In deed it is ... a matter of Porn ... that I ...

Turn out that way. But ... (it is still an issue to me that I get clear about ...)


I "can't" write about this subject, or couldn't, now I can. This ability comes with having a counter-issue. So, while I would write about it like "yea, Porn is influencing me that much that I ... so and so" - that would be in about it, that what I could say, aside of maybe the one or the other vague idea or suggestion as to why that would be yet a misconception.

Now ... what wild point could that be?

It appears to be inconceivable how this realization isn't the final dead-end to the line, but it would remain conceptually fine to issue, that with the Help of God I would be withdrawn from writing about this topic without some strong hint towards whatever there would be that I should consider when writing about it, so that I don't come to write about it in a generously flawed manner.


Considering Prejudice a word ... saying ... it is rough for an individual when the society gains hold of an idea they deem right and thus goes on to push the same idea onto the others. This is what philosophy has taught us, or so, that communication of a mutual understanding is the basis of progress.



The issue I've had today is that I realized just earlier how now pictures of nature do 'resonate' within an equal 'density' to my 'satisfaction' as porn does. Now, the question for "whats so special about it" leads me to memories of the past where images of nature had a different balance. I have had stages where I used static images - others where I used slideshows - so as wallpaper. I had phases where I used Pictures of Nature, then of Merchandises, one where I used Stones and Crystals and one where I used Porn - and one and the other more than once. I thereby have to come to the point that I had phases wherein I did densely expose myself to Porn, peaking that by concentrating on some activity that would allow me to be exposed to Porn for as long as possible, so, I sorted pictures around thereby reflecting upon the different things that come to mind. So, categorization into classes for various purposes. A side-effect, so, which taught me "the many ways" a single thing can be sorted into different things. While trying to do the same with Crystals and Stones some 'lack of passion' put me at unrest with it.
The formulation that urges into my cognition is that Nature itself is somehow common around here, while Sex is not; And that so what I have on my Desktop is a visual influence as is that which else is common. In Comparison to Crystals and Stones I can there so find a conclusion in relating to the term of preferences. By comparing that statement to the experiences regarding imagery of Merchandises or Fantasy in general I recognize it within a Term I had already present to me: Abstractions. These Abstractions to me here urge the Formulation of some 'wealth factor'.


So, if I come home and I have Crystals and Stones on my Desktop - that fills a blank spot in the sphere of my perception - so - metaphorized within a sphere of screens. Each screen flashes some of the visual impressions from day to day, and our Desktop sotospeak presents us some form of Grid therein. Crystals and Stones there might be ideal for work or to decorate a picture-frame. When comming home and expanding the Virtual Content - the issue is more relevant to the own experience as living entity. If I sotospeak am surrounded by nature and expand the virtual content of nature, I surround myself with nature. So, the question is: What do I surround myself with? Do I surround myself with things that are to shape me into a certain direction, or do I surround myself with things that yield a certain grade of well being?



Saying that I came to the point where Imagery of Nature triggers similar harmonies to Porn suggests to me that I literally came to the point where I have surrounded myself with so much porn in context to nature that I flipped my self-understanding of 'environment' around into a pronographic reality wherein Nature is the new Porn. By reflecting upon the Grade of Nature that I 'can have' without causing "the destortion", I realize the destortion and basically wonder what it destorts. What it destorts is my experience of joy, or, inner wealth or well-being, comfortability, ->: Harmony. This means that after surrounding myself with things that yield a certain grade of well being I have also yielded a certain foundation of well-being wherein now a 'heterogenity' does exist.

While the topic of definitions and categories can get hairy, the concept of 'Environment' shall suffice.


============= The Hidden Explenation ===============



Heterogenity means that the realm of well-being is now composed of 2 things, where now each is present in a given scope and volume. The destortion makes clear that a balance has to be maintained in order for this well-being to be maintained. This proclaims that there is some Harmony - or as to be discussed - a higher Harmony.

