An honest reaction

I never question the spatial dimensions of familiar objects.

There’s a table. I’m confident where it begins and ends. I do not question it’s dimensions because they serve a very clear purpose. I have no motive to question them. Don’t fix what isn’t broken.

Time is different. I question time’s integrity, specifically in relation to familiar objects, namely the planet, reality and myself.

I question this dimension because I do not like the practical result of this dimension. For all intensive purposes, it has a beginning and an end. Similar to the other dimensions.

In regards to my interest, it’s irrelevant that my mind creates distinctions that otherwise do not exist. I’m not interested in reality beyond my mind. Reality outside of me could be going to shit, it wouldn’t bother me, I’m only interested in harmony within, for that is all I have access to.

I know my end. I know my slot.

What shall I do with it?

I don’t place high value on my time, therefore, it’s of no great consequence how I choose to invest my time. I do not have the power to change my bias, but I have the illusion of control in regards to what I expose myself to. I react to the illusion, so it is valuable.

Why should I not expose myself to that which makes me lose sight of adversity, and when confronted, use methods to suppress said adversity. When on a death bed, why not render oneself incoherent from the experience with drugs?

This would be an honest reaction and a precedent for how to react in general.

Those are 5 questions.
…that you have failed to answer.

I hope I follow you… :

Death of my body.

A human enduring it’s condition.

‘It’ being my time. Which I try to answer in the paragraphs that follow the question.

I believe the value of my time isn’t far from neutral due to the things encompassed within my time, cancelling each other out. The result being something of little consequence.

I think this because I am the composition, the result of my bias. It made me, I did not make it. My movement is a reaction to my bias, so it’s not possible for me to act beyond it.


Is this what you meant? I heard somewhere that it’s a trap for a person to try to answer a question if the question can be avoided…

As usual, the opposite of what you hear is often the truth.
It is a trap to not answer the question that shouldn’t have been avoided.

Such is your choice.

That is not a “slot”. That is an identification.

Use it to better answer the those questions.

I think they call that “fatalism”… for a reason.

Therefore you can make no decisions?
Who made the decision that you have no power?

You’re saying that if every time I was confronted by the choice of life and death, if I chose life, I would never die?

That, and suicide, are the only conditions I see where you can describe death as a choice.

What’s the difference between these to you?

That one is determined, another chosen?

What do you consider a better answer?

I can see possibilities, I don’t know which one is supposed to be obvious…

Because fatism seems like prejudice against the obese instead of fate? Because it’s fatal? Because it’s focus is on the end?

I’m not saying I can’t make decisions. I’m saying I can’t change the factors that influence my decisions.

The idea was a reaction to the many influences around me. There was no ‘Who’ deciding these influences.