Better *Is* Better Than Is Or Is Not

Why? Well, for one thing, it is harder to get into a paradox. I may not always know the absolute values of some thing's existences ... but usually I know which are better ... just like when i pass somebody on the road, i don't usually know exactly how fast i am going, but i always know that i am going faster than the guy i just passed.

Tags

  1. better truth
  2. logic

Comments


Seth says
on facebook here

Seth says
M 2012-11-12 07:46:41 16279
Better is mostly a one dimensional geometrical property. Try to order the Cartesian plane; closest to the origin?; closest to the X-axis; closest to the Y-axis ? how?  When you get into order theory you get complex in a hurry if you want to do it mathematically . Enjoy!

you can order according to whatever dimensionality you want ... some ways are better than others.  proximity is perhaps better than coordinates which are always biased.

Mark de LA says
seth 2012-11-12 10:24:23 16289
M 2012-11-12 10:23:11 16289
Nope!

Well maybe when you have a moment you can consider it and tell me why not.


Mark de LA says
seth 2012-11-12 08:11:59 16289
M 2012-11-12 07:46:41 16279
Better is mostly a one dimensional geometrical property. Try to order the Cartesian plane; closest to the origin?; closest to the X-axis; closest to the Y-axis ? how?  When you get into order theory you get complex in a hurry if you want to do it mathematically . Enjoy!

you can order according to whatever dimensionality you want ... some ways are better than others.  proximity is perhaps better than coordinates which are always biased.
Things like the above just are a lot of words - word salad!


Seth says
M 2012-11-12 08:54:11 16289
seth 2012-11-12 08:47:47 16289
M 2012-11-12 08:19:09 16289
seth 2012-11-12 08:11:59 16289
M 2012-11-12 07:46:41 16279
Better is mostly a one dimensional geometrical property. Try to order the Cartesian plane; closest to the origin?; closest to the X-axis; closest to the Y-axis ? how?  When you get into order theory you get complex in a hurry if you want to do it mathematically . Enjoy!

you can order according to whatever dimensionality you want ... some ways are better than others.  proximity is perhaps better than coordinates which are always biased.
Basically you seem to be saying you can make up anything you want & call it better - even if it makes no sense to anyone else - KEWL, I deem this no better than anything else nor less better (i.e. worse) than something at random.

Well, whereas it is true that "you can make up anything you want & call it better", that has nothing to do with what i am saying.  In fact the very form of your statement is always the case: "X can make up anything they want and call it Y".  So, in saying that you are not really saying anything at all.   But my message  actually  does say something.  Do you know what it says?
Nope! Makes no sense to me.
hmmm ... mental block? ... or maybe it is just too simple and you are expecting something more complex? ... or maybe you are holding some assumption which contradicts? ... or maybe you got tripped up because i intentionally didn't put in the punctuation? .... or maybe you are just habitually mismatching ?  

Hmmm ... which is it ?

Mark de LA says
seth 2012-11-13 08:42:09 16289
source: Mark said on Facebook

Well, maybe work on Order Theory a bit. This is pretty much useless & most decisions are binary. I'm not going to choose an apple which is closest to me from an orange that is 3 inches farther frome just due to proximity.

Proximity comes into play in decision theory, but not in the way you are thinking above.  Rather a space of possibilities is created with many variables.  The variables can be binary, but in real life are rarely so.  The number of dimensions in the space are just as many as are needed to allow the values the vary independently.  Also agency (otherness) must be introduced into the space ... what is good for me may not necessarily be good for you.  We are in a possibility space and not a geographic one.  Now draw a sphere of possibility probability around one occurrence.  The trick is to get the sphere closer and closer to the desired occurrence by choosing different values of the variables.  I probably haven't described this right, but you should be able to get the drift ... we can delve into decision theory and possibility space as deep as necessary.

That is the context in which i used the word "proximity" on facebook here.
In fact of reality, you do something or not - that was my use of the word binary. Most of what gets done is responding to the effects of the external world seen through the eyes of your self & for the purpose of survival of the self. Decision theory might be good for massive projects & plans but rarely applies to the individual.


Mark de LA says
Truth is even a rarer determining factor.