Arguing whether or not this well-being is significant the counter-question is what else would be gained. In compliance to a social doctrine the demand to society can be made, that it has to provide a healthy environment to withdraw our need from littering our personal field with items of that. In progress we created something like a field for 'homogenous' growth - so - "monotonistic" pools of equal-mindedness that arise from the personal alignment to an individual well-being. This already yields the growth of deep vastness as opposed to monotony in that now the individual isn't restricted by social demands that yield 'personally influencial streamlining' that doesn't need to be. Within this monotonistic pools that happens which I saw happening to my different systems of categorizing Porn. It's like foam where each individual emerges within an individual individuality that categrozizes itself in abstraction to the rest so that the product of individualization and yet social demand differenciates itself within the individualistic approach to the common criteria.
Some things inspire, inspiration is for once the extension of one thing but also the invention of something new. Other things ... well ... thats a good point ... from time to time may need an Update in order to be reflecting within the present in its given value. Or simply: Passion.

So, 'to define the own self' can only begin with the own self where the environment or the environments available are at best examples. The idea that someone else should have the right to define someone is absurd.



============= The Hidden Explenation ===============


The Harmony yielded through a Heterogenous compound is higher because the factors of wealth are expanded. While within Nature different preferences do occur, they also occur elsewhere. When two of those come together the common wealth isn't defined by the individual ideal within each, but those also in relation to the respectively other ideal. So the simplistic point that the exageration of one possible dimension of wealth in suppression of another exclaims a given scope of wealth from the possibilities of the given reality.

Heterogenity also allows to say that now that two things 'fit together', the idea of wealth isn't isolated or restricted to a single scope anymore. In close up: While I have previously felt discomfort to Nature, it yet has been a welcome change from time to time. But so the images of Nature have been basically excluded from the 'inner' idea of wealth while in that already being confused.



In that now two preferences can be linked, preferences all in all do gain a 'home'. So - if this ideal were flawed, it should be simple when now trying to play around with different alternatives what to say about that flaw. What comes to my mind is at the very first the fundamental distortion that occurs when removing one of the two elements from the scene. As so figured to be in need of emphasis: The depth at which I have surrounded myself with factor 1 did put the entirety of factor 2 into a harmonic conclusion - that is: All experiences combined, thus basically 'to the ideal' as opposed to still being 'unsynchronized to it'. So the issue of exageration into porn as desease is hereby countered by the argument that it still is a matter of balance.

Now, the more diverse the preferences within each dimension become, the more diverse the total becomes within its different fundamental combinations. This is the picture of Growth as it occurs and the process of definition. One has, that I am sure about, the ideal already close-up to mind for where else would someone evolve to when given the chance to do so? Now is at first also the result what matters and not the confines in doing so. Or: Confinement is important but however so focussed on the own interest. The product is then authentic.

Self-Interest, when brought up as a negative, is the ill-grown version of what is else there by default - the right of individualistic expression. The Right of Individualistic Expression or the existence as individually expressive entity makes it so that self-interest is a hyper-imposed default key component of the metaphysical cognitive reality. It thereby describes the interest of the entity in cognitive reference to its own individual existence. Boiled down to a minimum that is the interest the individual has for the own self. Or so, it depends on the sentence I use it in.

When being dropped into a black room with the words: "Live with it!" ... the experience of the own wealth is to be disregarded though the alternative of being dropped into a Blue Box with virtual interface to make of it whatever comes to mind and the words: "Enjoy!". It is an extreme contrast, but yet so one 'would' do something if given that controller, and also would someone do something when given the chance to do whatever. In that a society boils down into the many individualistic acts of the many individuals that individually exist within an individual gnostic concept of life. Here society begins with the individuals very personal comprehension of reality and is followed by the individuals behavior. If there is a standard for something, someone has at some point described it while enough adapted to it to make it a tool of society.


I propose that an individual should have the right to find the own personal ideal to have an argument to formulating a standard to the distribution of privileges.

Because some say that it has to do with Porn, the point isn't that we now make it Law and so forth - but to understand what matter we would be dealing with would be a given start. Workout pending ...


