Beyond The Boxes of Metaphoria

Post Reply New Topic

1. Why are you asking in a poll, if I understand or not? Now that I have read you, and understand you, what do you want?


People do not typically understand what I am trying to say. As this is a problem I have worked on for some time, it is important to know if how I explain it makes sense. I am impatient to find conversation about it, without relating and dissecting ideas intellectually they are not valid to me, just ideas that are annoying to express due to the complexities and limitations of words. Comparative reasoning cannot incite the correct frameworks but build upon a presentation simply.

It is the difference between thinking in word and visually, words are limiting things because I always have to come up with new ones to explain ideas. Somewhere there need to be invented a direct connect between minds as to avoid the social complexity nonsense, I need a USB cord to my brain but it requires a converter and an adapter. Nothing I’ve seen on ebay seems to be fitting these descriptions <Laugh Snort>.

If 3 people can understand me then that is suitable enough to expand, even for simplicity reasons. Seeming I’ve already spoken the brilliance I suppose there is no intellectual input from others deemed necessary?


2. Why is this in the General Forum?

I do not know, as it is topic that actually encompasses science, religion, philosophy and general idea not otherwise specified.

I do not know this forum yet.
[/b]

I suppose I can't complain that you posted in the General forum. There are many who post stuff here, which seems to belong better in other forums.

So, I didn't mean to target you individually.

People see the "end" of death and the "beginning" of life as well as the deterioration of various other universal objects as opposed to their morphosis and assume, therefore, that everything has a beginning and an end because the human mind focuses on life as opposed to matter and energy (the universal kind of energy, not the spiritual kind).

Plus, humans get things set in their minds and anything which downplays the human condition isn't taken to too well generallly.

I don't find viewing the universe in such a way depressing at all. I make my own meanings and conditions instead, which, I believe, the human mind sort of needs psychologically.

Yes, it is all about how open your mind is. Take nothing for granted, and nothing will terrify/upset you.

Creating purpose/meaning where there seems to be none, is a good ability. Unless one has no need for it.

The mind comes up with alternative ways to reason with time and conclusion. Perhaps it does not exist when mind is not, as time and awareness do not exist then, therefore there is no reason to worry. However to sooth the mind of others I suppose I came up with this.

Time when slowed down lasts forever. (especially when your hungry and stuck waiting somewhere).

So the last moments are the forever dream. I suppose it's all about ones attitude when the lights go out, especially prior to sleep every time one sleeps.

Harsh realities are rejected, ideas pushed away due to the fact persons have the inability to cope with truth or logical ideas. I've had people become viciously outraged and start yelling at me for my words. Such fragile human psychosis’s, just means I can create madness too

I would prefer to believe in some afterlife come the time of death. I can only imagine I would die more peacefully with a belief that my conscious existance wasn't ending. But I doubt I will. I'm atheist. That is how I see the universe. Although a spiritual eternity would be comforting.

"Psychotic thought processes"? Nice therapuetic talk there. Are you trying to intellectually intimidate this guy with psychobabble and a cold, academic demeanor? You can't understand what he's saying so automatically he's psychotic, or at least deserves to have his mental integrity insulted - great logic! In all seriousness, such passive-aggressive double-speak may indicate borderline and perhaps narcissistic personality. Perhaps you should seek professional help rather than armchair psychoanalyzing selective individuals here.

Delusion is only human, yet delusion is not always bad. Delusion can be criminal or it can be for the good. Thinking for yourself and not the delusion for you is a good saying.

Human thought pathologies including mine are interesting. I always analyze everything including myself.

It is entertaining. But I need to find more intelligent people to speak to in person. So I was thinking about going to the university and observe.

Who wants to learn so very badly yet will not be accommodated, who else that is like this yet still believes in the American dream? Or is it a fallacy to those that are disabled or impoverished, yet has a mind like everyone else to even desire betterment let alone the belief of its dream?

A dream is a hallucination I read in a Sigmund Freud book.

Perhaps the harsh reality that you're rejecting is that people do not understand you not because you are some much more intellectually advanced than they are, but because you have failed to communicate effectively. The conclusion that you have drawn is not, by logic, the only and exclusive one. You alone are accountable for your words, and if you fail to communciate them effectively, you cannot assume you are not, at least partially, if not entirely accountable for that. Blaming others like this is not a sign of intellectual superiority, but of emotional immaturity.

Possessing great intelligence means nothing if you fail to communicate it. Without effective communication, intelligence turns into little more than cerebral masturbation, and just as fruitful. Moreover, if you use your intelligence as a weapon to passive-aggressively insult, browbeat or bully other people, then 1) you deserve any and all hostility you recieve and 2) you are abusing your own intellect, which demonstrates you are not as smart as you think you are.