Seth says
source: Mark above
In fact of reality, you do something or not - that was my use of the word binary.
Well what you do in reality can rarely, if ever, be completely described in language in a binary way.  In other words, if i write down in language that i did something, or that i did not do something, that usually is not the complete story.  That is why binary questions in court are not a good way to get at the truth.  Oh sure, we permit lawyers to insist upon yes-no answers ... but everyone knows that when they do so, against the protests of their witnesses, they are attempting to hide and or gloss over a larger truth.

It is interesting to note that understanding "A Better Truth" is just a way to comprehend that binary thinking is rarely all that very reliable. 

You seem to like binary logic a lot more than do I.  I have been on a tirade against it for a long time ... you always seem to defend it.

Here is one of the problem with binary thinking ...





Seth says
M 2012-11-14 07:46:55 16289
seth 2012-11-14 07:31:43 16289
M 2012-11-14 00:11:17 16289
KEWL, hold it in your mind that way to preserve, protect & defend your selfness. Or you could finish BofNK & find more clues!

well BofNK started out with the whole "direct consciousness" thingy ... quite a nice thing one can construct using one's mind ... but that thingey ... is just one example of trumeth and has almost nothing to do with a better truth.  in fact, it seems to me to be  using an entirely different definition of truth ... as such it become a confusion to discuss it here.  Perhaps we should start a new item for that.
For me I don't want to discuss your word at all. (sounds like a brand of the drug speed)
Direct experience is not constructed - that's the point.


Sure it is ... by your own thesis  ... "whatever the mind does it does to preserve its self" ... the mind becomes aware of direct consciousness ... that awareness is just like any other function of the mind.  Oh sure you can deny that ... but is that denial not just another one of those cases where them mind defends its self ?   I find is impossible to get out of that bind ... except, of course, by just declaring it so based upon Faith.

Now, jumping ahead a bit,  you will claim that you did it, and i did not ... and that the experience itself is quite convincing and that you did not need Faith to know.  I will be honest with you.  I did not do the exercise completely and have not ever experienced this so called "direct consciousness".   Have you?  

Seth says
M 2012-11-14 08:32:40 16289
Who says the mind is doing direct experience? I have had a few. They are not "it" & descriptions are pretty useless. If you want a recipe, from BofNK (21:58) <-- nice one!

Well, yes, i know that you assume that the "direct experience" which happens with this kind of exercise is not completely constructed by one's mind ... but rather comes from spiritual being.  I do not make that assumption, rather i expect the opposite.  That is the contradiction ... err the paradox of otherness ... that befronts us.  I like to accept that as such and perhaps move on to the effect of the contradiction on our inquiry ... but not play any self defense in the process. 

Seth says
M 2012-11-14 00:11:17 16289
KEWL, hold it in your mind that way to preserve, protect & defend your selfness. Or you could finish BofNK & find more clues!

well BofNK started out with the whole "direct consciousness" thingy ... quite a nice thing one can construct using one's mind ... but that thingey ... is just one example of trumeth and has almost nothing to do with a better truth.  in fact, it seems to me to be  using an entirely different definition of truth ... as such it become a confusion to discuss it here.  Perhaps we should start a new item for that.

Seth says
M 2012-11-13 16:01:36 16289
seth 2012-11-13 13:58:09 16289
M 2012-11-13 12:04:48 16289
I don't see any problem. I can't conceive of a person both simultaneously doing something & not doing it at the same moment.  Most of your confusion may be because of bad use of language by someone describing events.


What a person, or any other thing, actually does can only be partially described in language. 


Truth is normally a relationship between what is said in language and what actually happens.   So in that sense "all of [the] confusion may be because of bad use of language by someone describing the events".  So apparently we agree on that.  That is pretty much all the diagram is saying, but it is saying it about formal binary logic.


Well, I'm going more with PR's distinction which has truth independent of language, i.e. what so.


The problem with that is there is no way to talk about it.  You could not build a fact checker that could judge it.  In fact it cannot be judged ... i just is. 


Sorry, for me, that is just a washy intangible that can never be known or verified ...  too weak for me.  It is only 1/3 of what is studied under the topic of epistemology .... it is just part of the semantic triage that comprises human apprehension in which truth can become a tangible thing.

... and, i might add, it is a change of topic from this item.

