Archiv für September 2012

My miss_Ing nomos in tha‘mnemosyne‘

As the fukkking blunder of Defamation of interpret and tation, the narratives of ‚our‘ hoods will depend on coin, coin, coin,.. and the sikh_ness has start to equal relations to animals! The anim[al-Qaed< }.

Salaam Ya!

Mind-independent is not the sort of term one uses every day. I did have a rather particular notion of what I mean by this, in agreeing to aRAP[e} narrations of riches beAph the poor. I mean that there are certain situations where what one thinks must give in to the way things are; where no amount of reconsideration or vacillating or other mental activity will make a difference; where one must simply accept and move on. This may sound a bit vague, but I mean it in a quite straight forward way. If you have locked your keys in the car, no amount of argument or discussion or logic or redefining will make it that you have not locked your keys in the car. It simply is the case; one must move on to unlock the car by other means.

Reality is of course fraught with white hetero_patryiarchy philosophical history, so much so that it has the potential to derail this discussion. I will therefore say little about it at present, in the hope that some degree of mutual agreement will enable the discussion to get purchase here on this blogsport….

One of my least favorite philosophical prejudices is that the mental or thought-based is to be equated with the fantastical or phantasmal[e}, as opposed to the real thing, or the experience of the real thing, or what have you. I ask whether, despite the fact that thinking about sex (in the restricted sense) and having it are quite different, the two are so different that they both cannot be called equally experiential. Certainly a sex fantasy is an experience, and one far less vivacious, less detailed, more solipsistic, and under my greater control; but are my fantasies therefore different ultimately in kind from the reality? It seems to me that this lack of vivacity, privacy, and so on, is what constitutes them as fantasies rather than real sex–that is what I mean by its being a fantasy, and so qua fantasy it is quite real, but qua physical activity of sex, not. And the real sex, unless you are doing it wrong, is something quite experiential as well. In this sense, we are not dealing with two sorts of stuff here, viz. what is mental and what is not, or what is thought versus what is experience, but different kinds of experience, which despite their differences are equally a mental sort of bias thing.

30th annee of ‚Wild Stylez‘ as Radical Queer Punk coroner

To live in an urban area full of sublimed typo_graphics ‚Graffiti‘ has uphood since the dishing of frames the streets have wisdomed,…another anniversary strives my hard boiled neck with attitude. The German ‚Sieg‘ narrations through English-American enslavement of aberrations in Black.

f

The v. Steuben bluff on Rome gypsee the math

They are these floating images, these anonymous clichés, which circulate in the external world, but which also penetrate each one of us and constitute his internal world, so that everyone possesses only psychic clichés by which he thinks and feels, is thought and is felt, being himself a cliché among the others in the world which surrounds him. Physical, optical and auditory clichés and psychic clichés mutually feed on each other…

The „hardness“ of the hard core is understood as a stiffly stratified and relatively immobile image type that is not flexible and flowing, a standardized lyrics on anitfascists Britcore beAph in postfascist Hamburg use. The etymology of stereotype derives from the Greek stereos, meaning „firm, solid,“ and typos, „impression,“ and its French translation is cliché. Thus, there is something immobile, hard and solid in the stereotype. This immobility is crucial to SDC’s definition of schizoanalysis, because it distinguishes shizoanalysis from „immobile“ techniques like photography and other graphic arts. These instances of immobility and thinking are organized in root forms instead of „variation, expansion, conquest, offshoot,“ a embodi_ment map that is „always detachable, connectable, reversible, modifiable and has multiple entryways and exits and its own lines of flight“ . We, as English listeners must narrate, that the state that psychoanalysis projects one’s antifascist cartography back to a family photo: it reduces the experiential multiplicity to [anti_] Oedipus. Thus, this might be called „snapshot thinking,“ which, unlike „cinematic thinking,“ is not in movement. It is revealing that in modern French, cliché indicates both a stereotype and a snapshot. Both result in a freezing of reality into a reified image.
„Snapshot“ emphasizes immobility: it fixes the flow of life into one instant. The moving image, in comparison to a still image, introduces movement (like schizoanalysis, which puts the psychoanalytic conceptions of the „family photo“ into movement).

The „Otherness“ of extreme addictive behavior turns towards the self, and shows how the self is formed around a center of difference by the everyday normality of mainstream consumption of hard stylez images and narratives. The relations between „addict others“ and normality (of everyday media use) are in constant movement. Plugging into media culture is ontologically continuous with repetitious plugging into the Graffito drug assemblage, with similar effects of sedation or euphoria.