Any genuine intellectual has no desire to show off or to alienate others. Furthermore, a genuine intellectual thrives on exchange with others, and recognizes the inherent value of interacting with others, regardless of their comparitive intelligence or knowledge. For the genuine intellectual, nothing is uglier, more crippling and more d*mning than intellectual arrogance.

In other words, get over yourself. What you are doing isn't smart, but merely clever. And cleverness is loathsome, for as Samuel Beckett (a real genius) noted, it is the tell-tale sign of a hack who has nothing original or of substance to say.

You believe I think I am superior when I am not, In fact according to testing from doctors that would prove that my I.Q is all over the place. My failure to communicate properly goes way back, yet that does not make it my fault. In a way you’re enacting superiority by saying I have a failure of any kind. Indeed that is the truth, having just finished this part of the conversation and your new remarks seen I must ask why?

I have said on numerous occasions these types of things…

1. Each mind is a gift, intellect is no measure of any minds contribution to society directly or indirectly.
2. Really there is no stupid or smart, intelligence is just a measure of itself, where not all of the mind in its complexity can be measured therefore not tested-able. Nor can it be judged exclusively in what it is because it is within itself.
3. Superiority and inferiority is an illusion.
4. Does your position of my superiority, make you feel somehow lesser to make note of it, and then oblige insult to abilities in communicalities? As if my fault to be as I am while others commonly hold no patients.

People are like birds of a flock, there clicks have each an understanding socially, I am my own.

Do not anyway ridicule me, I do implore upon persona as well as humor.

If you knew anything of me in person you would know that even going to a university or elsewhere on my own is a challenge or at least depending upon circumstances disruptive or discombobulative.

IF persons want to speak to me then this is the rules:

1. If you start problems with me, you’re going down.
2. Have a conversation with me, not a social war, you will lose.
3. A good attitude is best; share your interests, beliefs and ideas. I think as I do, have a problem with it don’t talk to me.
4. Social conflict creates a physiological response, such as in person. If someone raises there voice, becomes upset, or unpredictable things happen my nervous system overreacts. Online conflicts create a similar problem, when in reality in a mature setting there is just the exchange of thoughts and ideas despite grudges and other such stupidities.

I am not fan of the carnal mind; it is dissectible intellectually, not intending physiological imagery in literal interpretations.

My gifted area is Similarities, abstract reasoning and conceptualization. Such topics as these are my primary ability in intellectual gift.

Amen..

By the way I do not bully. Teachers in classes commonly took the misfits like a few in this post, individualized them out and made them look silly. Such as stopping everything they were doing for interruptions that were non-relevant to the issue at hand and centering attention on that person.

I'm not sure that i'm as stupid as you might believe I am, but your standing up to the other person then taking me on is plausible of a few things.

Deductive reasoning:

1. You know the person, he was made to appear an arse by my standing up for myself. Then you appeared to be on my side by talking against him then me.

2. Your misguided by your interpretations of me, your inability to understand me and my unique ways inflicted your ego to think I believed I am superior, when it never was stated as so. Emotionally by my self-confidence in statements you were jealous and needed to say it was my inability.

3. You hold a belief bias. Perhaps your belief requires you to defend it sub-consciously. In this case, it is delusion and intolerance.

4. You feel to modify my behaviors, when I myself am an outstanding citizen and American. Who happens to behave as I do though commonly respectfully but I’m foreign to common thought and ways by any standard or measure of typicality. It therefore is your subconscious intolerance manifesting evidently in the previous post.

I do not think it is wise to continue with bantering instead of intellectual discourses.

I'd like to converse concerning topics I put forth, not social stupidities. It's a waste of my time.

I was originally going to point out indicators of paranoia and formal thought disorder, but I thought it would be too much effort. However, since my assertion has been challenged I will offer evidence:

Paranoid delusions:
Psychological projection:
When a person projects, they take ideas about themselves and put them onto someone else. Some amount of projection is normal to identify with others, but paranoiacs tend to project hostility and bizarre beliefs onto others.

• sc wrote:
  (Y) - Complex of the Psyche and Possibilities
  "An illusion is only as believable as its associated delusions"
  Here sc (or Nathan, as I shall henceforth call him) deprives himself of insight into his somewhat muddled (in my opinion) thinking by projecting it onto others as illusion and delusion.
• sc wrote:
  if your mind cannot handle intellectual conversation without a psychical breakdown of insult because of my unique way of thinking then refrain.
  Here Nathan projects awareness of his precarious mental organization onto people reading his original post to this topic. This insinuation is without provocation; only Aspen responded, and his was a firm but polite request and nothing more.
• sc wrote:
  Persons simply hate me because I do not fit in or think like others, but that nonsense is ending now with the truth!
  Here Nathan realizes he has a difference in perception and belief that puts him at odds with most other people. I speculate that he may hate himself for this sensed deficiency yet project this hatred onto a vague "persons"; surely, the majority of people Nathan has encountered have never known him well enough to either love him or hate him.
• sc wrote:
  There are two reasonings to current theory madness in science.

