203,000 more jobs; unemployment down to 7%. Can we just enjoy this moment?

[Lash444]

Just that they process risk a little differently. This is a prime example of the extremes you take it to and this is just from one post:



That is just one of the 296 posts from you where you refer to the "Conservative Brain". Does that show intelligent debate, or the ramblings of a delusional psychopath?

Meh, I think the conservatives on this board are much more likely to stoop to using silly, and childish "slams" than vice versa. Maybe its the fact that I am a Democrat that I just see it more, but I really don't think so. At least Moonbeam's comments are delivered in an original way. Most other members on this board repeat the same old shit, with a sprinkling of childish behavior to instigate.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I did cite 16 peer reviewed articles noting differences of various types between liberal and conservative cognitive styles all with caveats of various kinds. I reference most often, when I refer to a conservative brain defect, to the fact that ON AVERAGE, conservatives are more likely to deflect or reject ideas that are unpleasant to their egos more than liberals are. I do this over and over in the face of endless truthiness claims put against me by conservatives that I am the one doing that. I have to point out over and over again that while there is scientific evidence that they are more likely to do this than liberals they remain absolutely and totally convinced that they don't and liberals do.

So, while one can quibble about the percentages of difference between liberal and conservative delusion, it is a fact that conservatives on average are tend to be more delusional than liberals. And what I get in the face of that is a near 100% denial by some of our noted conservatives who post here. No questioning of the self. No modest well maybe, just absolute denial. The evidence for a brain defect couldn't be clearer given of course, you have a liberal enough mind to see it and are open to scientific evidence. What I may have in spades, as it were, is the ability to present myself in ways that affect conservative ego.

You said that you previously cited 16 studies that support your perception. Please link a couple that you find to be most credible. Also, you should know full well that there are studies that that reflect poorly on liberals as well. Yet, you don't seem too concerned about these studies...why is that?

 

[Matt1970]

Meh, I think the conservatives on this board are much more likely to stoop to using silly, and childish "slams" than vice versa. Maybe its the fact that I am a Democrat that I just see it more, but I really don't think so. At least Moonbeam's comments are delivered in an original way. Most other members on this board repeat the same old shit, with a sprinkling of childish behavior to instigate.

Moonbeam's comments were original over a year ago. Now they are just the same old shit over and over again. Conservatives can't do this because of their brain defect. Conservatives can't do that because of their brain defect. The only variety he has is the rewording. It's like reading about the same even from 300 different news sources. It's still the same old story.

 

[IGBT]

it's the usual holiday bump. Nothing sustainable going on here.

 

[turgenjev1]

You Americans should be happy. Here in Croatia unemployment is about 20%, particulary among young people.

 

[LunarRay]

Fear is a survival instinct. It keeps you safe.

Only fools would consider it a weakness.

Sure! IF placed in an environment where Fear is a rationally invoked instinctive reaction it might increase the survival potential. Like avoiding Lions in Africa some time ago.

The proffer Moonbeam makes is to do more with What is causing the Fear reaction. Fear of something that rationally might not ought to cause fear.... Bunnies in Africa stalking humans ought not stimulate a fear response.

It appears that many Righties have a fear of Loss of Control... Probably shared by the Lefties but the reaction to that seems very different.

I figure a defect argument must be supported by base of normal and that is subjective. It might even be defective thinking to NOT react as the Righties do if the basis supports that.

There is a distinct difference twixt the L and R on the same issue. The question seems to generate a How question rather than a Why question...

From upon my perch it is easy to see who is right or wrong but then all that is subjective and based on how I process Fear... I might have seen a lion and thought a wonderful dinner was at hand while my fellow caveman secreted himself in the security of the cave.... and saw shadows.

 

[Matt1970]

Sure! IF placed in an environment where Fear is a rationally invoked instinctive reaction it might increase the survival potential. Like avoiding Lions in Africa some time ago.

The proffer Moonbeam makes is to do more with What is causing the Fear reaction. Fear of something that rationally might not ought to cause fear.... Bunnies in Africa stalking humans ought not stimulate a fear response.

It appears that many Righties have a fear of Loss of Control... Probably shared by the Lefties but the reaction to that seems very different.

I figure a defect argument must be supported by base of normal and that is subjective. It might even be defective thinking to NOT react as the Righties do if the basis supports that.

There is a distinct difference twixt the L and R on the same issue. The question seems to generate a How question rather than a Why question...

