i like to be..unseen..in the cracks..[invisible]
whenever anyone actually notices me..[for good or ill]
the karma..of either.*...brings forth..the other..[sorry brother]

i..of myself..know..only that others gave me
as part of lif's lessons..i found synchronicity
ie..why is that specific word/image/smell/taste/song/thing..used specifically..[or made into my awareness..now?]

iopenmy sensdesand nothing..silence
meaning ineed toact..as ibegan totype..iheard a auto..rev its engine twice

as iwatch..they talk of race 213..thats that lost tribe

we apparently..just need wait a little longer
we will all soon..see..the jokde..of being alone

its funny..swedenberg
/A RESPECTED*..swedish/scientist
<<..was being..a scientist..recording..the facts..compatible with believing in God?

19 volume opus
plus excellent derived texts
the religion..of science..[that was subverted*]
hidden..by lesser usages of science/religion]..[like christian/science..[that..isnt scienc..or that hubbard sci-trance/religio-fiction

hubbard wrote many wisdom's..;pre his sci-fi/lie

but..in the end..he too fits..his uses*

i..prefer that im not take..neither too seriously..or its duelity..the joke

im joking..jocularly...of course
i think..im a joker..[but prefer to feel..more the fool..or the hermit..in his tower..

under estimation..sans in-timidation
rather than over the top gues-timation

i thought i..upset you
bound you from replying..
with your own..live-time....thought

in rhyme..with that resonating in-live time..
in my own mind..looking for any synchronized..sign*..near to real time

[we allow others to in-fluence..]..and chose the time
to rhyme..their own reasoning..in their own..real time
where do..i end..and you begin..we are all*..without end]

sorry
drifted off topic..yet a gain

Dear oug,

Your last post seemed to be much longer than necessary to answer my question. Your posts take more space than is necessary to say something. If you took the time to look them over, you would find that you can say the same thing while using less space.

It upsets me that you comment on my posts at all. However, you have a right to do so. One way to stop you from commenting on my posts is for me not to post anything at all. I was going to do that, but I changed my mind and posted some more to see if possibly you would let it alone. You didn’t.

Apparently you looked up material on the underworld and related matters in commenting on my post which quoted the Aeneid. Anyone interested in the subject could have looked up those things for themselves without struggling through your spelling and grammar. Your post on that subject added nothing. At least you could use a spell checker to make your posts more readable.

You wrote: i like to be..unseen..in the cracks..[invisible]

If that is really what you want don’t post! You obviously want very much to be seen since you seem to post more verbiage than anyone else. I skip most of your posts. I read your most recent one because I saw my words near the beginning.

I got very upset when you chose to comment on my most recent posts. I made the mistake of thinking you were embarrassed because I got upset and therefore you would stop commenting on my posts. I was obviously wrong.

Anyhow, I don’t like you commenting on my posts at all. I try to be a rational individual. You take my words and immerse them in what I consider the rubbish of the spirit world and similar nonsense.
I will read your next post to see if you choose to reply to this. Otherwise, from now on I will not let your posts upset me. I can do that by not reading them.

Dear Banjo,

Thanks, so there are ten different French/English possible translations (and one of them you prefer) which to me only shows that apparently in Latin (classical or Medieval) there is no noun clearly derived from the verb credere like belief from believe or croyance from croire.

For instance, there is no German word for the noun “mind” but if you look it up the dictionary you get many possible translations (12 in my dictionary) leaving it to the translator to pick from one depending on the context.

Dear david f,

I think there is a difference between

(a) concepts that directly depend on phenomena accessed through senses (e.g. a horse),
(b) abstractions where this dependence is indirect (a mammal), or
(c) abstractions where this dependence is also overshadowed by our personal and cultural representation of reality, where the human factor is explicit, as studied by social sciences or humanities, and
(d) mathematical concepts, totally formal in the sense, that the dependence on physical phenomena remains at most subconscious (when you think of the number 5, you do not associate it with apples or bunnies, although you first learned about numbers by counting apples and bunnies).

I think in this, off the cuff categorization of mine, only concepts sub (c) cause problems when translating from one historically rooted language into another.

(ctd)

(ctd)

I have always wondered about how people born understand those abstract concepts that we can grasp only by visualizing them. Actually, I think that in advanced mathematics it is easier, provided the person can “climb the ladder of abstractions” that not everybody can, blind or not.

>>However, a blind person still has the concept of extension and dimension even though he or she may not be able to manipulate notations the way a sighted person can.<<

Not only “extension and dimension”. There is the case of L. S. Pontrjagin (1908-1988) who lost his sight at the age of 14 but grew up into one of the most famous mathematicians of the Soviet era. His textbook on topological groups has become the bible on that topic that many of us grew up with. His mother learned to read mathematics also in English and French (I think) and read mathematical texts to him. I am not sure who wrote his mathematics, but he could explain things better than most mathematicians without that handicap.

Correction:

"I have always wondered about how people born understand"

Of course, born blind.

Dear david f,

>> in making decisions on personal. business, governmental, scientific or many other matters I think it is often better to avoid both optimism and pessimism in favour of making realistic estimates. <<

I agree but do not see how “hope should not be regarded as a virtue” follows from this. It only means that you should act according to what is the actual state of affairs rather than according to what you hope for.

I agree that some politician are unrealistic, not only bible-bashers but also also rigid followers of some “politically correct" (or not) ideological trends.