_
I think they butted their head on a stump a long time ago,
…and have never recovered. 
Sorry, Meno_. MagsJ is def right about me. No denying it.
But I do want to recover.
If I seem oblivious… I’ve been telling you that.
I’m sorry! From the perspective of eternity, it’s a done deal that hasn’t happened yet (from the further future’s perspective… which is also a done deal from the perspective of eternity).
Whatever IT is.
“It’s just another call from home”…
Every woman who had their man distracted away from them & didn’t like sharing be like… “If I wrote that song, it would be called Go”.
The home woman prolly has no clue… so this female is reaping exactly what she sowed. And if they both have a clue, this song is stupid.
That’s why monogamous folks should not even flirt.
But we are all (before we learn from the school of hard knocks) good liars about what crosses the line into flirting… and before you know it (until you learn)…sucked in.
Then there’s folks so calloused by that school they switch their position and surrender to it, use it against others. Still to their own detriment…burying themselves deeper and deeper in callous.
Until (sometimes) it cracks & has to be dealt with.
It is but tragic at the same time as it is stupid, but displacing nietzhe’s supposed correspondence with Socrates, and using Meno’s /meno’s corresponding supposed role, as a kind of premirdial model; may or may not even recur
May be apologia not cover a sense of victimhood deliberately imposed for tragic effect?
Crappy or not it comes, suprising
I don’t know what you’re saying. I need body language, maybe.
Gotta go.
Recap:
I ventured to defer commenting on the complementative remark and thank you for that, just going around why the reflected concern with tea and fascinating , …
It is like the means cat fishing around it’s bowl of fish, trying to figure why can not it go directly and start lapping up.
Trying to forge less distant relationship between the tragic and the comic aspects of how to go about it both ways:
& I know that even this may not do it- tryin’ maybe against most, if not all doubts, as if between lines , there may be remarked space, to fill in- as oft occurring , past the limits of reason can be spelled out.
The difference between the remark on stupidity and tragedy may lie in this apprehension of feigned increduality, to give the impression of a rebounding of boundaries, correlating with the need to indicate a passing of limits, and trying to shut down a more recent interpretation.;
Either that, ( the above)
Or, the resolve not to minimize and simplify to the notion of the triad, between to lines and the space between them as indicative of a hidden motive, which may kick out at least one participant.
If that’s the case, I will willingly go, not trying to portray mysel either some kind of saintly figure or an idiot, thereby shooting myself in the foot, but because: for once and for all, and being completely honest , I can not hold any grudges, and speaking imaginatively, no holds barred, realizing the implicit geometric necessity to uphold the image, only the ultimate act of non deception and honesty works.
I gotta go, but can not, bound by ancient and I guess hidden chains that enslave me, course by assent for attainment of what appears to be far , very far off objectives.
by for now, but only apparently, which I am not at the moment
hm?
God I am frustrated, just came across Samuel 22 I believe, where it was David who foreshadowed Jesus in saying:
‘Father, why have You abandoned me”?
( I think) maybe might be off fairly sure though , that does not debunk anything, it really just magnify the immanence of the retro- transcendence.
Psalm 22. It ends well.
Yes and thanks for that, but only lately found that David foreshadowed Christ’s cry, for only He, Jesus fits that description.
_
How… fascinating.
And the birth of the miraculous and the decline of the conception of tragic within.
Yes. I did think about that with respect to Husserl’s historical method this semester. I am not prepared for a more complicated answer at this time, however I do highly recommend scrolling all the way down to the Introduction back in 2018. I went through several books from the Law & Prophets & intend to indulge in all the rest at some point.
Check out Spoken Gospel, the “Old Testament” books:
bible.com/podcasts/399
These are super cool: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLIrW … TStXXyapIL
‘Edmund Husserl: Phenomenology of Embodiment
HusserlFor Husserl, the body is not an extended physical substance in contrast to a non-extended mind, but a lived “here” from which all “there’s” are “there”; a locus of distinctive sorts of sensations that can only be felt firsthand by the embodied experiencer concerned; and a coherent system of movement possibilities allowing us to experience every moment of our situated, practical-perceptual life as pointing to “more” than our current perspective affords. To identify such experiential structures of embodiment, however, Husserl must clarify and set aside not only the ways in which the natural sciences approach the body, but also the ways in which we have tacitly taken over natural-scientific assumptions into our everyday understanding of embodiment. Husserl’s phenomenological investigations eventually lead to the notion of kinaesthetic consciousness, which is not a consciousness “of” movement, but a consciousness or subjectivity that is itself characterized in terms of motility, that is, the very ability to move freely and responsively. In Husserl’s phenomenology of embodiment, then, the lived body is a lived center of experience, and both its movement capabilities and its distinctive register of sensations play a key role in his account of how we encounter other embodied agents in the shared space of a coherent and ever-explorable world. Many of Husserl’s findings were taken up by such later figures in the phenomenological tradition as Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty, who gave these findings an ontological interpretation. However, Husserl’s main focus is epistemological, and for him, lived embodiment is not only a means of practical action, but an essential part of the deep structure of all knowing.’
leap
Time permitting follow up on some gaps to be filled between a minoiac Uber reasoned leak of a paradoxical over drain if the Socratic water it’s intrinsic knowledge and strange after the fact revelation between Husserl’s and the polanyi dream so mentioned.