Seth says
M 2012-11-15 07:53:56 16289
M 2012-11-15 07:51:44 16289
OTOH, you may not get so lost if you went for determining FACTS instead of truth. The material world can be clothed in facts without too much dualism. One such fact is that you & I were born. Just exactly what you & I are may be up for some speculation, though.

fact (n.) Look up fact at Dictionary.com1530s, "action," especially "evil deed," from L. factum "event, occurrence," lit. "thing done," neuter pp. of facere "to do" (see factitious). Usual modern sense of "thing known to be true" appeared 1630s, from notion of "something that has actually occurred." Facts of life "harsh realities" is from 1854; specific sense of "human sexual functions" first recorded 1913.
I thought you meant what you said about not wanting to follow this train of thought. 

How is this comment related to this train of thought? 

Seth says
But, getting back to this item's topic ... it is of a different kind of truth ... it does not need or use the assumption of your "direct consciousness".  It is really of a much more mundane nature ... and your "direct consciousness" can happen or not, can be interpreted as coming from a spiritual being or not,  with no affect on what i am staying here at all.  It is, as perhaps you have observed elsewhere, quite beside the point.

I am dealing only with where something is experienced, and then the experience and thinking about the experience, is told to someone in the world.   The match between the two, the experience and the telling, is all I am concerned with. 

Seth says
M 2012-11-14 18:01:50 16289
M 2012-11-14 18:00:45 16289
seth 2012-11-14 17:47:45 16289
Are you really saying that based upon your exercises, that you know a better truth ... or the truth ... of the matter in Benghazi ?
NOPE! those things are your mind thingies.
Sorry, I thought you were talking about something related to real truth!

nevermind!

Look, i can understand how you experience something that you call "the real truth".  But that "real truth" has nothing to do with things like Bengazie, the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the price of beans at the Framer's market in Renton, or any other thing that people normally talk about.   Those facts and opinions and conjectures and other mental behaviors are the subject here.  I am really just trying to figure out if you have a valid reason for bringing up your "real truth" in this context?

Please tell me.

Mark de LA says
seth 2012-11-15 08:17:33 16289
M 2012-11-15 07:53:56 16289
M 2012-11-15 07:51:44 16289
OTOH, you may not get so lost if you went for determining FACTS instead of truth. The material world can be clothed in facts without too much dualism. One such fact is that you & I were born. Just exactly what you & I are may be up for some speculation, though.

fact (n.) Look up fact at Dictionary.com1530s, "action," especially "evil deed," from L. factum "event, occurrence," lit. "thing done," neuter pp. of facere "to do" (see factitious). Usual modern sense of "thing known to be true" appeared 1630s, from notion of "something that has actually occurred." Facts of life "harsh realities" is from 1854; specific sense of "human sexual functions" first recorded 1913.
I thought you meant what you said about not wanting to follow this train of thought. 

How is this comment related to this train of thought? 
Paraphrasing the Gandhi movie "I know a way out of Hell ...." i.e. truth hell. Just thought this up this AM.  If you don't like it or it ripples some part of your brain that only feeds rwg - delete it!


Seth says
M 2012-11-14 17:22:28 16289
seth 2012-11-14 16:48:55 16289
M 2012-11-14 16:19:11 16289
seth 2012-11-14 15:20:31 16289
M 2012-11-14 11:07:05 16289
M 2012-11-14 11:04:18 16289
Yep SOS.

Do not expect to be a violinist if you refuse to get a violin and take up the bow & practice!

I didn't assume anything, I did the exercise & got a result. Same way with Rudolf Steiner but folks think they can argue about it & avoid the work.


I don't doubt your results or experience.  I do, however, expect that your interpretation of them contains the assumption that i have identified.  But i certainly accept that you believe that it does not. 

I have had similar experiences and was not compelled to interpret them as coming from a spiritual being.  I suppose it does come down to the assumptions that we have learned according to our different experiences.  Hence i do understand your continual admonitions to do the exercises.  If that is the basic conflict between us ... then perhaps we both should accept it and move on.

