pudn said:

Rad photo and rad looks, what does or where is leonibuki mean/from?

thank you pal !!

leonibuki is a ship name for the characters ibuki mioda and leon kuwata from dangan ronpa : D

theyre honestly the best pairing ever even though they never actually had a conversation in canon and are kinda sorta from different games „,

they were made for each other though i tell ya

im also url buddies with ibukileon !

I think my cat is sick. I’m really worried. His eye is like pink/red. I did a ton of researching online and it says that he might be allergic to something. The only thing out of the ordinary that has happened and yesterday my fan was dusted. I also bought a rug a few days ago. I really hope it’s something like that. It’s only one of his eyes..

pudn said:

But i do feel for your view on the words destroy true livid life because an action has a re-action, but only if you suppose it as a Re-action then rather an action of its own. I mean, everbody has a view and from another stand point, it is Fucked Up. I you can put up with what i'm laying down.

"But i do feel for your view on the words destroy true livid life because an action has a re-action, but only if you suppose it as a Re-action then rather an action of its own."

I’m not exactly sure how actions and “re-actions” are relevant.  I’m not basing my argument regarding language’s effect upon our conceptions and our perceptions of reality on actions.  I’m basing it on the notion of difference constructed from a linguistic representation.  That is to say, I don’t argue that every action has a reaction; I’m suggesting that every concept has a counter concept—an opposite—and this recognition of some difference—which may or may not exist in actual reality beyond the limitations of language—is the creation of categories that represent those differences.  Without an opposite or a lacking/negated counterpart, nothing expressed through language can exist.

For example:  If you ask me, “What is a pig?”  I’ll answer, “Whatever is not a pig.”

Watch on lanadelreignofterror.tumblr.com

my life

pudn said:

70. & 33.

33:Choose: East Coast or West Coast? East Coast :D Represent hahaha

70: Are you the kind of friend you would want to have as a friend? I would say so :) I’m always there for anyone if they need it and I give them advice when they need it :) 

pudn said:

I feel for what you're saying in ur bio, but with what you said and the link you posted going against itself on what i found as atleast two levels, i don't see an arrangement of your part as coming off as valid and feel peeps may dismiss your view from the gettgo

"I feel for what you’re saying in ur bio, but with what you said and the link you posted going against itself on what i found as atleast two levels…"

Is this what you’re suggesting:

1.  Existence precedes essence.
2.  The consequence of existence is free will.
3.  Free will is the tool with which we create an individual essence.
4.  Meaning and reality do not exist.

5.  If meaning and reality do not exist, then we cannot create an individual essence.
6.  If we cannot create an individual essence, free will is conceptually flawed.
7.  If we do not possess free will and free will is the consequence of existence, then reality is conceptually flawed.
8.  Therefore, reality must exist.

If so, here are the problems with this argument:  the argument presupposes that existence and essence are the same or are always mutually exclusive in a state of duality.  Also, I’ve never suggested that there’s not an underpinning reality.  I’m arguing that the reality we construct with language is based on substantial differences between values and subjects and, without language, these categorizations are meaningless.  Thus, language separates reality into two spheres:  the reality that no one can truly define or interact with, and the reality created through language based on the systematic categorization of values and subjects via various differences that ultimately aims to provide us with a method of understanding reality so far as we can.

"i don’t see an arrangement of your part as coming off as valid and feel peeps may dismiss your view from the gettgo."

Immediate dismissal is not a concern of mine.  I don’t expect anyone to accept my theory, and validation of the argument as some sort of truth honestly means nothing to me.  Sharing my thoughts because some followers asked me to do so does not negate my apathy.

pudn said:

i can suppose that's close to what i'm trying to hit on the head, but that seems elementary in octave thinking. Like, we as beings are freebased. With that you have free will, is that not god of your own being, and with that essence i see a godly being as a whole, thus a dividend of your being is a hole in reality. Like me saying god, i mean as one, not one providing for you to base your thinking off of but as if, you provide you something for you to futhermore your own. Did i tangent too much?

"…we as beings are freebased"

I’m not entirely sure what you mean by “freebased.”  At first, it seemed that you meant it to be synonymous with “free will,” but the subsequent sentence suggested otherwise.  So I’m not exactly sure what you mean.  I’m also wondering if by “freebase” you referring to the inescapable consequence of being born without essence (or with existential freedom, freedom of choice, etc.).

"With that you have free will, is that not god of your own being…"

First, you have to define free will and whether or not free will and free action are distinct from each other or parts of the same overall concept.  Are they incompatible?  Are they mutually exclusive?  Are they two parts of the same thing?

Then, you have to explain the relationship between mind and body.  Do mind and body retain autonomy and are, thus, independent from each other to some extent?  Are they, like free will and free action, two parts of the same thing?

"…and with that essence i see a godly being as a whole, thus a dividend of your being is a hole in reality."

You might have to correct me, but are you arguing that being born with free will is in fact a sort of essence?  If that’s the case, then you have to explain what you see as an “essence” and why.  An “essence” generally refers to something that defines a person or must necessarily exist in order to maintain an identity.  Are you saying that “existence” and “essence” are essentially the same thing, part of the same thing, or distinct from each other?  Is existence a condition, while essence is a consequence since our condition necessarily requires us to create an essence (for example:  I exist, then I breathe.  This makes me a person who breathes).

What do you mean by “godly being”—are you referring to an actual deity, or are you arguing that all people are “godly” because existence precedes essence and we construct essence via the consequential freedom of choice and/or will?  Are you suggesting that the absence of “essence” fractures “reality” in some manner to some extent?  If so, you then have to explain what you mean by “reality.”  Do you mean the reality we construct through language in order to create categories of difference, or do you mean the reality beyond the limitations of language that one can never fully recognize, identify, or understand due to the application of language?

"Like me saying god, i mean as one, not one providing for you to base your thinking off of but as if, you provide you something for you to furthermore your own."

I’m not exactly sure what you’re arguing or suggesting here.

pudn said:

I ejoi your shitass bio. With that being said on both yours and my part, what do you believe in

Are you strictly referring to religion, or are you asking about my worldview in general?  I don’t believe God exists, and I don’t believe the majority of the concepts to which we refer with language actually exist beyond the limitations of language.

For the second part, here’s a better explanation:  http://maryslovechild.tumblr.com/post/32221619462/what-i-believe-language-murders-meaning-truth-and

Is this what you mean?

I am so hungry. I already took my nightly pill that I have to take with a full meal. I have been slacking and eating the smallest meals with to take this damn pill. Idk what it’s even called. I need to get one of those old people pill organizer things to take to work.
I hate taking them too. I feel so lost when I’m at home. I can be curled up in bed and be freaked out because I feel like I’m in the driveway or something crazy like that.
The sleeping pill that has pain medicine in it causes me to actually not sleep. So now my sleeplessness has gotten worse but at least I do usually end up sleeping at least for an hour or so every night compared to an hour a week. So that’s definitely a good change.
I can’t eat after I take one of my pills, and that’s what makes me want to be hungry. I’m probably not at all actually hungry, but knowing I can’t eat until noon tomorrow is making me feel like I need something.

Text
Photo
Quote
Link
Chat
Audio
Video