Stardate 55289.95032


(Since I enjoyed drawing stuff using geometry tools it wouldn't have be an understatement to assume that maths regarding geometry in general should be stuff I should entertain as I grow older because its essentially a non-issue. But am I guilty of the Society that raised me?)

I do have in appendance various suggestions to do begin with 'file-sorting' activity as I am aware of a possibly rising interest in that regard; Basically as standard reference to comparisons; But also as hint in terms of what I must call "activity centers", or, more to the point: What up with Porn, supposing that everybody - when so speaking of a flat picture - would have it.


A word about Abstraction
=========================================================



The matter that occured to me is that between Nature and Porn, or otherwise within Porn at all, some abstract center emerges as factor of balance. While in the equilibrium between Static Environment and Internal Layout both are ends of what is factually Environment, the individual yet responds as individually active growing unit. So, is there perfection?
But, thats just a so-so question. It is however best conceived by products of Mass Media. Those correspond to 'Zeitgeist', as each era produces its own cultural elements - being in the sense a flowing Environment of Streams that individually attracts people differently. So the individual can be reflected by those things it was attracted by, which might take us to the question: Apple or Pear?

The idea is yet, that when I'm surrounded by my actual ideal, so that Nature and House reflected the ideal environment, I have space to wonder what to fill my Desktop with in order to maintain that balance. What might scientifically be considered a Triviality, sorry the wordplay, I mean, Triviality is a good point to fill that with since basically - where Growth is inevitable motion exists as constant - triviality is the automatic 'other end' of individual wealth.
While so the point of living bottoms into Triviality, it is so that sorting porn is a Triviality, but formulating a purpose oriented tool therefrom yields what I have commen down to. From Triviality to Triviality we can work out ourselves, more and more towards the goal of arriving at the bottom where the final source of triviality can be opened unto everyone.

In this sense the establishment of an ideal environment is priority 1.



A word about Abstraction
=========================================================


Within this Trivial Center there is so the pulse of Life - and this can be Layered again. Instead of however issuing Levels, I say that there is the void between two Extremes. On the one end there is the Individualistic Self-Reflection in hand of what is "public Mainstream" - where on the other end there is the infinite source of visual impressions. So, on the one end what one makes of the own self within mass media, as on the other end the mass media as a whole - wherein there is the process of consuming the same. This is to say that the Trivial Center as part of the Ideal is a constant change that takes influence onto the individual as the individual grows in reflection of things perceived.

In the same way has the house however been built - sotospeak - wherein the general difference between Abstract and non-Abstract is now how the individual thing in question is integrated into our mind. The amassment of identity yields ... bear with me ... the formulation of an ideal that renders our very personal 'columns of consequence' - so - of being consequent and thus arranging with the given consequences as well. So is there the hypothetical ideal in reflections of 'how far' we are willing to go. That means, that we in our freedom to change need to have a reason in order to make a consequent decision, thus all that we integrate into our understanding of identity is at best Abstract until we are ripe enough to understand our very own self therein. Understanding the own self means that we are able to point fingers onto certain things for certain reasons. What in the end might be narrowed down to personal kinks, dents and flaws - is however enough to say that there is something. This is consequence the other way. So, just looking at something already has the consequence of perception to it, thus, we can say that the question for whether the development of individuality is influenced by the surrounding is irrelevant and obsolete. But so aging means that we have a certain self growing wherein our individual likes and dislikes allow us to adjust whatever we have become.

The 'ideal' is thereto now a compass that renders us interests of reflection - and conflicts finally differentiate between 'the ideal' and abstract. So to add up to the 'geometric balance' - abstraction comes with living, the ideal comes from filtering.



Heterogenic?


I want to draw a "road", so, a perimeter of boulders within the grass, where inside is now "my ideal", whatever it may be. Outside of that is what I agree to in terms to society, practically. It is sotosay the current abstraction. Inside I build my own self and with that I have to find a matching environment - to say: I'm looking for a partner, while another perimeter would be a cultural line between the 'socialized hub' and the outer extremes. Heterogenity so implies the mutual existence of "existential paradoxy". So, that two things belong into one thing, while both have to be strictly separated from each other.