No "", and "" are really necessary here for me ... were i have analyzed this correctly,

just a [ok that is it] ... and then perhaps a [sign of respect for our otherness].
Your assumptions, descriptions & interpretation are your own & have nothing to do with the real truth


Well yes certainly my "assumptions, descriptions & interpretation are my own" ... as are yours, i can only assume.  But would you  tell me "the real truth" in the matter?
Yes - do the exercises, be open to whatever shows up regardless of self - continue as prescribed in BofNK 21:58 & eventually something will show up besides mind noise . If your self is able to handle it you will be surprised that it is a different kind of truth than you can ever find by rational/logical discourse.
Let me know how it turns out.


Mark, like i said above ... i'll repeat it below ... your BofNK exercises and their results have absolutely nothing to do with this item.  

source: me above
ut, getting back to this item's topic ... it is of a different kind of truth ... it does not need or use the assumption of your "direct consciousness".  It is really of a much more mundane nature ... and your "direct consciousness" can happen or not, can be interpreted as coming from a spiritual being or not,  with no affect on what i am staying here at all.  It is, as perhaps you have observed elsewhere, quite beside the point.

I am dealing only with where something is experienced, and then the experience and thinking about the experience, is told to someone in the world.   The match between the two, the experience and the telling, is all I am concerned with.

So, can you shed shome light on why you are still perusing that train of thought?  Can you say why it has anything to do with telling about experiences and thinking about experiences?


Seth says
M 2012-11-14 16:19:11 16289
seth 2012-11-14 15:20:31 16289
M 2012-11-14 11:07:05 16289
M 2012-11-14 11:04:18 16289
Yep SOS.

Do not expect to be a violinist if you refuse to get a violin and take up the bow & practice!

I didn't assume anything, I did the exercise & got a result. Same way with Rudolf Steiner but folks think they can argue about it & avoid the work.


I don't doubt your results or experience.  I do, however, expect that your interpretation of them contains the assumption that i have identified.  But i certainly accept that you believe that it does not. 

I have had similar experiences and was not compelled to interpret them as coming from a spiritual being.  I suppose it does come down to the assumptions that we have learned according to our different experiences.  Hence i do understand your continual admonitions to do the exercises.  If that is the basic conflict between us ... then perhaps we both should accept it and move on.

No "", and "" are really necessary here for me ... were i have analyzed this correctly,

just a [ok that is it] ... and then perhaps a [sign of respect for our otherness].
Your assumptions, descriptions & interpretation are your own & have nothing to do with the real truth


Well yes certainly my "assumptions, descriptions & interpretation are my own" ... as are yours, i can only assume.  But would you  tell me "the real truth" in the matter?

Mark de LA says
As an explanation consider that I just finished the first 17 chapters dealing with the subject of constructing the self etc in BofNK for the second time. It's not an obsession.  Most people ignore it completely & think they have something with words, logic, reasoning, labels & philosophies.   OTOH, it is completely you (&I).  To leave it out of considering truth may not bother you or may be a side issue, I don't know, but is is very revealing. I am truly not wishing to follow your train of thought on this particular item in the direction you are going any more.
ZZzzz....

Seth says
Well I think life is what I make of it.   So is any thing.   When a thing is not my thing ... not something i want to make anything of ... I like to ignore it .... not piss upon it. 

Mark de LA says
seth 2012-11-15 07:50:23 16289
Well I think life is what I make of it.   So is any thing.   When a thing is not my thing ... not something i want to make anything of ... I like to ignore it .... not piss upon it. 
You seem to have an obsession about peeing bissed on!


Seth says
source: Mark above
You might get used to the idea that you will NEVER know the truth (i.e. as they say the truth, the whole truth & nothing but the truth) about anything in politics nor wars for a start.  The rest of your thesis is just confusion to get around not being willing to face that fact. There are a lot less futile pursuits. The news is a low fidelity recording jumble of people's selves mixed with deception & selective omissions. As we saw during the elections the news channels also mix fantasy into future polls to retain audience & try to affect the elections ... still no truth. That's why the symbology M$M is so good; its main purpose being money.  I am finding a new interest in other things.

Strange that you put it in that particular way.   You see i have already gotten "use to the idea that I will NEVER know the truth (i.e. as they say the truth, the whole truth & nothing but the truth) about anything in politics nor wars for a start." I have actually given up on the whole truth ...  err ... wait for it ... wait for it ... that is exactly why i am settling for just a better one. 

So the rest of my thesis can not be "confusion to get around not being willing to face that fact" because i already have.  now why did it confuse you?