From upon my perch it is easy to see who is right or wrong but then all that is subjective and based on how I process Fear... I might have seen a lion and thought a wonderful dinner was at hand while my fellow caveman secreted himself in the security of the cave.... and saw shadows.

Do you see a lot of people in here even refrencing that study much less coming to the same conclusions Moonbeam has from it? You would think with all the lefties in here it would be their go-to response, but the majority of them see it for what it really is, hogwash. The way Moonbeam has latched on to it, twisted it in every possible way to fit the way he wants it to and using it to explain ever damn decision or thought process a Conservative has from the political choices they makes to what color car they decide to buy borders on the psychotic.

 

[Moonbeam]

Sure! IF placed in an environment where Fear is a rationally invoked instinctive reaction it might increase the survival potential. Like avoiding Lions in Africa some time ago.

The proffer Moonbeam makes is to do more with What is causing the Fear reaction. Fear of something that rationally might not ought to cause fear.... Bunnies in Africa stalking humans ought not stimulate a fear response.

It appears that many Righties have a fear of Loss of Control... Probably shared by the Lefties but the reaction to that seems very different.

I figure a defect argument must be supported by base of normal and that is subjective. It might even be defective thinking to NOT react as the Righties do if the basis supports that.

There is a distinct difference twixt the L and R on the same issue. The question seems to generate a How question rather than a Why question...

From upon my perch it is easy to see who is right or wrong but then all that is subjective and based on how I process Fear... I might have seen a lion and thought a wonderful dinner was at hand while my fellow caveman secreted himself in the security of the cave.... and saw shadows.

Careful of what you eat, my friend. I saw the fossilized bones of a woman who died in Africa 2 million years ago from eating a lion's liver. Doubtless, my conservative friends here will doubt my certainty, but I know exactly what happened because of science. Things that can't be comprehended by one can easily be comprehended by another who possesses real knowledge.

 

[Moonbeam]

Just that they process risk a little differently. This is a prime example of the extremes you take it to and this is just from one post:



That is just one of the 296 posts from you where you refer to the "Conservative Brain". Does that show intelligent debate, or the ramblings of a delusional psychopath?

The thing I like are your choice of alternatives, as if you could conceive of them all and had them pegged. Always some third way. Always some third way. You buy into your low effort conservative thinking every time.

 

[Moonbeam]

You said that you previously cited 16 studies that support your perception. Please link a couple that you find to be most credible. Also, you should know full well that there are studies that that reflect poorly on liberals as well. Yet, you don't seem too concerned about these studies...why is that?

http://2012election.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=004818

Take your pick.

What studies would you like me to concern myself about. Why would I be concerned about scientific evidence that reflects poorly on liberals. Liberals tend not to rationalize away scientific evidence that hurts their ego. You won't find out how much you hate yourself if you're mental conditioning knee jerks into defensive at the first sign of pain.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Can you point to the one that talks about this brain defect you go on and on and on and on and on and on about?

 

[Moonbeam]

irishScott: Oh you're not an elitist. You're a prisoner. You've constructed this mental distortion field with this twisted philosophy of yours. Occasionally you've hinted at past abuse in your posts, and that would make perfect sense. You were in an abusive situation that for whatever reason you couldn't escape. So you twisted your world-view to block out pain. When you assert the superiority of your strange, twisted philosophy, that isn't to exert power for its own sake, it's to prevent pain. A perfectly human thing to do.

Thank you for taking the time to respond. I do talk about abuse and I do talk about pain. But surely then, if I assert the superiority of my strange twisted philosophy how can it be to prevent pain? The superiority of my knowledge surely must rest on my belief that I know what I am talking about better than you or others and what is the subject matter, pain and abuse?????? So how do you explain the fact that I claim to know more about pain and abuse than you do while avoiding it. If you were to reason a bit more cogently, in my opinion, you would have come to a different conclusion, that I know more about pain and abuse and self hate, etc., because I actually know them better than you do. And the only way I could have arrived at any real experience of those things would be by feeling and memory. In short, in order to know more than you about pain, I would have had to experience it more than you have consciously. What you cannot and will not see is that the path of pain is the path of healing and you are the one who hasn't felt it. You assume that what I know about me doesn't apply to you. Hehe, I used to think so too.

i: Also explains why you post about it so much. The nature of internet communication means you can assign vocal tone, inflection, and essentially twist the nature of the post to whatever you want it to mean. As you are undoubtedly doing now. Were you to assert a similar opinion in reality you'd have to deal with what your eyes and ears told you, which is simple truth you cannot easily manipulate, risks cracking your field, and exposing you to pain.

