ADDICTION
Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future.
— Niels Bohr (1885-1962)
The titled responsion is natural, and so is it an addiction?
When making predictions is very hard, especially about the future. This is because we are so used to living in a world of facts and figures that we do not think much about the future. There are no real surprises in our life; we know how to get by, and there are always people around us to help us in a time of need. We rely on the economy and the work ethic of those around us to keep us going.
But what about the future? Can we predict it, or is it just a certainty? How can we predict the future? What can we do to prepare for the future? And when making predictions, how do we get them right?
It is always important to be able to predict the future, especially the one you want, because you may not have to work as hard in that future. If you make the wrong prediction, you can end up with nothing, no work, no money, and no chance for anything better than this. This is something no person wants. So having a prediction is very important.
To be able to predict the future correctly, you have to be able to see it in detail. You have to think of things that happen in the past. Think of what happened in the past and where it will take us in the future. Think of everything you have heard from your friends about what they saw and did in the future.
And if you do not understand past people's predictions, then you need to listen to what they have to say; they may be able to tell you where the future is taking us. Of course, you should not put everything they say into practice, but try to understand it, like a puzzle.
It is essential to look into the future and see what it could be. And make some guesses, and try to figure out which way the future is taking us. and try to come up with a conclusion based on the information you have gathered. You may have to find some data or some information that you can use to figure this out.
However, you should also keep your predictions short and straightforward so people can understand them easily. You do not want to continue explaining things for hours unless it is vital. So if you do not understand things, then go ahead and leave it at that and explain them to someone else.
The future can be very difficult, especially for the future. So if you want to ensure that you are ready, then learn how to predict the future, and you will never regret it.
First, you must understand that there is no way that all the world's people know all the details. Some people can see things that no one else can see. For example, if someone sees something, there are some people who know this person and others who do not know this person.
Secondly, you need to take the information given to you and understand it, and then put it to work to your advantage. If a person tells you a fact about the future, try to use it to your advantage and find a way to put it into action.
Thirdly, you should look into the future with an open mind and use that information to try and use it to your advantage. When you do this, you can use all the knowledge you gather to help make the future a better place.
Remember, to make your prediction easier, you need to think of solutions to any problems that arise and see the future realistically. So if you have a problem, you should see if you can use it to your advantage.
HOPE SPRINGS ETERNAL
The day the Lord created hope was probably the same day he created Spring.
— Bernard Williams (1929-2003)
The titled responsion has sprung eternal from our culture's internal minds and bodies.
Elsewhere I have attempted to objectify hope and describe the boundaries of its utility. Addictive as it may be, our language is impregnated with the mustard seed of something foul, delivered with benevolence in mind; this is our birthright, and yet society isn't always correct, politically or ethically.
The planksip writers' cooperative sponsors a re-writing of this article (500 words) with $500 in prize money for the best article as voted by your peers in the planksip writer's cooperative. Judged by your peers, your chance to join a community of creative thinkers and win over $750,000 in prize money is your entry point into becoming a planksip journalist.
We want to change the way people engage. The planksip organic platform supports your voice as a writer and a thought leader. Join today. Membership matters!
Daniel Sanderson