Bel

Too handle the 1977 beAph with Rocky – instead to boykot the liberal man musiical behind!

As no one believes – that in postfascist Hamburgs world premier on Rocky the mens critical theory of 1977 political beAph the garden has in common for aesthetical approaches the Kids have seen in this underdog story… the question is more how to produce the latters behind as emancipated way of life again.

All art is created out of either the conscious or the subconscious, so all art has in some way has a meaning, after all, why would art be created if it was to be pointless. Therefore I think art is created so that it would create a feeling. I mean take Rocky Balboa’s Academy Award for example, he suffered through depression and through his art he was able to portray that through the colour, the line, texture creating an overall feeling of depression, loneliness, anxiety, sadness, mournfulness. With postfascist Hamburgs polical left militant autumn 1977, when you first glance at the painting it does look like something that was just ‚for the sake of creation‘ but he is infact showing the subconcious mind. The same goes for any type of art; High Renaissance art in Italy like in the Vatican has been created to show the power of God and religion upon society and deepths the Hebrew sense to idolatry
.
It’s like a piece of music-each note has been specifically placed in order to gain an emotional reaction from the listener.
Whether quality has something to do with it, I don’t really know how to answer that – perhaps there is no ‘quality’ as such, it is just the interpretation of the artist using aesthetics to his or her advantage. With being valued that entirely depends upon the person, I mean I adore Rocky Balboa for example but I know some people who hate their work and decide it is not good, like I do not care for artists such as main prof fights in public media debates yet others adore him.
In this day and age art is difficult to value; like in 19th Century Paris, there was the Royal Academy of Arts where artists’ works were judged as good or not good if they followed the set rules like draughtsmanship, build-up of colour from dark to light, and the hierarchy of art of course, yet today we have moved away from that. To value art we must look towards our emotions, as critical man in the sheeds of white_ness by spaces of European persons of colour, when we view a piece of art. To be honest, all art is conceptual it is just depends how easy it is to understand, but all art has a reason for existing.

SDC think there’s a false dichotomy in the question, but in the sense that conceptual art, or art who’s sole aim is to promote some idea or concept is self nullifying, it’s just that it’s fatal logical flaw is rarely picked up.

b‘Elle°°drag:core against liberals!

Do it again Japan – old RAF coroned narratives sikh the state mind set!

Assembled Scripts on Wittgenstein will follow the beAph!

°-_-°°° ShaoLin Zion_Ism on the run

Bel

Pii_ES: The Kim Yyong UN’s [thale] Ban key Moon was tri_gone ball_ism sour affiliated with dumping mass ideology as poor deepen conspiracist porn actress, what must be denied in favor Japanese actresses!
Old friends from postfascist Europe will follow real sub_poemed friends in Japan and the East! Bass_ism against conspi_racism is yours!
My stolen Muslim honor of the راںبنا ہام پاگل حسین سلیم family and Biz coroner_s in Pakistan will ongoing map the TT killings till Sharia Law is prudentially emotional and body political spirited. Allies of alien defamation. Fuck ya!

Pii Ppii E_ss PAN: For all pH homo_national right winger; I‘Ll fart the hood by age_Ism and Heroine scene a Rom_aah squat could beef! Fishers!

cccpostfascit یورپی پابندی

Salaam//ShaH_loom Gwadar poor [[rainee harbour orpHan]]] aryian skinheads!

I mean -on lee_- all my family so called idolatree Pakistanian has‘nt got a Tuerrrken Brot beside…

h

Live well with rainbow bubbled flyin saucers…

pHuck the Muslim money washing riots!

As I mention the fact to live under 800,-€ each month in postfascist Hamburg/Europe, the reason for anti/pro Islam money washing by all that rage a film could burst,…the refugee ‚no border/no nation‘ anti_racist white wash of color blindedness the left with conspii_racism as _Ism paradigma my Paki heir has in common to seek ‚Freitod‘ as moral stance for affiliated anim[al_Qaeda],…the lie behind is only the history of money washing the migration cause with networking behind the bars and lines the beef of

Law of contradiction

How can something ethically be positive or negative for someone while being ethically insignificant and ethically unaffectionate? There are standard meanings for the terms amoral, moral, and immoral. It’s okay to have your own definitions of terms, but you must explain your logical reasoning behind your definitions. SDC and Britcore Hip Hop in postfascist Hamburg is against your logic and is therefore against your morality mainly because there seems to be contradictions and/or inconsistencies. This is another reason why your morality seems to have ambiguity.

u

Bel,…the rough Shokat!

Assassine free bear_ING

Hieroo_gly_pHyks….You Never Knew fas_ION!