Hypervigilance and signs of persecutory delusions:

• sc wrote:
  I am a new member here on the forum, I have not typed on this forum before because of the likelyhood of persons like yourself. I have grown tired of them inciting conflict, all being cold hearted for the most part.
  Here Nathan has a preexisting, vague suspiciousness that he has begun to transfer to his interactions here. I have no doubt that, if Nathan has expressed his theories elsewhere, they would be met with some disbelief and even derision, but he continues to ply his ideas while at the same time expecting hostile reactions.
• sc wrote:
  Can you respond with some intelligence please, not your delusions of me due to your hate as a hater? Come on.. People should stop following me around from board to board and let me conversate in peace.
  Aspen's firm request not to start conflict on WrongPlanet.net has led Nathan to feel persecuted not just by Aspen but also by the WrongPlanet.net community in general. He also believes that Aspen's recognizing him from another forum means he is being followed in general.
• sc wrote:
  When a few or more are of an agenda, the truth does not matter when the truth hurts.
  He believes there is a conspiracy against the truth, which is also a conspiracy against him because he has made it his mission to reveal the truth.
• sc wrote:
  I'm going to use my new pod casting system and take a photo, that way people will be less likely to twist what I say and manipulate intents.
  
  Not just a text person on a screen, one person that will not take the harassments of the few!
  Again, Nathan exhibits hypervigilance.

Grandiosity:

• sc wrote:
  Talking to myself, as even universities have not the mind to comprehend. At least I suspect.
  Here Nathan holds his ideas to be above the comprehension of even the most learned erudites.

Formal thought disorder:

Psychotic individuals often show severe lapses in the organization and logicality of their thinking and speech.
Non sequitur:

• sc wrote:
  f something was always it could not have been nothing originally, as anything that is always is product of another point of origination from the other. Therefore neither something nor everything was product of the mechanism of any singular point of origination universally.
  If I understand what Nathan is getting at correctly—which I do not dare assert—he seems to be logically contradicting himself. One point does not lead into the next, logically.
• sc wrote:
  Abstract: The Circle is No Absolute
  This is tangential to the body of the message his belated abstract was mentioned in; its mention does not improve comprehension of his theory and is only circumstantially related to it (i.e., it is an association best understood by Nathan).
• sc wrote:
  When a few or more are of an agenda, the truth does not matter when the truth hurts.
  
  Hypercondriaism is a disease, not me!
  Nathan's mention of hypochondria has nothing to do with what he mentioned before or after.

Derailment:

• sc wrote:
  Where are your facts as a first hand witness to all that occurred? You don't have them but I would take a lie detector test.
  Nathan breaks his train of thought and makes the wild claim that he would take a lie detector test to prove his truthfulness.
• sc wrote:
  IF you want your social click to remain as it is with your social acts, then I say my influence upon this forum would reflect social equalities and not the pricks.
  
  Who's your daddy, who let the dogs out, who who who. (humor)
  
  Pardon my existence while I figure a few more posts.
  Nathan's sense of humor in the situation as he perceives it (i.e., hostile) is admirable, but his choice of humor and placement in the flow of dialogue is bizarre and seems to indicate a derailment from his purpose.

Semantic paraphasia, neologism:

• sc wrote:
  I think it is only proper to have patients with me
  Here Nathan writes patients when he means patience; this is more severe than a mere absent-minded typo.
• sc wrote:
  People should stop following me around from board to board and let me conversate in peace.
  
  It is an intellectual challenge, Mr. / Ms. Dairy air.
  Here Nathan uses the neologisms conversate for converse and Dairy air for derrière.

Self-reference:

• sc wrote:
  Hypercondriaism is a disease, not me!
  Here Nathan makes a superfluous reference to himself.
• sc wrote:
  Can you respond with some intelligence please, not your delusions of me due to your hate as a hater?
  Nathan again interjects a self-referencing pronoun without need.

Neat I have something for you and anyone else that desires to continue bickering. For now on you will be ignored while I conversate with persons who are not like yourself.

http://www.simplecomplexities.org/music/textualpricksbeware.wma

English was never my gift, word similarities I get mixed up. Word usage and how it comes out is not correct.

Look up mixed expressive language disorder.

Although I have heard the saying grammer nazi's before. Your criterion matches a charcter delusion of me in your head.

Sensitivities & Taking Insult

Why taking insult when it comes to autism or Asperger's syndrome
medical literatures as well as terminology in general is ridiculous.
Discrimination exists with the individual typically, it does not represent
the whole in totality of those who might share its study.

