http://godlessmom.com/4-questions-brand-new-atheist/
1) Why is there something rather than nothing? (or) Why does the
universe bother to exist? (or) Why is it necessary for our universe to
exist, and to continue to exist?
All this got me thinking. First let me say that because the mind can create a question object in the mind does not mean it is a real or meaningful question. That is not to say anything against the mind, but if the mind can conceive a god, and no god, it can also conceive of other thing that just are not real.
First, if there was nothing, there would just be empty cold space, aka nothing. Why should there be a bound on nothing? What else would nothing look like?
Before the big bang, what ever was there had higher entropy than matter that existed. Disorder increases. If it was a singularity, what ever that was, is now gone, converted into matter and energy. If it was not a "singularity" then it could be something like a massive black hole exploding, and we only see the effect of the last one. Some questions we can not yet answer yet. It need nothing have anything to do with we humans. It is a human desire to have an answer. All most all cultures have a creation hypothesis story. We want answers, but some questions are beyond our understanding yet.
Chemical and physical process do not need a purpose, they continue until conditions are not suitable. end of. We humans try to place propose on things where there is none. This is something like our desire to learn and/or understand. Man has no purpose beyond to reproduce, unless we impose one onto it. We should be trying to keep our environment in such a condition that we can live, but there is not enough cooperation to see the obvious. There is religion because people will not see the obvious. Oh well. enough.
Concepts like purpose are just concepts, and as such exist as concepts. Our mind can handle them as abstract nouns, concepts, yet they may have no physical reality. Things happen because of a driving force exists, nothing more. Man is just a opportunistic minimal living on a big rock whirling through space. It has enough gravity to attract an atmosphere, and enough heat for organic material to produce oxygen that we breath. We need to keep the carbon dioxide consuming plants healthy so that we may continue to live. We live in a closed system, and our population has become large enough that we are effecting our environment. Shit happens.
Thursday, March 16, 2017
Wednesday, March 15, 2017
Why should I care if the truth offens you?
Cultural stories of creation are myths. So is the bible and the Quran. There is no real god, at best gods are just concepts or belief held by others. Any god is just a mental object. Why should I care if you find this offensive for this is the truth, the one and only truth, and if you find it offensive, that is your problem.
I have religion pushed at me frequently, and I push back now. It is only right.
I find political correctness offensive. You are trying to force your beliefs onto me, even when your beliefs are wrong. Do not expect compliance with political correctness.
Species is often defined as groups which do not naturally interbreed through location, preference, or habit. We humans are, by that definition, a group of species. As such, how can any government expect that different species will live together when the immigrants will not respect our traditions. Every time a immigrant with difficulty speaking English cuts a the line up at Tim Hortons, there are developing ill will. Every time they do something stupid in traffic, there is more ill will. In Red Neck Alberta, expect some immigrant to be shot soon. It is easier than lynching. Those who do not comply with the law get away with much already, "I did not know" goes the cry. Bull shit. I saw the same one get chewed out, and she did cut the like again the next day.
There is no self, or nonself in Buddha terms is true, correct, and real even if we belief in the illusion of there being a self. Our mind is just a mass of neurons with synapse. The self is, at best an image of self created by a bunch of neurons and synapse doing there thing. The whole brain and body is the self, but there is no self within the brain, just a convenient illusion, and a self created ego with "privileges" that expands with power and success, however we define power and success.
Muslims are impossible to not offend if we chose to try to talk to them, so I do not care. So when asked anything religions, I will tell them there is no god, so you can do as you like. End of.
I have religion pushed at me frequently, and I push back now. It is only right.
I find political correctness offensive. You are trying to force your beliefs onto me, even when your beliefs are wrong. Do not expect compliance with political correctness.
Species is often defined as groups which do not naturally interbreed through location, preference, or habit. We humans are, by that definition, a group of species. As such, how can any government expect that different species will live together when the immigrants will not respect our traditions. Every time a immigrant with difficulty speaking English cuts a the line up at Tim Hortons, there are developing ill will. Every time they do something stupid in traffic, there is more ill will. In Red Neck Alberta, expect some immigrant to be shot soon. It is easier than lynching. Those who do not comply with the law get away with much already, "I did not know" goes the cry. Bull shit. I saw the same one get chewed out, and she did cut the like again the next day.
