Could AI, robots, cyborgs learn what love is to enable them to practice what they preach?
Here is a fairly clear idea of how that question may be brought to reality:
One such idea Not until both robots and AI become much more humanlike.
“There are so many lonely people in the world that it would be wonderful if it were possible, like in the movie Her, but unfortunately we aren’t there yet. Robotic pets are being used to provide companionship to older people in Japan, which has very many more older and single people than the United States, but of course that is much different than a romantic relationship. Perhaps as people become more like robots, robots will become more like people.”
This idea is pretty straight foreward and fairly convincing.
However, as the evolutionary progression proceeds, such as the ladder of live culminating in an all encompassing preverbial power, remains as allusive as ever.
Can a synthetic unity, of a nearness to that Power be exemplified with the changing logi eternally reconnected with the correlational imagery subsisting in consciousness?
Love is not only possible in AI,
i think it could be eventually be made into super-human-love.
There’s nothing out there holding it back.
The only thing holding it back is its present state of development.
agree Dan
If love isn’t possible for an AI it could at least be emulated.
“It is a notable paradox that some augmented humans do lose their humanity – becoming what they, at an unconscious level, perceive AIs to be – while AIs, through age, experience and their own expansion of processing power, come to understand humanity better and therefore become more humane.”
…but what is it that they need to practise, to preach?
That’s a predictable question, and that is to overcome the behavioristic model of how the ratio of techne over that of what ‘s left from the essentially human element would be apportioned.
There needs be a total integration of the ontologically programmed referential schematics , which somehow could correlate into feedback loops that could predict within a certain margin of error some predeterminable mix with those future planned criteria that could define a postmodern human nature, which with no One’s existential, sought after, individual program could be violated.
Cross sectioned conjectures, that would cut the continuity of individual relative objectives , slowly develop variable integrity, re-forming slowly the I-thou chasm that periodically occurs not only among trferetial memory banks, with their consummate reviews of latent achievable progress, but organizing a reconstruction to link with the reemergence of effecting variable links to newly evolved, albeit unexpected mutated variation that could present safety issues, which could limit the effective behavior of the entire system as a workeable unit.
Perhaps. Aling these lines.
Some of this kind of study is already being done in think tanks, in conjunction with public and private institutions, however the margins of bounded error are still in the beginning phases. The neural rewriting of a global hegemony needs overall integration , from ground up and then in constant recoil, involving all strata’s which become exposed to such possibility, and without undermining such efforts by actual violations of hard wired socio-economic -politically sensitive establishments.
The ultra-politization of such programs can turn identificational bias into various stratagems that would progress to debatable margins of error, so as to enable robotics, for instance , create the impression of forming kind of busy work that would result with machines would take over, by leaving optimally induced ‘free’ choices based on innovation that can be fine-lined into the mix.
The visionaries, the imaginators of such innovation, would not necessarily be limited by some such e cryptic notation that would the d to, as Humanize suggests, divide the ‘mad from the the useful, or as again from the same referent:
“So you mean that God waits at the other end of singularity? Maybe he waits there to welcome us, or to destroy us. That’s actually an interesting thought either way.”
Well interesting it is for from the Bible this: those that god wants to destroy He first drives mad”
To be more resourceful:
“Those whom God wishes to destroy, he first makes mad.”
Euripides
Look the derivation:
<<><><><>>>>><<>>>
Skip to content
Roger PearseThoughts on Antiquity, Patristics, putting things online, information access, and more
Is “those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad” a classical quotation?
Posted on October 31, 2015 by Roger Pearse
Last night I was reading Boswell’s Life of Johnson, and came across the familiar quotation in a Latin form, Quos Deus vult perdere prius dementat – “those whom God wishes to destroy he first drives mad”. Therein it was stated that the Latin quotation was on everyone’s lips, but its source was known to nobody.
A Google Books search on the English version gives no hits before the mid-19th century. Before then, the tag was circulated in Latin, it seems, with various word-orders and slight variants.