M: Did you but suffer you would not suffer....A saying reported to be of Jesus.

i: But this philosophy apparently gives you a rationalization for everything, a I'm sure you have one ready and waiting for this post. You've invested too many years into your philosophy, and nothing anyone says on the internet can sway you.

M: He who tastes knows.

i: The saddest thing is this is not in keeping with reality, it will limit your ability to affect the world around you in any manner, and when you die your philosophy will die with you. This is simply a result of the way of things that everyone is subject to. And it's a shame, because you clearly have a decent intellect that could benefit others considerably, but instead you've chosen to apply that intellect to purely selfish actions, framed as selfless acts of pushing enlightenment.

I hope you change and confront your pain, to acknowledge reality, eliminate your pain and prosper; but in your current state I can only hope you die as painlessly as your distortion field can provide. For that is the only thing you seem interested in accomplishing.

M: The truth is the truth. It can't be kept from those who deserve it and can't be given to those who don't.

All you have to do to open the door to the understandings I speak of is to feel what you really feel. The experience of the wool pulled from your eyes is quite amazing. I must have said I can't believe it a thousand times. I used to be just like you.

One other thing. Everything I know I was taught by a man with a big smile on his face who said he was 99.999% certain he had transcended his own self hate, that he remembered everything and relived all of it. I have no idea why I was so lucky as to have met him.

So again, thank your for your post. You just have no idea how wrong you are. I am a nobody and it makes me rich in ways you can't imagine. You can take nothing from nothing, but only if you are very lucky.

 

[Moonbeam]

Can you point to the one that talks about this brain defect you go on and on and on and on and on and on about?

I have already gone on and on and on about the brain defect thingi to you and nothing changes. You deflect every time. You can't stop telling yourself the same story that nowhere in the scientific literature is your brain defect called a brain defect. That is the defect. Once more them:

You deflect truths that are unpleasant to your ego and if this truth is called a brain defect, which is naturally unpleasant to you, you will deflect the fact it's true. So by calling it a brain defect and you denying you have one, you prove it's true. It's all based on the fact that your nature has been elucidated by science and set in stone by you.

Another brain defect that conservatives have is cognitive rigidity. They don't take well to or adapt unpleasant ideas. You will find that research also in the link.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I have already gone on and on and on about the brain defect thingi to you and nothing changes. You deflect every time. You can't stop telling yourself the same story that nowhere in the scientific literature is your brain defect called a brain defect. That is the defect. Once more them:

You deflect truths that are unpleasant to your ego and if this truth is called a brain defect, which is naturally unpleasant to you, you will deflect the fact it's true. So by calling it a brain defect and you denying you have one, you prove it's true. It's all based on the fact that your nature has been elucidated by science and set in stone by you.

Another brain defect that conservatives have is cognitive rigidity. They don't take well to or adapt unpleasant ideas. You will find that research also in the link.

I've taken the time to read through these studies and can't find anything that backs up your claim of a conservative brain defect. If I use your train of thought some of the studies show that there's a liberal brain defect. Maybe that's why you act like you do in here. You use the claim of a conservative brain defect to deflect against admitting that your have a liberal brain defect.

 

[LunarRay]

Careful of what you eat, my friend. I saw the fossilized bones of a woman who died in Africa 2 million years ago from eating a lion's liver. Doubtless, my conservative friends here will doubt my certainty, but I know exactly what happened because of science. Things that can't be comprehended by one can easily be comprehended by another who possesses real knowledge.

What is of interest to me are the circumstances the lady had at hand. Did she happen upon a dead diseased lion or rationalized that she was hungry and the lion was food so she went about figuring how to convince this lion to die.... That she may have died as a consequence of either event - eating the liver - served to eliminate her from the gene pool.... hopefully.

Indeed, having expertise in a subject trumps ignorance in it. Some folks intuit first ... usually... and then go about trying to prove or fail that 'feeling'. Many folks simply take the short cut and adopt what makes them feel all warm and fuzzy.... I get a kick out of listening to someone who is totally ignorant in a subject adopt a position unsupported by the information to this point in time. Even the most ardent deniers of something have to allow for some possibility that an argument contrary is possible. But they don't.... and that is amazing.

 

[michal1980]

I've taken the time to read through these studies and can't find anything that backs up your claim of a conservative brain defect. If I use your train of thought some of the studies show that there's a liberal brain defect. Maybe that's why you act like you do in here. You use the claim of a conservative brain defect to deflect against admitting that your have a liberal brain defect.

he has no studies.