There is no self, or nonself in Buddha terms is true, correct, and real even if we belief in the illusion of there being a self. Our mind is just a mass of neurons with synapse. The self is, at best an image of self created by a bunch of neurons and synapse doing there thing. The whole brain and body is the self, but there is no self within the brain, just a convenient illusion, and a self created ego with "privileges" that expands with power and success, however we define power and success.
Muslims are impossible to not offend if we chose to try to talk to them, so I do not care. So when asked anything religions, I will tell them there is no god, so you can do as you like. End of.
Thursday, March 9, 2017
Historical Cultural Creation Hypothesis
Historical Cultural Creation Hypothesis
As the old Navajo, in DNA Tracing, said, "calling our creation stories 'myths' is offencive." So how should we modern thinking humans refer to these cultural and religious myths so as to call them what they are and remain politically correct, and correct in reality. In reality, these are myths, but to have something blow over the head of the uneducated, to remain unoffensive, while remaining truthful to our own beliefs?
There is a new age Hindu fellow, trained in science, and acceptance science, who is trying to adapt Hinduism to modern reality and English. Hinduism has the same problem as most of the religions, with the youth forsaking the belief system; and he sees the solution is to modernize the religion, keep the values and the good parts, at the same time as adopting science that we see as real. Buddhism rubbed off Hinduism, just as all christian branches rubbed of Catholics. Keep the best of both, let the wrong, useless, oversimplified, and waste of time stuff fall off, perhaps even create a new profit or leader. (Joseph Smith, or LR Hubbard type hype leader come to mind, but based on truth.) We do have the three of the four horseman, but these have not figured out the individual non-exceptional human needs yet. But it is the why of routine liturgy that must be explored. The Buddhist spins the wheel to the right as a symbol of "tomorrow is another day to do it all again" and to remind ourselves of karma, (aka, we are the sum of our past), and we have a small effect on the future, and to the right because, facing south, that is the way the sun goes.
Many of us spend our lives believing or studying a hypothesis, only to find that the hypothesis is false. Now what? Oh well, much good came incidentally out of the effort. Does it matter. Out of the 110 or 120 billion people who lived before us, how much has been lost? A human life is but one test of a biological package, the test is survival of genes, not knowledge or correctness. So if we are to measure our lives by the number of offspring, we have far different values than other measuring by other accomplishment. It does not matter, we are only one of the 110-120 billion other experiments in H. sapiens lives. We each struggle to expand our understanding is specific ways. Comparison is not justified. We should do for others as we would they do for us. We should do for others, not to others, to get our of our heads. It was easier to see this when there was less change, but it still can be seen in multi-generational communities, if we look.
All cultures have there historical cultural creation hypothesis; Science has a new one, which is supported by evidence, some physical, some logical. The old one will need to be abandoned. We need to pay attention now to science, not because of what we know, but for the approaching issues that we have identified on the horizon, and others that are there as well. Yet if we look at the why's of many practices, at there foundation lie a sound ethical reason. Perhaps I need to breath a bit more first.
The words are but a crude pointer to the though behind the concept. The incense create a smoke for the concepts, thoughts, ideas, the abstract nouns, to ride on....
As the old Navajo, in DNA Tracing, said, "calling our creation stories 'myths' is offencive." So how should we modern thinking humans refer to these cultural and religious myths so as to call them what they are and remain politically correct, and correct in reality. In reality, these are myths, but to have something blow over the head of the uneducated, to remain unoffensive, while remaining truthful to our own beliefs?
There is a new age Hindu fellow, trained in science, and acceptance science, who is trying to adapt Hinduism to modern reality and English. Hinduism has the same problem as most of the religions, with the youth forsaking the belief system; and he sees the solution is to modernize the religion, keep the values and the good parts, at the same time as adopting science that we see as real. Buddhism rubbed off Hinduism, just as all christian branches rubbed of Catholics. Keep the best of both, let the wrong, useless, oversimplified, and waste of time stuff fall off, perhaps even create a new profit or leader. (Joseph Smith, or LR Hubbard type hype leader come to mind, but based on truth.) We do have the three of the four horseman, but these have not figured out the individual non-exceptional human needs yet. But it is the why of routine liturgy that must be explored. The Buddhist spins the wheel to the right as a symbol of "tomorrow is another day to do it all again" and to remind ourselves of karma, (aka, we are the sum of our past), and we have a small effect on the future, and to the right because, facing south, that is the way the sun goes.