Bel

Next Sat at Sept 15th an eve at OZM

Stay re_Bel at the occasional commercial district of the homo_national, autonomous left!

The fact, that many inhabitant citizens of assimilated white power leftist can‘t understand my small talk,…here the swatter squat of DIY…all the three components are merely important to form a meaningful sentence.. In case of poetry or idioms it can be let it to maintain the rhythm. Perhaps people often speaks in a simple language avoiding length and maintaining tense for dynamic takings, but it is so much important for the folks those are learning alien languages.It is highly recommended in case of language translation and interpretation for foreigners.

In ancient Rome children were sent to a grammaticus, a teacher of grammar, in order to learn how to use the language correctly.

Now, if your only goal using language is to get the message across in some way, you don‘t need much spelling or grammar. You‘ll find a way to say what you want to say in most situations. It gets trickier the more abstract the situations are. The reason flawed spelling is often unproblematic in internet communication or ‚lyrical DJ sets, is because the people communicating know what they are talking about anyway. So if you write „Their assholes!“ usually everybody will figure out that you mean „They‘re assholes“. But, there *are* situations where it might make a big difference. (Sorry about the vulgar language, but it’s a good example and one that you will find very often). But you see, all in all you mostly manage to communicate despite making mistakes because the context is usually pretty clear.

So, back to the question as to what right does anyone have to force you to follow a certain standard? Well, no right at all. You can spell things the way you want to. And you might even be understood. But! The community will judge you no matter what. They will always find that you‘re misbehaving in a certain way. If you spell things wrong, they will always, in general, feel that you are deviant in some sort of way.

Now, the interesting thing is that this has nothing to do with grammar books or dictionaries. You can make mistakes in dialects and even in slang. You can mispronounce dialect words and speakers of that dialect will judge you even though there is no reference work on which to base their judgement. Don‘t think it’s true? Try it! Go into a an area where they speak a certain accent and try to be a part. You will see: they will tell you that you‘re saying things wrong. If you tell them ‚wrong‘ doesn‘t apply because there are no dictionaries for the way they talk, they‘ll say well, that’s just not how we talk here. And individually they will feel that they themselves wouldn‘t have said/written it that way. That’s a judgement. It’s complicated, but I have a very good argument for why „I wouldn‘t say it that way“ is the same as „I think that is wrong“.

And I actually think that this is how the whole notion of language rules comes about in the first place. People judge each other. They feel that what you‘re saying is in some way awkward. They reject it. You stop talking that way. Or — and that is why language evolves — they think it’s interesting and innovative, and they don‘t give you any signs of rejection. In which case you will continue to talk that way. And maybe they themselves will end up talking that way.

At the end of the day, language rules exist because of the judgements made by speakers. It’s not the dictionaries that tell you how to write; it’s the community. So if you‘re bold enough, write the way you want to and wait how the community responds.

On reflection I see three different strands to their criticisms:

(a) I tried to use a relaxed conversational style in between quoting Deleuze and Derrida and to the tutors it didn‘t fit the material or the conventions they were used to.

(b) Criticism of writing style is at least partly a symbolic act (enter Foucault stage left), in which the critic attempts to assert power in relation to the one criticised. There’s often no consistent logic underlying the critique.

(c) Many people as they get older come to believe in a myth of decline, and this manifests itself in disapproval of the way language changes around them.

I can agree with anyone that says grammar exists to promote order in communication. I know that the less rules we have in communication the higher chances we have for miscommunication. The whole point in language being a tool to communicate I still can‘t help but feel the rules have been blown out of proportion. I know I have no excuse for my poor grammar and I have been working hard to improve myself for years. I know I have got better and I only choose to improve because I understand that not only is accuracy important in communication but it shows a lack of willingness to improve myself and that to me is unacceptable. On the point of it being blown out of proportion I honestly feel that the worst part of any language is spelling and phonetic similarities. It is a waste of my brain power to have to remember the way words are spelled. To this day if I don’t have access to a spell checker I have to write out a word a few times and select the one that looks the most correct based on having seen that word before. If I am lucky I got it right and I don‘t look ignorant.

Bel

Uni autaumn = Gentrifikation

No comment!

The moral winner of 9/11 is the Islamic Intersections in science and social paths.

As the injustice starts in the summer 2000 bridal with a huge PAK inflammatory through all foreign PAK citizens in their promotional electricity to be the best Anti_Jewish guys the world has seen, and the joke to abuse a German passport by all money washing the so called immigration scene and left has abandon, the moral winner of many more death tolls will be the Islamic intersections out bursting of equality and emancipation ole Islame_Baath has to waggle with.