Now certainly the media ... the news ... politics ... people's lives themselves ... are at times a "jumble of people's selves mixed with deception & selective omissions".  With that i can heartily agree.   But still and all that jumble is just part of what our lives and media are about.  I am not nearly as pessimistic as you.  

Nor am i all that very obsessed with self.  It is big.  No doubt about that.  I think  some people have is worse than others.  But for others the defense of self is not nearly as paramount as you seem to make of it in your life.  After all we are quite different beings.  I know that because so very frequently you go there whereas i am not even thinking about it ... then when you do go there, i get a kind of disappointment that says ... omg, he is doing that again ... whereas i didn't even care about his ego or mine ... i was into the thing exclusive to our egos.
Please, , don't think that i am trying to hold you in the wrong and myself in the right  ... in fact please just don't even respond to this ... just think about it ... could you be quite different there than I in this regard ? .... but don't tell me ... i don't really care ... just honestly propose the question to yourself.  Ask yourself:  Does Seth care as much about defending his self as I do?  And if you answer is that I do ... they ask yourself the question how could we be so very similar in that one trait?

Seth says
M 2012-11-15 12:44:36 16289
... & your underhanded mention of it as neutral.  You missed the point of my whole contribution which had nothing to do with being it had to do with switching the subject of your thesis from truth to facts. It is a fact that I took a shit today. That fact is not controversial. If you start looking for truth in it you may end up deep in shit.


Well i did not get "switch the subject of my thesis from truth to facts" from what you said.  I don't see any real difference.  Is not perusing facts, just the very same thing as perusing truth?

If you took a shit, and you tell me  you took a shit, i would believe it ... your sentence above (bold italic blue) would be true  ... i would have found all the truth, and all the facts, in the matter that i would have desired. 

I really have no idea what your sentence, "If you start looking for truth in it you may end up deep in shit", means ... nor what i would do to actually try to do it.

Seth says
M 2012-11-15 08:22:06 16289
seth 2012-11-15 08:17:33 16289
M 2012-11-15 07:53:56 16289
M 2012-11-15 07:51:44 16289
OTOH, you may not get so lost if you went for determining FACTS instead of truth. The material world can be clothed in facts without too much dualism. One such fact is that you & I were born. Just exactly what you & I are may be up for some speculation, though.

fact (n.) Look up fact at Dictionary.com1530s, "action," especially "evil deed," from L. factum "event, occurrence," lit. "thing done," neuter pp. of facere "to do" (see factitious). Usual modern sense of "thing known to be true" appeared 1630s, from notion of "something that has actually occurred." Facts of life "harsh realities" is from 1854; specific sense of "human sexual functions" first recorded 1913.
I thought you meant what you said about not wanting to follow this train of thought. 

How is this comment related to this train of thought? 
Paraphrasing the Gandhi movie "I know a way out of Hell ...." i.e. truth hell. Just thought this up this AM.  If you don't like it or it ripples some part of your brain that only feeds rwg - delete it!



This diagram illustrates a relationship between the meta world of thought, language, communication ... and the world of being.  I agree that if you experience only the world of being, you will be out of the meta world ... which i think you refer to as "truth hell". 

My problem with that is that truly dwelling in that that being-only-land does not seem to permit me also dwelling in my culture.  For, it seems to me, that my culture is mostly all just doing that thought, language, and communication thingey.  It is how we humans have evolved ...even our brains

But, hey, bro, i respect your direction, though different than mine, it must be a fine path indeed.

My quest ... in this item ... is to try to discover ways to improve the match between the meta world and the world of being ... the world that just is ... the world of actuality ... spirit or otherwise ... and the world that is just about it. 

Incidentally,  i don't get any rwg here ... except of course the sentence you wrote with me as the subject ... lol ... .