Many of us spend our lives believing or studying a hypothesis, only to find that the hypothesis is false. Now what? Oh well, much good came incidentally out of the effort. Does it matter. Out of the 110 or 120 billion people who lived before us, how much has been lost? A human life is but one test of a biological package, the test is survival of genes, not knowledge or correctness. So if we are to measure our lives by the number of offspring, we have far different values than other measuring by other accomplishment. It does not matter, we are only one of the 110-120 billion other experiments in H. sapiens lives. We each struggle to expand our understanding is specific ways. Comparison is not justified. We should do for others as we would they do for us. We should do for others, not to others, to get our of our heads. It was easier to see this when there was less change, but it still can be seen in multi-generational communities, if we look.
All cultures have there historical cultural creation hypothesis; Science has a new one, which is supported by evidence, some physical, some logical. The old one will need to be abandoned. We need to pay attention now to science, not because of what we know, but for the approaching issues that we have identified on the horizon, and others that are there as well. Yet if we look at the why's of many practices, at there foundation lie a sound ethical reason. Perhaps I need to breath a bit more first.
The words are but a crude pointer to the though behind the concept. The incense create a smoke for the concepts, thoughts, ideas, the abstract nouns, to ride on....
Monday, March 6, 2017
Control vs Free Will
Philosophy, by simply changing the name, can start the argument over again. How different is free will and what is within our control? Epictetus to Dan Dennett to Sam Harris. How different is that which each define? Well Sam tries to measure it, but what he measures is part body, beyond our control or power, so he finds we little or no free will.
Epictetus starts by defining what we have complete control of, our mind from input acceptance decision to output decision, bounded by our beliefs, values, and reality. Reality includes our talent and skill stack, our temperament. Our assents, positive and negative impulse, opinion, reason or logic, are all that is ours. We can, also, over time change our beliefs, likes and dislikes, some rationally, but one our beliefs become fixed, change takes time. Also what is marginally out of our power, hidden behind beliefs, likes and dislikes, will vary, person to person. It is those individual differences that make up the diverse population with different behaviors we see today.
We are bounded by reality on one side, and each persons reality is different. Some of us do not tolerate cold, others of us do not tolerate heat. Each persons skill stack is different, as unique as a fingerprint. Yet each of us has control of our thinking, our ability to accept or reject an incoming proposition, as long as that preposition does not conflict with our beliefs. If it conflicts with their beliefs, then it conflicts with their learned beliefs, for all beliefs are just learned, which often people have never rationally examined.
Some of what we learned is just wrong. We do not know what part or which "fact". We just do not know. Which or what. Some facts do not stand the logic test, other the total lack of evidence makes it unlikely, even inconceivable to some. So one wall of our free will or control is movable by adding or subtracting beliefs. This may be why AA and the like work, they change our beliefs and place behaviors out of our control. Oh well, who knows.
Free will, or within our power or control, is what personal responsibility is based on. So if instinct is to eat, we are not responsible for overeating; if what we eat is within our free will, our overeating is within our responsibility. Likely, is in that zone of partial control, where our free will permits the body to have input. We can use our power of impulse to move ourselves into a food free environment, but others may contaminate our environment or we wait too long, instinct takes over, and we lose control. Staying out of places where we lose control may be the best control some of us have if instinct is in overdrive.
Epictetus starts by defining what we have complete control of, our mind from input acceptance decision to output decision, bounded by our beliefs, values, and reality. Reality includes our talent and skill stack, our temperament. Our assents, positive and negative impulse, opinion, reason or logic, are all that is ours. We can, also, over time change our beliefs, likes and dislikes, some rationally, but one our beliefs become fixed, change takes time. Also what is marginally out of our power, hidden behind beliefs, likes and dislikes, will vary, person to person. It is those individual differences that make up the diverse population with different behaviors we see today.
We are bounded by reality on one side, and each persons reality is different. Some of us do not tolerate cold, others of us do not tolerate heat. Each persons skill stack is different, as unique as a fingerprint. Yet each of us has control of our thinking, our ability to accept or reject an incoming proposition, as long as that preposition does not conflict with our beliefs. If it conflicts with their beliefs, then it conflicts with their learned beliefs, for all beliefs are just learned, which often people have never rationally examined.