All the studies show there are difference which is a big surprise /s. (i'm not saying the studies are worthless, just that IMHO its obvious there would be differences)

 

[LunarRay]

Do you see a lot of people in here even refrencing that study much less coming to the same conclusions Moonbeam has from it? You would think with all the lefties in here it would be their go-to response, but the majority of them see it for what it really is, hogwash. The way Moonbeam has latched on to it, twisted it in every possible way to fit the way he wants it to and using it to explain ever damn decision or thought process a Conservative has from the political choices they makes to what color car they decide to buy borders on the psychotic.

Moonism is a theory that invokes the obvious. As in: Which came first the chicken or the egg?... Well, anyone who thinks knows the egg came first... Dinosaurs laid eggs and they were around long before the chicken.

In the case of brain defect - as I opined earlier - one has to determine or define defect. But that aside. There are differences in the brain that can be measured between our two types of thinkers (on the same stimuli). It appears that one can infer from these studies that how one processes the fear stimuli differs consistent with these brain differences. I attribute genetic activity to most everything but the stuff with genes does not evolve within its own lifetime.... Moonster differs on that... he says the thinking process alters the brain to conform to the desired thinking or at least that is my take on it. I argue that each has a predetermined potential - given the appropriate environmental factors - to activate physical change... and ergo, the thinking as it relates to the brain.

I don't much wonder why Lefties don't grasp onto this 'defect' notion to slap the Righties but, I expect it might be because although the difference exists what makes what the Righties think wrong and the Lefties right.

Is being moral something that anyone can achieve or is it only attainable by some precursor philosophical endeavor?
Are the attempts to gain full employment a moral quest and/or does who has to pay for this possess a trump card whose morality is a conjured attempt to avoid a self involvement in another's well being? Why wouldn't everyone want to see everyone else happy, healthy and etc.? There has to be some underlying thinking that keeps folks less than caring.
No doubt, I see the issue of our Nation's unemployed as a moral issue.... easily solved but for the absence of effort coupled with a concerted effort to not solve it.

 

[LunarRay]

he has no studies.

All the studies show there are difference which is a big surprise /s. (i'm not saying the studies are worthless, just that IMHO its obvious there would be differences)

I think it is reasonable to infer from these studies that the differences and the thinking are related.

I find it incredibly important to also consider how a brain injury can open up a previously untapped attribute.... Like some guy who banged his head and now has all this musical ability... Do we all have this potential and could avail ourselves simply by proper use of a hammer?

 

[michal1980]

I think it is reasonable to infer from these studies that the differences and the thinking are related.

I find it incredibly important to also consider how a brain injury can open up a previously untapped attribute.... Like some guy who banged his head and now has all this musical ability... Do we all have this potential and could avail ourselves simply by proper use of a hammer?

don't disagree with anything you said.

Or like what tends to happen to old people that have had strokes, they all of a sudden speak a language they learned in their youth.

I acknowledge the differences. I reject the notion of moonf*ks idea of a defect that he keeps trolling about.

IMHO he needs to use that idea of a defective brain, because it allows him to dismiss an entire population of people and how they think.

 

[LunarRay]

don't disagree with anything you said.

Or like what tends to happen to old people that have had strokes, they all of a sudden speak a language they learned in their youth.

I acknowledge the differences. I reject the notion of moonf*ks idea of a defect that he keeps trolling about.

IMHO he needs to use that idea of a defective brain, because it allows him to dismiss an entire population of people and how they think.

Well... There it is.

All we have to do now is set about determining the 'Defect'.... and who has it. ()

I wonder if different cultures might view things a bit differently? I suppose they would. I'd expect an Island Nation populated by ardent Christians to be totally sympathetic toward the poor and one populated by A-theists to be contrary thinkers... I can't find any, however, I have found a few States with a rather high population percentage of Christians but they seem to act like Atheists.... Guess I should check again on Sunday.

 

[Moonbeam]

Quote:
Originally Posted by michal1980
don't disagree with anything you said.

Or like what tends to happen to old people that have had strokes, they all of a sudden speak a language they learned in their youth.

I acknowledge the differences. I reject the notion of moonf*ks idea of a defect that he keeps trolling about.

IMHO he needs to use that idea of a defective brain, because it allows him to dismiss an entire population of people and how they think.

Well... There it is.

All we have to do now is set about determining the 'Defect'.... and who has it.