Mark de LA says
     This nested mess is hard to reply to at this moment.  Neither Firefox nor IE9 is working all that well with fbi.  You & I best know the facts of our own lives & some shared ones. I was suggesting that a fact is a fact & really nothing to quibble about except it is gleaned from the news or politics. The meaning of truth has always been a difference between us & is not likely to change in that regard. Truth is one thing to GW, another to RS & a third thing to Peter Ralston ... etc. Facts are more in the domain of action in what we call the real world (or maybe you call it the concensus world. See the etymology I provided previously. RS speaks of higher truths which you & I both may have a hard time accessing; so better to leave that notion alone for now. Peter's notion is from the point of view of ontology (which he also calls zen). Such a notion is accessible to both of us although not always easy & without some effort. You have the best resource for that in BofNK. The word being is difficult to grok & takes work to access & is best not something to argue with.
      I'm unclear how logic, rhetoric, argumentation, philosophy & the like are ever going to extract truth out of minds. It seems like a futile task. I think that leaving truth out of the conversation will lessen the rwg which I know for a fact will not yield any truth. We can disagree on what might be a fact in some case, but that may just be a plea for more information.  Presumably with more information the facts of a case will become clear although in some instances the converse shows up.
 

See Also

  1. Thought The 2017 White House correspondents’ dinner with 267 viewings related by tag "better truth".
  2. Thought Conversation on hash tags? with 111 viewings related by tag "logic".
  3. Thought 3 state logic with 86 viewings related by tag "logic".
  4. Thought Read between the lines ... with 78 viewings related by tag "BetterTruth".
  5. Thought BARBARA CUBED - The Manual of Pure Logic with 72 viewings related by tag "logic".
  6. Thought The binary logic of two distinctions with 34 viewings related by tag "logic".
  7. Thought Identity Entails Logic with 20 viewings related by tag "logic".
  8. Thought List of Logical Fallacies with 17 viewings related by tag "logic".
  9. Thought Identity Entails the Laws of Logic with 8 viewings related by tag "logic".
  10. Thought Reading Groups To Read For A Better Truth with 6 viewings related by tag "better truth".
  11. Thought The Rise of Gobbledygook. with 6 viewings related by tag "logic".
  12. Thought The Ten Commandments of Logic with 4 viewings related by tag "logic".
  13. Thought about: GW Document: Spring - #57 with 4 viewings related by tag "logic".
  14. Thought Illative force with 3 viewings related by tag "logic".
  15. Thought A Better Truth with 3 viewings related by tag "better truth".
  16. Thought Illative Force - A Lament with 3 viewings related by tag "logic".
  17. Thought News in the Light of What's Published with 2 viewings related by tag "better truth".
  18. Thought Worth Repeating with 1 viewings related by tag "logic".
  19. Thought BARBARA CUBED - I. DEFINITIONS with 1 viewings related by tag "logic".
  20. Thought phrases are more specific than single words with 1 viewings related by tag "logic".
  21. Thought The meaning of a communication with 1 viewings related by tag "better truth".
  22. Thought Truth with 1 viewings related by tag "logic".
  23. Thought Conventional Logic vs Faith with 1 viewings related by tag "logic".
  24. Thought not (not X) is not necessarily X with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  25. Thought Logic is great, Survival is better! with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  26. Thought An interesting dialogue about Truth with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  27. Thought Found on Facebook with 0 viewings related by tag "better truth".
  28. Thought Truth & Science with 0 viewings related by tag "better truth".
  29. Thought A Better Truth with 0 viewings related by tag "better truth".
  30. Thought about: hmmm .... with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  31. Thought about: Sorites with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  32. Thought Some math musing re philosophy of mind with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  33. Thought about: Burningbird ? I love you 25% of the time with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  34. Thought Way to Go Coach! with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  35. Thought Paradox and Otherness with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  36. Thought Pride an Glory in Your Code with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  37. Thought Extensional VS Intensional Logic with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  38. Thought Peter Ralston's attitude twards representations ... with 0 viewings related by tag "better truth".
  39. Thought about: Not (not A) is still not A. with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  40. Thought about: logically speaking with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  41. Thought Barbara Cubed - Page 2 Illative Force with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  42. Thought dmiles with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  43. Thought The Excluded Middle with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  44. Thought logic is great, survival is better with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  45. Thought A == A aka Indetity with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  46. Thought Liberal Wet Dream with 0 viewings related by tag "better truth".
  47. Thought How my thinking has changed with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  48. Thought Why I Disrespect the UN with 0 viewings related by tag "better truth".
  49. Thought If pigs could fly ... with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".
  50. Thought Aristotle on Topics with 0 viewings related by tag "logic".