Some of what we learned is just wrong. We do not know what part or which "fact". We just do not know. Which or what. Some facts do not stand the logic test, other the total lack of evidence makes it unlikely, even inconceivable to some. So one wall of our free will or control is movable by adding or subtracting beliefs. This may be why AA and the like work, they change our beliefs and place behaviors out of our control. Oh well, who knows.
Free will, or within our power or control, is what personal responsibility is based on. So if instinct is to eat, we are not responsible for overeating; if what we eat is within our free will, our overeating is within our responsibility. Likely, is in that zone of partial control, where our free will permits the body to have input. We can use our power of impulse to move ourselves into a food free environment, but others may contaminate our environment or we wait too long, instinct takes over, and we lose control. Staying out of places where we lose control may be the best control some of us have if instinct is in overdrive.
Tuesday, February 28, 2017
Parasites of the Mind
Parasites of the Mind
I do not know what else to call them. These are concepts, residing totally within the mind that are wrong, and create problems for the person who's mind is infected... or perhaps not for the person, but those around him... or perhaps not causing them or anyone a problem, but are just obviously wrong, and that person does not know it, or perhaps he does.
I have one that says eat, eat. I know it is there, but how does one get rid of it? Identification must be the first step. I have dispatched some of these parasites that were culturally implanted. Several remain, including TV, eating, and personality disorders. Oh well. I have given up any concept of religion, and am trying to sort my beliefs out to that which is logical, or at least logical or needed for a modernish sort of life. I am not willing to go minimalist, for I was raised that way, with nothing but what was needed, as defined by others. I often feel like I was raised as a farm slave. Oh well, it is all done now.
Religion is the worst parasite of the mind. God lives only as a false concept in the mind. As a concept, it is beyond space and time, and has no physical existence, yet directs the lives of people, as long as they have the concept in their mind, and strongly controls their mind, just like that eat, eat, parasite of the mind. Each morning I wake up, and there it is, that damn eat, eat thought.
So will the next piece of evolution provide a truth test, is this though based on reality or is it a free floating concept that macerates as being real? Yet the eat eat is at least part real. Is it thinking that causes the problem?
If one cannot separate religion from there life, than perhaps they cannot separate truth and false thoughts. So then we cannot trust our political leaders to tell the truth, to base decisions on the important truths, and simpler issues.We see people who are clear of religion, and we see those who are not clear of religion. So which group functions better? Which have higher morals, ethics, values? Well as it turns out morals, ethics, and values are totally independent of a belief in a god or religion. Many religions promote a set of morals, ethics and values, yet these are not attached to a belief in a god.
Any religion that condones war, in any form, permits sanctioned killing, while there religion says do not kill. So right off there is a cognitive dissonance. Either address the dissonance, or you will lose the cognitive alert. Preach religion and armament is just not compatible; it is either one or the other. Guns bring violence, so the religions preach one thing and live another. Then either arm and defend free of any god, or have your god with peace and losses. The alternative is open sanctioned killing as with Islam, which is also a mind parasite.
It is only awareness that is the first step in removal of mind parasites. Oh well, in the end we will just die anyway.
.
I do not know what else to call them. These are concepts, residing totally within the mind that are wrong, and create problems for the person who's mind is infected... or perhaps not for the person, but those around him... or perhaps not causing them or anyone a problem, but are just obviously wrong, and that person does not know it, or perhaps he does.
I have one that says eat, eat. I know it is there, but how does one get rid of it? Identification must be the first step. I have dispatched some of these parasites that were culturally implanted. Several remain, including TV, eating, and personality disorders. Oh well. I have given up any concept of religion, and am trying to sort my beliefs out to that which is logical, or at least logical or needed for a modernish sort of life. I am not willing to go minimalist, for I was raised that way, with nothing but what was needed, as defined by others. I often feel like I was raised as a farm slave. Oh well, it is all done now.
Religion is the worst parasite of the mind. God lives only as a false concept in the mind. As a concept, it is beyond space and time, and has no physical existence, yet directs the lives of people, as long as they have the concept in their mind, and strongly controls their mind, just like that eat, eat, parasite of the mind. Each morning I wake up, and there it is, that damn eat, eat thought.
So will the next piece of evolution provide a truth test, is this though based on reality or is it a free floating concept that macerates as being real? Yet the eat eat is at least part real. Is it thinking that causes the problem?