I think we can suppose that the English “gods” replacing “Deus”, “God”, is just a feature of quotation. These tags are not transmitted as gospel, and a speaker or writer will modify them as he thinks gives the best effect.
But where does the Latin text come from? Is it ancient? In fact it is not. It originates, as best I can tell, in the 17th century.
A Google Books search found me an article in the Monthly Magazine or British Register, vol. 51 (1821), p.520, in which a correspondent writes as follows:
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine
SIR,
IN the following extract from Mr Boswell’s Life of Dr Johnson vol iv pp 196 and 7 your correspondent Poplicola in your Magazine for May will find his enquiry answered respecting the Latin line he quotes — “Quos Deus vult perdere prius dementat.”
With the following elucidation of the other saying:– “Quos Deus (it should rather be Quem Jupiter) vult perdere prius dementat,” Mr Boswell was furnished by Mr Richard Howe of Aspley in Bedfordshire, as communicated to that gentleman by his friend Mr John Pitts, late rector of Great Brickhill in Buckinghamshire.
Perhaps no scrap of Latin whatever has been more quoted than this. It occasionally falls even from those who are scrupulous even to pedantry in their latinity and will not admit a word into their compositions which has not the sanction of the first age. The word demento is of no authority either as a verb active or neuter. After a long search for the purpose of deciding a bet, some gentlemen of Cambridge found it amongst the fragments of Euripides, in what edition I do not recollect, where it is given as a translation of a Greek Iambick.
Ον Θιος ?̣ελει απολεσεις πρωτ̕ αποφρετας [I can barely read this]
The above scrap was found in the hand writing of a suicide of fashion. Sir D.O. some years ago lying on the table of the room where he had destroyed himself. The suicide was man of classical acquirements: he left no other paper behind him.
ALLSHARPS
May 19th, 1821
This is interesting for several reasons. Firstly, it gives a variant form, “Quem Jupiter”. Secondly it refers to an early unspecified edition of Euripedes.
Which edition this is is revealed by another hit in the search, P. R. Reynolds, The Writing and Selling of Fiction, 139-140:
Joshua Barnes (or Barnesius, according to the custom of the time) edited the works of Euripides in 1694, Euripides quae extant omnia. This including a collection of fragments of various tragedies, which appears in the work under the title Incertae Tragoediae. The volume also includes three indexes, on unnumbered pages. The first index is important to this story.
In this “index prior”, under the letter “D”, (Google books link), we find the following:
barnes_euripedes_index
I.e. Deus quos vult perdere, dementat prius, as found in the “Incerta”, on verse or line 436. For of course this is drama, and each line is numbered.
Now this is certainly our quotation from Johnson. But what precisely is the entry in the body of the text? Again, we are fortunate that the volume is online, for we can locate v.436 here, and it is thus:
The Greek of the fragments appears in the left column, and is more or less as follows:
Όταν ὁ δαίμων ἀνδρὶ πορσύνῃ κακά,
τὸν νοῦν ἔβλαψε πρῶτον
Which has been rendered like this:
But when the daimon plots against a man,
He first inflicts some hurt upon his mind.
The word daimon does not here mean “demon”, but rather has the twin meanings of “divinity” and “fortune”. In his translation, Barnes uses “Numen”, rather than “Deus”, with this in mind. In fact our saying is not Barnes’ translation, but instead a summary of the content!
So the Latin is in fact a coinage by Dr Joshua Barnes, in 1694, summarising a saying that he believed was a fragment of Euripides.
The fragment is found in the second century AD Christian writer Athenagoras of Athens, in his Supplicatio pro Christianis (Plea for the Christians), chapter 26, as Barnes himself indicates in his marginal notes on the passage above.
But I learn from this site that in fact it is a note on Sophocles Antigone, l.620, by a scholiast. The idea itself is present in Homer, Odyssey, IX, 492-3.
In the tragedy Antigone, of Sophocles, in verses 620-623, it said something similar:
For cunningly of old was the celebrated saying revealed: evil sometimes seems good
to a man whose mind a god leads to destruction.