The Origination Complex and Self-Association.

Origination is beginnings simply, quite frankly common sense. So to utilize the simple form of the originator complex on something like Asperger's syndrome and the psyche would be interesting.

Concept & psyche (psychical) origination and its causal ramifications in the negative concerning labelism.

Asperger’s syndrome and autism is sociological as well as psychological as a label. One thing most doctors will not want to speak about is the negative ramifications of labels.

Perceived negatively:

1. One may or may not feel defective or disabled. However by noticing the labels archetype in association to the psyche of a few, the label becomes both the source and disposal of negative energies, the label is to blame. Yet the label is the label and the dissociation (perhaps) between the label (conceptuality) and the self is either disguised or not. Possible emotional and psychological damage, or so I’ve seen written by acclaimed professional.

2. Socially perceived negatively the archetypical aspie and or Asperger’s syndrome terminology becomes infixed, part of the psyche and in adaptation psychologically the label becomes more so like the idol or conscientious self relating reference. One is or is described to be an aspie. But what really is good or bad of it? IS the label good for someone or not in self-awareness, is it a form of indoctrination but to the extent of indoctrination and as to whether it is positive or negative is highly subjective to the individual. No not religious, the only word I found.

3. In gatherings anti-establishmental philosophies might arise, taking ownership of the concept of Asperger’s syndrome by being one diagnosed of it, yet it is just a concept. Pathology is pathology and it is the study of disease however that is the nature of pathology, pathology is not the person obviously. Disease is terminology, yet unfortunate for those who influence themselves to it that who also it systematized in its literatures. Still yet a concept not a person.

Perceived Positively:

1. Adaptation via the label inherited socially the gathering of others, such as now, whose purpose is not clear other then social things. Yet, in any typological social segregation directly in intent or indirectly, there is the group mentality beyond that of an interest but in real life. Persons of disabilities (differences) gather for peer support, advocacies and this being unique to autism from my observation thus far, a longing towards positivity.


2. The mindedness of relating to others of the alike. But is this positive or not, socializing is seen as a good normal thing, however if by reason of diagnosticology and its ritual symptomatological systemizations, is it then good or bad to be adapted socially to a label? It certainly creates interesting conditions of the gathering of minds, although all very different then one another.

The autistic spectrum has "thought disorder", not just Schizophrenia. ASDs include language disorders throughout. They're not necessarily indicative of psychosis. And it's also hard to diagnose paranoia online and sc definitely doesn't sound paranoid to me.

His writing is just a sample of the aphasic symptoms which are seen in the autistic spectrum as well as his own individuality.

He might be paranoid himself, after all to conjure such things up just to disagree with me, what is the fear? Someone might actually know something or can think something he cannot therfore it is worthy of social conflicts? He believes him self to be the educated one, the better one and me of less intelligence because he goes to college. I'd talk to professors as well, I bet they are nothing like that guy.

I will be honest, due to my disabilities and how school was not properly suited; I have spent much time with psychologist including extensive testing. They are the only ones thus far I have found intelligent conversations with. I can talk about psychological complexes, what I think about people and situations, my ideas and can discuss them intellectually as if it was a one on one teacher. Not counseling blarney, intellectual discussion and they are paid to be patient, free conversation comes with the pricks, oh well wish there was a coupon for premium forums without the arses.

I have never been diagnosed with paranoid delusions, nor schizophrenia.

I could have 3 PHD's differ with the discriminatory man who disgracefully diagnosed me publicly in insult. I speak in generalities and have only but once told someone they were crazy.

That was Aspies For Freedom the owner lady, only because she said someone else was crazy so I called her a nut. After all I was then called a liar as if the chat never happened. Also it is not freedom because they ban people who think differently then make up excuses they were insulted, clearly displaying intolerances and are quick to conflict with anyone else that is not like them.

An extremely bad example of horrid reference to how leadership and public relations should be conducted. Let the free mind be the free mind, the rigid that do not offer freedom fall as they are of themselves, not everyone and only for themselves.

When my next appointment for the regional center comes I’m supposed to get tested for employment placements and other services.


Also I have no persecutory delusions, you will notice the persons bigotries as I happened to mention amen in the previous post, persecutory delusions are commonly applied to Christians in diagnosticologies. I suffer no thought disorders, just the one he created, so since he is qualified in symptomatology and has credentials to diagnose people openly I might ask for his legal contact for his offices of practice.

Oh wait, he a textual prick on the screen and I’m not the first one he has done it to. Also he thinks I am not smart, but it is so ridiculous I have observed other like him, the intelligence is not original, regurgitated things thinking for him.

Original thought is commonly misunderstood, until the good thinkers decipher it and have a conversation.