I wonder if different cultures might view things a bit differently? I suppose they would. I'd expect an Island Nation populated by ardent Christians to be totally sympathetic toward the poor and one populated by A-theists to be contrary thinkers... I can't find any, however, I have found a few States with a rather high population percentage of Christians but they seem to act like Atheists.... Guess I should check again on Sunday.

I get the feeling that Michal thinks it's me who has the brain defect. What a fascinating idea. Preposterous, of course, but definitely fascinating. It would mean that the sky isn't blue that things fall up and God is the Devil and that running around with my toes in the grass and a grin on my face is actually agony and he's not a Dalek encased in a shell terrified to feel anything yelling "EXTERMINATE THE DOCTOR WHO SAYS WE"RE DEFECTIVE."

 

[mshan]

"A Lot More to Like Besides the Headline Growth Rate

I have been complaining relatively consistently about the quality of recent job growth, with many jobs coming in the low-paying, low-hour sectors of the economy, including restaurants, hotels, and retail.

This month the goods-producing sector took a big step forward, adding 44,000 jobs versus its 12-month average of 24,000 jobs. The much larger services sector still added 152,000 jobs, but that was well below its 174,000 average over the last 12 months.

Within the goods sectors, things were hitting on all cylinders with manufacturing (even including the perpetually suffering nondurable sector), construction, and mining all doing better than trend.

Other stronger-than-trend sectors included transportation (couriers gearing up for holiday shipments) and the health and education sectors.

Things weren't all roses, though, with finance (which actually lost jobs), leisure and entertainment, and professional services all performing meaningfully below trend.



Hours Worked and Hourly Wages Put More Money in Consumers' Pockets

The category mix of jobs was probably one of the bigger contributors to a better report on both hours worked and hourly wages.

However, manufacturing hours were also up, indicating that the improvement wasn't entirely mix-related.

I think the hours and wage data is almost as important as the raw growth in employment, but is often overlooked in quick assessments of the employment report.

Although growth in total annual wages paid looks something like 4.4%, just 2.1% comes from adding more employees, and the balance from wage and hour growth per employee. Given very low inflation, those additional wage dollars can go even further.

The wage data referenced here is strictly private-sector data, and is not inflation-adjusted."

http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=622119

 

[Matt1970]

I have already gone on and on and on about the brain defect thingi to you and nothing changes. You deflect every time. You can't stop telling yourself the same story that nowhere in the scientific literature is your brain defect called a brain defect. That is the defect. Once more them:

You deflect truths that are unpleasant to your ego and if this truth is called a brain defect, which is naturally unpleasant to you, you will deflect the fact it's true. So by calling it a brain defect and you denying you have one, you prove it's true. It's all based on the fact that your nature has been elucidated by science and set in stone by you.

Another brain defect that conservatives have is cognitive rigidity. They don't take well to or adapt unpleasant ideas. You will find that research also in the link.

To sum up, you are full of shit. There is absolutely nothing in there to indicate a defect.

You deflect truths that are unpleasant to your ego and if this truth is called a brain defect, which is naturally unpleasant to you, you will deflect the fact it's true.

Show me where specifically in the study you draw this conclusion from.

 

[Spungo]

What's awesome about the jobs report is that it shows how fake the economic recovery is. The fed said they would print money until the jobs numbers looked better. Then a jobs report shows the numbers getting better. The market realizes this could potentially lead to a stock market crash because it would mean tapering QE. The stock market started going down while treasury yields went up. Then the fed said don't worry, we'll print more. The thing turned around and stocks jumped up again. This has been the new norm lately. Any time there has been bad news about the economy, stocks would go up because bad news means more QE. Good news caused stock declines because it would potentially mean less QE.

 

[irishScott]

Thank you for taking the time to respond. I do talk about abuse and I do talk about pain. But surely then, if I assert the superiority of my strange twisted philosophy how can it be to prevent pain? The superiority of my knowledge surely must rest on my belief that I know what I am talking about better than you or others and what is the subject matter, pain and abuse?????? So how do you explain the fact that I claim to know more about pain and abuse than you do while avoiding it. If you were to reason a bit more cogently, in my opinion, you would have come to a different conclusion, that I know more about pain and abuse and self hate, etc., because I actually know them better than you do. And the only way I could have arrived at any real experience of those things would be by feeling and memory. In short, in order to know more than you about pain, I would have had to experience it more than you have consciously. What you cannot and will not see is that the path of pain is the path of healing and you are the one who hasn't felt it. You assume that what I know about me doesn't apply to you. Hehe, I used to think so too.