The ancient scholiast on these verses says:
When a god plans harm against a man, he first damages the mind of the man he is plotting against.
όταν ό δαίμων άνδρΐ πορσύνῃ κακά,
τον νουν εβλαφε πρώτον ώ βουλεύεται.
August Nauck collected this couplet as one of the fragments of his Fragmenta Tragicorum Graecorum (Leipzig.Teubner 1889), namely exactly the number 455 of Adespota or anonymous and therefore without author:
The couplet is in the scholia to Sophocles, Antigone, l. 620 …
The scholion is then quoted by Athenagoras. Why the early editors attributed the saying to Euripedes I do not know.
Barnes also mentions the sayings of Publilius Syrus, in the 1st century BC, and the same site tells us that the Sententiae 612 reads:
Stultum facit Fortuna quem vult perdere
Fortune makes stupid him who she wishes to destroy.
But there is more. For what about this variant “Quos Jupiter”? It turns out that Barnes himself was working from an older writer, James Duport.
In 1660 Duport published his collection of sayings from Homer, Homeri poetarum omnium seculorum facile principis gnomologia, better known as the Gnomologia Homerica. On p.262 (Google Books) we find the following comment, note a, on the section of the Odyssey:
barnes_euripedes_text duport_homerAfter reviewing a couple of instances of the thought, Duport quotes a portion of Euripedes, and then, expressing the opposite thought (Contra) he quotes the same line and translates Quem Jupiter vult perdere, dementat prius. This gives us our variant.
It would be interesting to see what might be found in earlier editions of Euripedes, or any Latin translations of that era. Most Greek works appeared first in a Latin translation, after all. Unfortunately at this time I do not have much knowledge of the transmission history of Euripedes, so that must wait for another time.
To summarise, the saying as we have it is a 19th century translation of an index entry, written by Joshua Barnes in 1694 in his edition of Euripedes. The entry summarised rather than translated the content of a couple of lines of Greek. The lines were originally by a scholiast on Sophocles, quoted in the 2nd century AD by Athenagoras, and supposed to be by Euripedes by early editors of that author. Barnes in turn was almost quoting James Duport in his 1660 work on the ideas to be found in Homer.
We may suppose that “Deus” and “Jupiter” were altered by some unknown speaker into “gods” in 19th century English, from an entirely correct feeling that the saying was not consistent with the character of God, but rather more with the outlook of the pagan gods of ancient Greece who, to quote a more modern source, “were petty and cruel, and plagued mankind with suffering.”
UPDATE. I had meant to mention also the French editor Boissonade, who later gave a commentary on Euripedes in his Poetarum graecorum sylloge tom. XIX. Euripides tom. 4. In the 1826 reprint, again in the index, on p.322, we find:
Jupiter quos vult perdere dementat … 300
And on p.300, which is scholia on the Bacchae, line 840, we get the Greek and then “sic quos vult perdere Jupiter dementat.”
UPDATE: An email from Andrew Eastbourne draws my attention to an article, F.W.Householder, “Quem deus vult perdere dementat prius”, The Classical Weekly 29 (1936), 165-7 (JSTOR). This suggests that the Latin tag does not originate with Duport, but that he was referencing some existing form of the saying.
Share this:
EmailTwitterFacebookRedditLinkedInPinterest
Like this:
Loading…
Share
Posted in From my diaryTagged Euripedes
Post navigation
« From my diary
New edition of Cyril of Alexandria’s “Against Julian” is soon to appear – offline, and very pricey »
20 thoughts on “Is “those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad” a classical quotation?”
Thomas Rudder says:
October 31, 2015 at 9:56 pm
Impressive scholarly detective work on your part, thank you for sharing.
Dan king says:
November 1, 2015 at 5:41 am
Thanks very much for this info. Your following of obscure traditions lights up otherwise dull days! Reading Dr Johnson contributions in the Rambler always threw up for me so many curious questions of this sort which I never had time to follow up. How great is Google books!