If one cannot separate religion from there life, than perhaps they cannot separate truth and false thoughts. So then we cannot trust our political leaders to tell the truth, to base decisions on the important truths, and simpler issues.We see people who are clear of religion, and we see those who are not clear of religion. So which group functions better? Which have higher morals, ethics, values? Well as it turns out morals, ethics, and values are totally independent of a belief in a god or religion. Many religions promote a set of morals, ethics and values, yet these are not attached to a belief in a god.
Any religion that condones war, in any form, permits sanctioned killing, while there religion says do not kill. So right off there is a cognitive dissonance. Either address the dissonance, or you will lose the cognitive alert. Preach religion and armament is just not compatible; it is either one or the other. Guns bring violence, so the religions preach one thing and live another. Then either arm and defend free of any god, or have your god with peace and losses. The alternative is open sanctioned killing as with Islam, which is also a mind parasite.
It is only awareness that is the first step in removal of mind parasites. Oh well, in the end we will just die anyway.
.
Sunday, February 26, 2017
Offensive... your problem.
We who have been raised in a primarily christian, agonist, atheistic society have a different concept of offensive than that of a muslim or arabic majority culture. To be offended, we need to take offense by learning to be offended at bullfeathers, or not have confidence in our own beliefs. The muslims have been taught to take offense at "pictures of mohamed", it is a learned reaction to disrespecting a bullfeathers quzi historical, fiction or mythical character. Belief in a fictional mythical character or the laws of such is a now a joke, hence, anyone who believes a fiction cannot be taken seriously. It is impossible to take seriously any belief system that is just wrong. We can see now these are just juvenile meme systems. Live this way and good will come, and if you do not, hell will come to you.
So once we see all religion as just meme systems, how can we take them seriously? Why would we ever be offended at a religions wild ideas unless we are in a religion, and trying to be living with ludicrous beliefs, aka, a big man in the sky concept.
Now should we have the right to offend them? That is there reaction to something that is acceptable in much of our society. So do we have a responsibility to clean our behavior of things that they find objectionable. It that is yes, then they also have the responsible to clean their behavior of things we find objectionable. This makes coexistence logically impossible, unless everyone learns to not be offended. How does one learn to not be offended at the pushing of bullshit onto the youth and others?
If we have confidence, we can separate out others crap beliefs out, and make a decision to ignore, avoid hearing, preach realism back, or let it all go as just their delusions or their beliefs. If you are offended, it is your problem.
So once we see all religion as just meme systems, how can we take them seriously? Why would we ever be offended at a religions wild ideas unless we are in a religion, and trying to be living with ludicrous beliefs, aka, a big man in the sky concept.
Now should we have the right to offend them? That is there reaction to something that is acceptable in much of our society. So do we have a responsibility to clean our behavior of things that they find objectionable. It that is yes, then they also have the responsible to clean their behavior of things we find objectionable. This makes coexistence logically impossible, unless everyone learns to not be offended. How does one learn to not be offended at the pushing of bullshit onto the youth and others?
If we have confidence, we can separate out others crap beliefs out, and make a decision to ignore, avoid hearing, preach realism back, or let it all go as just their delusions or their beliefs. If you are offended, it is your problem.
Thursday, February 23, 2017
Current Beleifs
Current Beliefs, they are a changing, to what is more likely true. This human uses a probability approach to what is likely true, not an absolute or traditional belief approach. Decisions mostly require some kind of "future knowledge" to determine if they are correct. Most likely positive outcome, conservative, lest regret, most probable chance of success, or some combination can be used as well or there opposites. A decision is a direction, not a future outcome. We do not have control of future outcome; anyone who thinks we do is inflicted with a mind parasite.
There is no god, no soul, no life after death, no rebirth, no reincarnation. Only natural can occur; there is no supernatural nor miracles, now or in the past. Story telling was likely one of the first language art forms. Language produced a multitude of creation, old times, and historical behavior stories. We need to do what is rational and logical for any and all of the human species to survive in this current time frame.
Species is often defined as the largest group that would naturally mate and produce fertile offspring. This can be psychological as well as range. The key word is "naturally"...mate. A sex deprived male will mate with almost anything, and that is not natural; the other common definition excludes "natural". Natural only mating provides the possibility that we h. Sapiens are composed of numerous species, and therefore I may not be of the same species as other individuals, this could include the group who consider mating with there own sex, and similar groups. This provides me with detachment from all perverted behavior groups, aka different preference groups, of h. Sapiens. This can be psychological or range. These other species have the right to live out their lives in peace, as long as they do not interfere with society.