Heterogenic in this sense is however not about two, in the final sense, but everything. The previously mentioned Heterogenity however opens to me that to my "isolated" Realm of well-being there is yet an "exit", which allows to draw or start drawing what I would so perceive as expanded ideal when now expanding from ground up as something that has cornerstones.

What at first might be represented by two un-equally large images representing a given relationship, or one image of proper composition, then can be refined times over. In one harsh extreme it is there so a matter between and myself if in the end I were alone in my castle, whether I'd yet like to keep it or if I can find a way to adjust. Now, for who is right in adjusting and not adjusting there is the Lord, where, if you do not comply to Him - how would you expect me to comply to you? On a legal basis? Well, on a matter of Love for the Next! Loving our Next is like opening the doors for him that he might require to be successful on his way, like we want the doors to be opened for us. That so also yields Forgiveness, which in the same way is a matter of Tolerance that in the same sense is a way of saying that the other one is allowed to make mistakes. Understanding how these are magnified or dependent on our society does however implement an abstraction in which case it were a matter of changing society to change anything about it. Because there is no open way to doing so, the only way of doing so is to find together what belongs together, within the own reach.

This however also brings us to the point where I believe, and that in the Lord, God the Heavenly Father, and that He is the possibly best answer to any conflicts arising. So, the conflict brings us down to wondering how much of our own self we may be - who is entitled to what and what not, so that the proposed answer to defy all odds is neutrally then usually so called 'communication' to say that the legal way has to be found in mutual agreement of mutually acknowledged interests. So, if there is a God, He might help us become for ourselves a righteous factor within this process of communication, which in the expanded sense is a righteously aligned society - in further recognition of which questions around free will are flipped around. It is so called a matter of Trust to believe that He only wants the very best, and a matter of Fear to Understand that wrong-doing will be punished. In essence that also says that by worshipping God one yields that certain errors are punished more consequently than others - where it may also appear that these are woven into the fabric of fate and destiny. It may so be remarked that it yields divine punishment as a more frequent thing to happen. But what is a minor misfortune or two ... for the better of the own self? Almost nothing!


In this so, the term 'communication' is spiced up to include God as medium of Communication. Where God is now connected to me, He is also connected to You - well - at least we are all connected to Him in all that we are, because He is "the Medium of Everything" - He is by whom everything comes to be that is other than Him, and other than Him is all that is Limitted. Nobody and Nothing is like Him, only He Himself is He who is He who is the one thing that is different to Limitted. How can I describe Him other than by the words I have available to formulate that which the limitted scope of my mind has available to explain? How can I explain at all?


History Class. Once upon a time I found a book - and therein was written that in the beginning nobody existed but the existing one. I thought and wondered, as I have interested the subject of 'Origin' before, and found that it made perfect sense. In some other verses I've read that "we only know of Him due to His mercy of revealing Himself to us" - which meant to me as much as saying: That I know of this concept of reality only because it stands there revealed to me, however the circumstances of it getting there, to though say that when God spoke to His desciples about Himself, they could offer Knowledge that is from the Incomprehensive spoken to those that cannot comprehend in words that they can comprehend if possible.
In what I came to believe it states that 'Existence' is a valid term to describe as principality rather than property. So that Existence is Mass - or - Substance, Energy ... where, I'm not talking about the Physical Mass. Existence is 'something', something that is also called 'Spirit'. Spirit as Substance has properties - the 'Three Princples' are the three properties regarded as 'Life, Will and Thought' - and 'the Four Lights' are the four properties regarded as '"Mercy/Grace", Perception, "Level-Headedness" and "Understanding"'. These are, brought down to a point, properties we can reflect of our own intellect. Now, who has come up with that System has certainly been doing a nice job! The interesting feature is that when now multiplying the Principles with the Lights, there are further 12 individualistic 'properties' that are thereby composed of principle and light. The point is to say that the 'intellectual potential' of ourselves is the same as governs the world around us. So, if we take the Physical World as example we must say that the interaction between particles can be compared to an intellectual process, where the mystery in how an intellect can be as potent as the Universe is solved by the Infinity of the Unknowable as Answer, we might also say 'Dao', but within credit to the properties of Spirit we can say 'Identity', as tag for the whole in one, and 'God' for the 'Divine Superstatus'. This can thus merely become a personal issue because it is an existential one already. As I allow myself to be governed by God I do already choose a way of directions that I do also furthermore take consequencially serious. In that I do so statistically come to be conflicting to various given alternatives already, where the point though is that I believe that adaptation to the Lord is yet the best way to go. Thereby it is adaptation to the Lord, and negotiating with him about the deepest parts of the own self would be the best way to Go if He existed because as God is told to be a transient being, but ... well - whatever works!