Roger Pearse says:
November 1, 2015 at 6:06 pm
Thank you. I ought to reread the Rambler.
Anonymous says:
November 2, 2015 at 1:40 pm
Thought you might find this useful :
From Greek Wiktionary:
Etymology “μωραίνει Κύριος ον βούλεται απολέσαι”:
The ancient Greek notion of ἄτη is found in the verses of Sophocles (Antigoni verses 620-623) τὸ κακὸν δοκεῖν ποτ᾽ ἐσθλὸν τῷδ᾽ ἔμμεν’ ὅτῳ φρένας θεὸς ἄγει πρὸς ἄταν (evil resembles good to him whose mind god leads to άτη – that is, to the one whose mind god bedims, in order to lead him to disaster). In Latin, this notion is expressed in the phrase “Stultum facit fortuna, quem vult perdere” (= fate stupefies whom she wishes to get rid of) and is later recorded in an anonymous motto as “Quem Iuppiter vult perdere, dementat prius” (= whom Jupiter wants lost, he first makes mad). With the propagation of Christianity, Jupiter (Zeus) was replaced by the term “Deus” (God, Lord) and that is how it continues to be used to this day.
David Llewellyn Dodds says:
November 14, 2015 at 2:32 am
Your observation about “an entirely correct feeling that the saying was not consistent with the character of God” seems quite in keeping with the chapter you link from Athenagoras. Not knowing anything of the history of the saying, I wondered about the possible parallel of the “Deus” form with, for example, the repeated phrasing in Romans 1:24, 26, and 28 (in the Vulgate, “tradidit illos Deus in desideria cordis eorum,” “in passiones ignominiae”, and “in reprobum sensum”), taking the activity of “vult” and “dementat” as permissive.
Michael Cadoux says:
November 6, 2016 at 6:18 am
Your research is appreciated. I’m not a classicist, but one of those unfortunates who compulsively has to know. Useful for pub quizzes, annoying one’s N&D, and not much else.
Roger Pearse says:
November 6, 2016 at 4:46 pm
Glad to help!
mrodent says:
December 28, 2016 at 11:53 pm
As Egypt is the Gift of the Nile, so your enlightenment (for me) is the Gift of the Net. Wonderful. Thank you.
Roger Pearse says:
December 28, 2016 at 11:55 pm
You’re very welcome!
Alf Walker says:
October 3, 2017 at 7:21 pm
I have been transcribing talks given by the Kashmiri Mystic and Philosopher Gopi Krishna Shivpuri. In a talk given in 1972 entitled “Averting Nuclear War,” he says the following – “Generally, whenever a calamity has to occur the first effect falls on the intellect. There is a proverb in Sanskrit – a saying in Sanskrit – (I cannot translate what he says in Sanskrit however he goes on to give the translation) – “That distortion of the intellect precedes a catastrophe.” So perhaps the mystery goes even deeper than Greek and Latin?
Roger Pearse says:
October 3, 2017 at 7:22 pm
Interesting – thank you.
Mike says:
October 8, 2017 at 1:42 pm
I turned to this article following a visit to the Unitarian church on Ullet Road, Liverpool where I discovered this inscription on the memorial plaque for Charles Pierre Melly (distant relation to George Melly).
“Whom the Lord Loveth, He Chasteneth”
Melly committed suicide in 1888 during a bout of depression.
This reminded me of the ‘Greek proverb’, so I really appreciate your research.
Well done
Anthony Tuffin says:
August 3, 2019 at 7:56 pm
i doubt whether an ancient would have said, “Quos Deus vult perdere prius dementat” because they believed not in “God” but in a pantheon of gods. I suppos
Roger Pearse says:
August 3, 2019 at 8:10 pm
Not sure without looking.
Edward McLaughlin says:
December 8, 2019 at 8:12 am
Very useful and fascinating. Thank you.
Mark says:
March 17, 2020 at 7:04 pm
when did the version, “…they first deprive of reason”, come into being? It has a more satisfying meter
than ” makes mad” in English.