The same way anyone does, rationalization. You come up with an explanation for the pain that makes you feel better in some regard, without addressing said pain directly. Or perhaps it partially addresses the pain, and fills in the remaining gaps with rationalization (the most convincing lies are half-truths).

As for "the path of pain is the path of healing", that's a prime example. In some cases this is true, such as breaking a badly healed bone to straighten it, or attempting to change oneself psychologically, to conquer anxiety and such. But in other cases it is also false. Cutting oneself is one path of pain, and it leads to the body healing the cut from the moment the cut is made, but that does not make it healthy or productive. Quite the opposite, such habits are self-destructive by nature.

And what you know about yourself may or may not apply to me. There are no two people on this planet, not even identical twins, who share a perfectly identical existence or perfectly identical needs. Your system might work for you to some degree, but from what I've seen of it on these forums it is rather overcomplicated and fallacious, another sign of rationalization.

M: Did you but suffer you would not suffer....A saying reported to be of Jesus.

So you claim to not shy away from pain, presumably because you see it as the path of healing? See previous response.

M: He who tastes knows.

A young child is certain that everyone else thinks the same way he does.

M: The truth is the truth. It can't be kept from those who deserve it and can't be given to those who don't.

All you have to do to open the door to the understandings I speak of is to feel what you really feel. The experience of the wool pulled from your eyes is quite amazing. I must have said I can't believe it a thousand times. I used to be just like you.

One other thing. Everything I know I was taught by a man with a big smile on his face who said he was 99.999% certain he had transcended his own self hate, that he remembered everything and relived all of it. I have no idea why I was so lucky as to have met him.

So again, thank your for your post. You just have no idea how wrong you are. I am a nobody and it makes me rich in ways you can't imagine. You can take nothing from nothing, but only if you are very lucky.

For one who claims to not be elitest, you talk of "deserving" the truth? So truth is a commodity that must be earned? A thing that provides stature of whatever form over others? Truth is truth, and it governs and affects all things whether they acknowledge it or not. It has no preference, and it is never "deserved" any more than those that acknowledge rain "deserve" rainfall. Granted those that acknowledge rain can benefit more by harnessing that knowledge, but they have not earned those benefits, they have merely made use of what was already there.

What I really feel is apparently rather different from what you really feel.

For being a nobody, you've concocted quite the convoluted belief system. It would appear that you haven't reduced, you've traded complications you couldn't deal with for complications that you could. You've gained, and have been continuously gaining for quite some time, as can be seen in your posting history.

I imagine the man who taught you was some form of either Taoist or Buddhist, as those are the two main philosophies that say honor and shame should both be avoided, as one is rooted in the other and both bind a person to purely manufactured, unnatural perceptions; but from what I've seen of your posts you've taken this one lesson and applied it to literally everything; using it as an explanation for literally everything. Or perhaps your mentor did and you adopted his way of thinking.

And so we go back to my earlier point that the most convincing lies are half-truths. Honor and shame should both be avoided IMHO, but that does not mean that everything human is born of honor and shame, or "self-hate" as you put it. Emotions are often independent of honor and shame (although they can be derived from them), and are completely natural. Conquering self-hate does not free you of them, only forceful suppression does that. Things that are forced will prosper for a time, and then fade to nothing.

This obsession and over-application of self-hate philosophy is further indicative of rationalization.

Simple fact is if I, or anyone else on this forum I'm aware of, followed your beliefs we would not be reducing or simplifying, we would be gaining and complexifying, as you routinely do. It would root our thoughts in unnatural, manufactured perceptions, as yours sadly are.

If you were a nobody, you would not continually harp on "Conservative brain defects", nor would you talk about "deserving" the truth. Both serve to reinforce an internal hierarchy that you have created. You were likely taught some form of "reduction brings enlightenment", attempted to "reduce", and when you perceived that you had reduced enough (likely through perceiving that you'd conquered honor and shame) you attempted lay claim on your "reward" of enlightenment. Just as you profess that claim in this very thread.

If your belief system is so truthful, so correct, then why do you do nothing but pontificate on the correctness of it? Why do you present cryptic, abstract arguments and responses? Even if they are your beliefs in their purist form, why do you not simplify it so as to lead others to your understanding over time? Assuming you were a college professor, and the rest of us were children that had barely learned addition, your posts are the equivalent of trying to teach us derivatives before we've mastered multiplication. Naturally the children will reject what they don't understand. The only explanations for such behavior is severe incompetence or an attempt to dazzle others with your own perceptions, so you can be the "honored" one.

But no one here is honoring you, except yourself. No one here is listening to you, except yourself. Your system is forced.