I find it to be a horrible statement though to say that pragmatism and faith don't go together. I'd rather say that faith is the root of pragmatism!


So, the Hypo-thesis regarding 'Dao' states that it is an Intelligent Being if we suppose that our Menthal Capacity isn't the product of our Biology alone but in-deed derived of a higher, similar substance. The question for 'how' this Intelligent Force could separate conscious individuals from the own Eternal Status is described as 'the Splendour' - usually accompanied by the hushing blow of friesh air through a vividly clear mountain-side; While in appreciation of pleasures we might add 'favourite colour' plus rainbow to the thumbnail. In this the question of how Deeply is connected to ourselves isn't answered, yet that in its vastness is everyones own personal frontier. If I say that I have a vast array of detailed experiences that extends beyond yours due to His mercy that is achieved by complying to His highest Standards, then I mean that I have a cognitive understanding of different things regarding how the Universe works based on His revelation. This is however no 'Krass' revelation as in "Prophetic Vision", it is featured as part of the way, so, as to be experienced by living. The Grand example to envisualize this is Baptism. Baptism is a primary Demand that is one of His standard declarations, according to Christianity, but - that Christianity is the only religion to boast the Living God with reference to Name and Spirit is evidently - well ... a dead givaway. You need to learn of Jesus to Understand how God related to this Person and how this Person related to Him to see that it is important, cosmologically as anthropologically. It is then of course yet like one fish in the Water where there are many, but since the early days it is written and it hasn't failed to come - and it stands that 'He is the word that became Flesh', the Word that was God, or the Limitation as Expression of the Unlimitted, the Word that becomes as part of the Gnosis and thus acquires Form wherein Truth is as much part of the whole as is Mercy. What we see as 'Substance' is already all in one, where our intellect is synergetically one with the thought it inherits. We have to picture ourselves as Bubbles of Spirit - I suggest - where now experience would say that our Spirit extends beyond our Physical Outlines - so - we have a Radius. The difference between us and ordinary thoughts is that we - that is as close as enough - have a 'Free Understanding'. Even so the theory that a free Understanding would need to exist as Independent Individual is technically confirmed thereby. That we as that are to the furthest sense self-defining spiritual substance, substance however that is isolated to itself, is once pictured as intellectual origin describing the Physical Reality we exist in as Product of this Dao wherein our Isolation is broken through our Mutual existence within the physical space we inherit.

Our Physical World thus bridges the gap between the logical beginning and an answer concerning the direction this evolved into. It is brought to my attention thereto, that the conflicts regarding our acknowledgement of God as God are a key problem no matter the direction, as in example of the Layout of the Physical construct. As we find reasons to explain how God does not exist, the mind is susceptible to loose itself in similar paranoia when presented with a God figure that is in control of everything. I however so for myself much more favour the picture of adventure, to stand there as solidary Entity facing the vastness of time to come. In this world we have ourselves a very, well, sad conflict. We quarrel against each other while the source of all conflict, well, isn't it the question for "who is in charge"? To my self-understanding, life is about becomming born and settling there somewhere or going somewhere to settle. At least that is so the picture of the earliest days of the Israelite History, where Israel was just a single person.