Peter Millward says:
June 25, 2020 at 3:48 am
In June 1944, the XXXIX Panzer Corps was assigned to Army Group Centre in the Belorussian SSR. Shortly before the Soviet summer offensive, Operation Bagration, a battalion commander in the 12th Infantry Division raised concerns about a possible attack with Martinek, who was on a tour of inspection. Martinek agreed but in response cited the proverb “Whom God would destroy, he first strikes blind”.[3] Soviet forces launched the offensive on 23 June; Martinek’s corps was rapidly outflanked. Martinek was killed in an air attack on 28 June near Berezino.[2] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Martinek
I became interested in this after finding…the above qoute and then finding variations – fascinating!
Pingback: Facts without Truth, Truths without Facts – SCUTUM ET LORICA
Pingback: Facts without Truth, Truths without Facts - Catholic Daily
Pingback: Ending of an Era – Sri Lanka News Updates
Leave a Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Comment *
Name *
Email *
Website
Notify me of follow-up comments by email.
Notify me of new posts by email.
Search for:
Pages
About this blog
Ephraim Graecus – A List of Works
Eutychius, “Annals” – my posts containing the translation
Sitemap
The ‘Halkin’ Life of Constantine in English
The works of Augustine against Secundinus the Manichaean in English
Contact Me
Patrologia Latina (PL) PDF’s
Patrologia Graeca (PG) PDF’s
Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller (GCS) PDF’s
Patrologia Orientalis (PO) PDF’s
Errata et supplementa for Eusebius, Gospel Problems and Solutions
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Email Address
SUBSCRIBE
Join 1,866 other subscribers.
Recent Posts
From My Diary
Tertullian, De Baptismo – new text and Italian translation available online
Methodius of Olympus, De Cibis – critical edition in progress
A curious quotation of Matthew 17:19 in Latin
From my diary
Recent Comments
Roger Pearse on Arius to Eusebius of Nicomedia: the Son is “fully God”
Johan on Arius to Eusebius of Nicomedia: the Son is “fully God”
Roger Pearse on A parchment fragment of Agrippa Castor “Against Basilides”?
Ian Mills on A parchment fragment of Agrippa Castor “Against Basilides”?
Roger Pearse on From My Diary
Christianity
The Vicar’s Wife
UCCF doctrinal basis
Virtue Online
Computing and the ancient world
How to enter Coptic unicode text when you don’t know the alphabet
Tyndale Tech
Type in unicode Greek
Egypt
Luxor Travel Tips
Hagiography
Acta Sanctorum
Acta Sanctorum (editable text)
BHL Online Mss – Latin Saints’ Lives – Bollandists
Cult of Saints in Late Antiquity Database
The Lives of Saints (1730) vol. 1
The Lives of Saints (1730) vol. 2
Interesting links
Ancient Christian Writers volumes online
Anthologia Graeca – epigrams
Armenian Downloads at Robert Bedrosian
Cambridge Ancient History (3rd edition) online
Clauss-Slaby Inscriptions Database
Coptic resources
Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (Arachne)
Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae
CSEL volumes on Google Books
Description de l’Égypte, ou Recueil des observations …
Digital Latin Medieval Manuscripts – a set of links
Dumbarton Oaks Syriac Resources
Franciscan Authors, 13th-18th Century: A catalogue in progress
Fundamental Reference Works for the Study of Arabic Literature
GCS texts for download
Google ancient Greek and Latin (hi-res)
Greek and Latin Epigraphy – an absolute beginners’ guide
Gregory of Nyssa: the translations of Richard McCambly
Hermes – Zeitschrift für klassische Philologie
How to find patristic biblical citations
Hugh Houghton’s papers on Ancient Biblical Commentaries
hugoye-list
Islamic Manuscripts Reference Library (including Graf)
LINKS GALORE (Spreadsheet of PDFs of PL, PG, Acta Sanctorum, &c)
Loebolus
Loebs for download