Salaam

Bel

Objective Theodicy

Concluding a theist viewpoint, the free-will implies that evil can occur, so in order to have free will, you are allowed to create evil…..At the end (as the advocates mostly come from Abrahamic religions spectrum), Go[o]d will prosecute the sinners.

The objective view then necessitates that the „gift“ of free will as a whole, objectively, is more intrinsically good than all evils that might be created by the gifted humans, collectively. Any other aspect will simply mean that „gifting“ the free will is, objectively, just absurd futility.[Though assuming that „all the evil“ are limited/pre-known, means that there is no free will,too!]

Nevertheless,if the above statement is right, this will mean that the divine world is not moral, due to the following:-

1- „End justifies means, unethically“, people are potentially harmed, their lives wasted due to others „free-will“ evils.
2- The unnecessary evil is supposed to have one purpose, to be the reason for punishing the „sinner“!.
3- The overall good perceived with this „gift“ is outside the human concept, as it is objectively not designed to prevent the „evil“ other than „employing it as a sign for free-will“ – only humans can prevent evil through ethical education, not religion.

Thus, Free will exists regardless of Go[o]d, and if it is Go[o]d gifted, it is immoral.

Some would like to deny us „free will“ on the basis of their interpretation of physics and metaphysical notions of determinism. Others would like to deny us „free will“ on the basis of divine omnipotence and divine omniscience. The end result of both being the same we are hapless victims of a future already fixed and known.

The problem in the physics department is reality can not be shown to be determnisitic only probablisitc. The problem in the religion department is go[o]d either is not, or is not anthropomorphic and anthropocentric nor omnipotent and omnisicent in the traditonal sense of those terms.

Creaturely freedom is real or at the very least no one can demonstrate it to be false, and the greater the degree of freedom, the greater the ability to alter nature in ways both „good“ and „bad“, and the future with it.

Can refer only to causality which is a physics term and concept. And, owes its foundations to cause/effect relationships as viewed by physics. But, as long as we are on about science, let’s bring this discussion home, shall we?

The macro world of Newtonian physics seems far more deterministic than the micro world of Quantum Mechanics, where it is distinctly probabilitistic. And, the unifying factor seems to be that on the micro scale where things are not so easily observed, things are not quite as settled as on the macro scale.This is not to say that things are absolute in the macro and only probabilistic in the micro. It is much more complex than that. Everything is deterministic, but only probabilistically. Which is to say that given certain „initial states“ certain outcomes are bound to happen, with some degree of variance.

This view of determinism is referred to by Stephan Hawking as Adequate Determinism, where it is stated that the world exhibits a determined probability. It was a notion I came to of my own reconning, but only just became aware that it had already been considered, but not dismissed or refuted, even passively.

It should also be noted, at this point, that determinism does not require absolute predictability.

There are various postulates which are commonly confused with determinism, and there are various forms of determinism… But, the common thread is given certain conditions(causes) there will be given outcomes(effects).

Another type of determinism is linguistic. It is based on the notion that given a certain linguistic going into a problem certain outcomes are bound to follow. In fact, anyone can notice an example of this form of determinism in my signature.

This heuristic follows through in mathematics. Phrase or formulate a mathematic problem in a given order and the outcome will be one thing. But, given the same number sets and the same operands, but formulated differently will generate an entirely different outcome.

Still we are seeing here the basics of cause/effect relationship.

Fatalism is the only form of determinism, of which I‘m currently aware, which is not causally related. But, that one relies on notions of which I am far from convinced, which, on this Britcore Hip Hop-BLOG, should be well known of me by now. In fact, in my view, fatalism doesn‘t really even bear consideration, much less mention, except in refutation, or active dismissal.

The reaction of white, English narrated co_kkk_ss after these attacks on 9/11/2001 on postfascist Hamburg’s gang lands, was nothing more then to adultery and children of the radical leftist scenes new economic promise of salvation in homo_national respects to the porn body and swatter squatting ..

Fuck ya‘all! Hip Hop will never die!

5 years ‚Still Dangerous Crew‘

..low kingz forward for new beApH‘in sections!

h

And for all persons of white [assimilated] origin, who can‘t understand ‚my‘ narrations and pro_nounciation of free spaces in all these artificial quarters by commerce, where I never want to live anymore a big kick in the ass. The weather Underground strikes again…No‘lympix Dallas was only an example!

Bel

u

NYC’s fasc_Ion week is already hurting stupidiety and noNames as not further to mention the streets!