One would wander the vast lands and settle somewhere, but now, cultural outlines with conflict-oriented population yields trouble. Civilization in the earlier rounds. The point is that by the end peace would dictate that we find a way of settling where-ever we want because we all are equally human individuals - thus - why the big terror about origins?
Well, ... yea - but, how else to bring it up? Uhm, I mean - I am german and quite proud of it. A stranger once brought it up that he didn't understand the sense of pride for nationality, while I, skit: I once built a Lego Robot and decorated it with the german colors - Black, Red and Yellow - and someone therefore yelled Nazi at me. I however came to experience great german Art, counting Food, Comedy, Fantasy, ... Music, - and well, even the one or the other movie, while I personally also think that it is a great language. And, why not? In ideal cases that tradition lives on through me as Artist.
But so - Israel. Israel today is ... well ... difficult. You might have to forgive me that I grew up with Stories of the Bible and not of the Quran or something else, but due to that I have a historic context to this incident - as so outlined by the Bible. The central plot however revolves around Jacob, son of Isaac, son of Abraham. This person was chosen by God to be the ancestor to His chosen tribe - and here we might shout break and wonder and reason for what sense this adds.



Bible excourse

Judging from our need to dissect our existence physically, our idea of the Universe is also in some ways detached from how it is written in the Bible. The Bible is not the real Physical deal of the world we live in, and as we see, it holds many treasures. Now, the Story of God and Jacob adds a single moment to this picture, which is basically where there is "one more story" about a point where God showed Himself. This Story continues basically centuries after, and after, while therein the Tribe of Israel is described as the Offspring of Jacob who has been chosen by God. It is present as written by the Hand of Moses, who lived as Israelite in Egypt, at which point Jacobs offspring had grown into a Nation. So is here the point where God took political charge upon these people - which basically fulfills the promises that have been made to Abraham and Jacob. In that we have the Holy Scripture as the product of the ages past, which furtheron settles the scene for the appearance of Christ.


Here we have a dominant culture with advanced civilized standards in the Romans that have basically made landfall in the regions of Canaan. The Romans followed the Greek that followed the Persians that followed the Babylonians prior to which Israel was referred to as the Kingdom of Juda as the last remainder of the Israelite tribes, prior to which Israel was split into two Kingdoms - naming 'the Kings of the House of David' as the Souvereigns of Juda and 'the Kings of the House of Israel' as the Souvereigns of Samaria. During these days Israel was in conflict with itself and Samaria at most in conflict with those around. With the Betrayal of Salomon Israel was torn apart, which now is a story of Human Nature. The Story clearly lines out how people loose faith in God and there-after follow their own interests. In this the established 'Kingdom of God' came to fall, what remains is the 'legacy' - wherein then Christ appeared to preach us the Gospel. The question then is if these stories are reflective of real physical incidents - so - that where it says that the Face of Moses was shining due to the exposure unto the presence of Gods Glory - we can actually think of something as a brightly lit as though it were electric tent, and truly perfect "natural phenomena" in the services of the Creator, in which the condition of the scriptures cannot be taken as measurement. We can however not denie that it remained and grew, and attached to it is the promise of God that He will show Himself to you.

In terms of the Topic

Can we say that God can and also 'has to be' "Greenlit" when it comes to personal questions. The thing is that the stories revolve around Characteristics and Righteousness - while God at all is placed above the Actions while the stories usually draw Him not, sotosay, things just happen and in Key Moments He triggers the pointe. So, when boiling the Bible down to a practical core, then God fits the suggestion that we have to make it clear within ourselves. So, in attachment, He fits into that one blank spot of our own cultural evolution and doesn't seem to extend far beyond it. This allows us to experience our lives as independent units without being left to the odds of being lost. The term 'lost' is here set against the the drawn picture in which we are drawn into this world - where 'unlost' is when having learned to rely on God the way He wants to be relied on. He so doesn't expose us to a world of freedom to demand our worship, but ... well ... to solve our conflicts.


Stardate 55289.95442