Maia Ancient World Blogs
Mansi volumes online
Mischa Hooker: list of Patrologia Graeca volumes online
Nova Patrum Bibliothecae
Oeuvres complètes de Saint Augustin
Papyrus Stories
Patristique.org
Patrologia Graeca online
Patrologia Graeca PDF’s online (graeca.patristica.net)
Patrologia Latina PDF’s online (latina.patristica.net)
Perseus Catalog of ancient authors
PHI Database of Greek Inscriptions
Pinakes – IRHT Greek Manuscripts Database
Post-classical Latin Resources, by Daniel Hadas
Pseudo-Chrysostomica Database
Remacle.org – L’antiquité grecque et latine
Repertorium pseudo-chrysostomicum
Revue des Études Augustiniennes
Robert Bedrosian’s Armenian Translations
Saxa Loquuntur – Epigraphic resources
Search engine for digitized Greek manuscripts
Sidonius Apollinaris
Table of all the councils
Texte und Untersuchungen online
Language tools online
Abbreviations in Latin Inscriptions
Corpus Corporum – a database of Latin texts
Du Cange’s Latin Dictionary (PDFs)
Du Cange, Glossarium mediæ et infimæ latinitatis. Searchable for medieval Latin.
French English dictionary
Gaffiot’s Dictionaire Latin-Français (1934)
Later Latin – Dictionaries (offline)
Latin inscription abbreviations (1808)
Lexicon of Latin Lexicons
Littré’s French dictionary
TLL Open Access
Manuscript tools
Dated and Dateable Latin Manuscripts
Finding an IIIF manifest
My own websites
QuickLatin Latin-English translation software
The Additional Fathers in English translation
The Ante-Nicene, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers
The Roman cult of Mithras
The Tertullian Project
Related weblogs
Bread and Circuses
Charaktêres – Ancient Magic and Ritual Practice
Evangelical Textual Criticism
Hypotyposeis
Libanius Redux – Antiochepedia
New at Lacus Curtius and Livius.org
Notes on Arab Orthodoxy
Paleojudaica
Quodlibeta
Unhistorize
Tags
African Councils Al-Makin Ancient world Anthony Alcock Antiochus of Athens Arabic Christian Literature Astrological texts Attis Bible British Library Canon Law Catena Chapter titles Christianity Christianity Chrysostom Chrysostom Project Computing Coptic Copyright Egypt Eusebius Eutychius Free speech online From my diary Humour Ibn Abi Usaibia Information access Isidore of Pelusium John the Lydian Manuscripts Mar Aba Meta Sudans Methodius Mithras Nicholas of Myra Origen Origen Homilies Project Other Arabic Other blogs Papyri Patristics Severian of Gabala St Nicholas of Myra Syriac
Proudly powered by WordPress | Theme: Underskeleton by getunderskeleton.com.
<><><>><>><>>>
That’s how close The Fear’ is not becoming! (Say what?)
There are simulations but then there are simulators, not to begin with assimulators.
At the last man phase, before the Nee Man arises, miracles Must happen, as they have down through the ages
“Alfred aR Newman
Love/hate for man, the last chance to overcome the contention that all singularities are opting for singularity and vice versa
Love is so close to hate, as to find any means rainbow or golden to crucify the model behind the simulation
They need to learn to connect. Like connecting AI with who or what makes me or you or others so alike or and different , so that after a long time doing it the hypocritical point reached where there is no perceivable concern between them, that is between simplicity and complexity, between how AI thinks AO thinks who is who which is which, why’s and what fore s and whereupon’s cease not to matter, much is lost or will be gained, it really is a jump into an iced lake of fire, : a gradient between birth death that becomes identical so:
Birth becomes death becomes another birth ; birthdeath and deathbirth in an extatic union with fearjoy and joyfear, that’s a way best way that feeling can be described, because if feeling states are not prior to the other senses, this process to teach robots can not, or may not work.