There is no self, only neurons in the brain that produce an illusion of self. That has been learned in the collective environments that I have physically passed through. These eukaryotic cells will just die off in the end, and with them goes all traces of non physical self or our outputs.
We have free will over those thing that are rational and in our control, as Epictetus describes, but only influence over our body and anything that is instinctual. As emotions are based on instinct and beliefs, we have only partial control over emotions and instinctive behaviors. As children we can learn to modify our instinct drives better, to fit into the society we live in, and comply with social norms, even when the social norms are wrong. But only with great difficulty do we learn at age, but we can learn. What we learned as children is not consciously known or recognized, to us as adults, as learned behavior.
Grammar is convention, and different parts of culture have different styles and conventions, which is also limited by the memory and concern of the individual. No religious person has any right to talk about my grammar as they are unable to sort fact and fiction. I do spell poorly, have poor memory for spelling and words, am dyslectic, and do not care about conventional grammar as no one has been able to explain it to me so that I understood it rationally. My family of origin had no idea what good grammar was, and I missed that in school for the most part.
We have an instinct to learn as learning is one of the human skills. As we learn, we see the need to understand other things, yet there is not enough time to do all that is needed. After adopting all these beliefs, language itself, needs to change, but how does one do that. All the belief based references needs to be removed, and only facts included.
Memes and meme systems are the basic building block of though, speech a communications. Tools, as Dennett says. Religions are mind parasites that control the recognition of reality of those inflicted with the parasite. Those mind parasites that do not permit peaceful coexistence should be inoculated against, or disinfected and that may destroy all mind parasites. Good.
There is no god, no soul, no life after death, no rebirth, no reincarnation. Only natural can occur; there is no supernatural nor miracles, now or in the past. Story telling was likely one of the first language art forms. Language produced a multitude of creation, old times, and historical behavior stories. We need to do what is rational and logical for any and all of the human species to survive in this current time frame.
Species is often defined as the largest group that would naturally mate and produce fertile offspring. This can be psychological as well as range. The key word is "naturally"...mate. A sex deprived male will mate with almost anything, and that is not natural; the other common definition excludes "natural". Natural only mating provides the possibility that we h. Sapiens are composed of numerous species, and therefore I may not be of the same species as other individuals, this could include the group who consider mating with there own sex, and similar groups. This provides me with detachment from all perverted behavior groups, aka different preference groups, of h. Sapiens. This can be psychological or range. These other species have the right to live out their lives in peace, as long as they do not interfere with society.
There is no self, only neurons in the brain that produce an illusion of self. That has been learned in the collective environments that I have physically passed through. These eukaryotic cells will just die off in the end, and with them goes all traces of non physical self or our outputs.
We have free will over those thing that are rational and in our control, as Epictetus describes, but only influence over our body and anything that is instinctual. As emotions are based on instinct and beliefs, we have only partial control over emotions and instinctive behaviors. As children we can learn to modify our instinct drives better, to fit into the society we live in, and comply with social norms, even when the social norms are wrong. But only with great difficulty do we learn at age, but we can learn. What we learned as children is not consciously known or recognized, to us as adults, as learned behavior.
Grammar is convention, and different parts of culture have different styles and conventions, which is also limited by the memory and concern of the individual. No religious person has any right to talk about my grammar as they are unable to sort fact and fiction. I do spell poorly, have poor memory for spelling and words, am dyslectic, and do not care about conventional grammar as no one has been able to explain it to me so that I understood it rationally. My family of origin had no idea what good grammar was, and I missed that in school for the most part.
We have an instinct to learn as learning is one of the human skills. As we learn, we see the need to understand other things, yet there is not enough time to do all that is needed. After adopting all these beliefs, language itself, needs to change, but how does one do that. All the belief based references needs to be removed, and only facts included.
Memes and meme systems are the basic building block of though, speech a communications. Tools, as Dennett says. Religions are mind parasites that control the recognition of reality of those inflicted with the parasite. Those mind parasites that do not permit peaceful coexistence should be inoculated against, or disinfected and that may destroy all mind parasites. Good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)