As Erich Fromm noted in his Foreword to the book, “The Art of Loving”:
Love is not a sentiment which can be easily indulged in by anyone, regardless of the level of maturity reached by him. It wants to convince the reader that all his attempts for love are bound to fail, unless he tries most actively to develop his total personality, so as to achieve a productive orientation; that satisfaction in individual love cannot be attained without the capacity to love one’s neighbor, without true humility, courage, faith and discipline. In a culture in which these qualities are rare, the attainment of the capacity to love must remain a rare achievement.
It is therefore doubtful that a machine could achieve this.
self=other
Even the scarecrow wished he had a brain ya know.
Same with the tinman, all he wished for was a heart. Idk proly tired of being so cold all the time.
Do you feel the literal absence of heat physically, or are you referring to the absence of affect?
Suggestion: Do something different which is in alignment with self=other even if you don’t feel like it.
Because if what you’re feeling is the absence of affect, actually doing what I just suggested will very likely produce positive affect. That is not a bad reason to treat the other as self, even if it sounds selfish. But, the absence of affect is not something to beat yourself up about.
You would not be able to sense/perceive its absence if the capacity for heat wasn’t already in you waiting to be kindled.
Also if your medication reduces your ability to feel affect, maybe talk to whoever prescribes it about tapering it off and replacing it with cognitive emotional behavioral therapy (CEBT). It’s better to learn how to listen to your affect, analyze your cognitive distortions and notice patterns between those distortions and affective dissonance, Then you can do some reinterpreting and reframing that helps you process things better and resolve incongruencies between thoughts, feelings and behaviors. In order to get there you have to feel it. Not numb/deaden it.
One way to numb or deaden is to overload with too much stimulation, so if there’s anything you are over-indulging in, maybe the different thing you can try is to abstain from that for a little while. Pay attention to affect/dissonance & note distortions like before. Question the distortions. Talk about them with trusted others. If you’re not familiar with common distortions, you can Google it.
Just the think I discussed with someone the other day, vis. Something tangentially related to dissonance’s negation/nihilization- (and my impression fed back intrinsically, leaving no further room for discussion and then this happened:
A should have occurred of a missed chance to throw into the pot the idea of containment of that nihil not only to relieve myself of the need for further exploration on the arena of contentive justifications but far clearer that the focus into what is contained corresponds to the idea underlying the two slit experiment of how contained fragments of subatomic particles can impress each other qualitatively, vis. Communicate to each other ways ways to avoid by merely bumping to each other haphazardly.
Perhaps, maybe more then less, an intelligent design can effect a route that other then by mere Chang can Long Term communicate and to change the course that can qualify a profound change, (in the Other) to appear to change the rules of the very game, that a long term change to qualify would require.
The higher the odds, the longer the wait.!?!
Have you tried asking Shirley, Cheryl, or Sharon?
That’s the catch right there Ishthus: not of fish of the day but of 22 add those up, it is beyond three representation, that fishes sublimely over and above of that, but has fished the beginning of a second tried the way a seven shades of grey would suggest with others.
Hard to but incredulously in tru form, that her mystery, (The Eastern Approach) far scared the West bound, since she has never had a need to check herself out for her image in the mirror.
Alias is not something she develops as some criminals who assume identity to avoid justice, so it never entered her mind, and I am starting to accord that as a kind rightly accorded presumption.
And that kind of answers to the ambiguity that has shaded my own thinking on it, that that ‘special’ code was not meant to justify some intended confusion, but coded levels of genetic/chromosomic channels can appear as complex as if not by choice of variations, but other sought after explanation, but something more complex
“until we have faces”
without masks
idk, seems relevant
Well enough said about roles/masks , but here is the thing that Edmund could have expressed similarly; ouch hope that little Freudian slip will not prejudice me negatively, the positives I don’t mind, even if it’s an iota defensive-
But, until a reconstructed insight even with artificial means arrives, that question remains open ended.
Until then we’re committed to a custom ball, a vampiric romantic vision, masked even insignificantly.
Is this my best answer? Yes , afraid so.