Posts made by agis

"Even if you had to live 3000 years or ten times more, remember anyway that nobody lives another life but the one she/he/it is losing and nobody loses another life but the one she/he/it is living" Marcus Aurelius 121 AD -  +180 AD

Coming from Tim here:  forum.gaytorrent.ru/index.php?topic=13140.80 .

Even if the emperor was, as usual, catastrophically quick, he didn't end against a wall with the chariot this time but to a reflection we could inherit and deem as very modern.

If the life was a thing which you/I/we all live losing it or lose living it, after 1800 years the emperor still invites us all to the practice of  applying with our mind activity different but symmetrical categories.
We generally consider ourselves living beings since we live the life we are losing but, symmetrically, we could consider ourselves dying beings since we lose the life we are living.

According to the much more common first application, a very common question we happen to find even in not philosophical forums is:

what is the death?

But if we had to the endorse the less common one we should ask ourselves:

what is the life?

This one is really less common and, even in the environments where life is studied from a scientific point of view (biology or zoology), it is generally considered as a low profile or a no profile at all question. Nothing to be worried about I'd say if, after 1800 years, they still act as the emperor. After all he was a very intelligent dude.

Butt… butt...butt...

according to you what is this life? And is the mystery of the separation (disjunction) between life and death a  mystery at all?

I answer here of course  even if I didn't meet Tim (mebbe… because in the web travel where the names change more easily I could have met him under another name).
Personally, every time I lose in this here and now a known person, a BF, a beloved and -why not?- even an hated one or a person I was introduced to by someone's or something else memory or testimony, I'm always sent back to a thought written 1800 years ago by the emperor Marcus Aurelius:

"Even if you had to live 3000 years or ten times more, remember anyway that nobody lives another life but the one she/he/it* is losing and nobody loses another life but the one she/he/it* is living"

• since the emperor didn't use exactly this way the "she/he/it" could be taken as a choice of mine.

Of course the emperor's diagnosis called for remedies to this pain and many of them - the persistence in a metaphysical or objective elsewhere, the persistence in ourselves with the memory…- have already been remembered by you all.

So here I could put now a dash and a little hole

-°

just to say: yes, I was here and then passed away.

Bye Tim

Of course both the bombastic title of this thread and my "neologism" tried to be playful Jonathan   . At the most a serious aspect could stem from the apparent oddity observation of some disputes like the latest one about the bi/straight sex bit in the other forum where some positional rigidities could seem difficult to understand like if, after having invented the "farnhamality" I went on saying:

"How do you dare damned farnhamj07 not being farnhamal when it is absolutely obvious that farnhamality  is MY/your/our "natural" thing?"  :crazy2:  and so on and on and de hoc satis I'd say cause every now and then it could really and solidly seem there are things we could/should learn/name through an obstensive path. For instance-the book, libro, livre, 本, 書, 책자, เล่ม which could seem to send us back to a somewhat precise, perceptible  object.  But  what object  do the philosophy whose farnhamality seemed to be only an useless synonym send us back to?  ^-^

@agis:

• BTW this term seems to be polysemantic since we could have a "nature" in general and a "nature"of yours/mine/ours/even singuar things. How comes? ??? 

Corollarium Jonathan: if it happened instead this term was only apparently polysemantic where could you/I/we all all find an operational common denominator between a "nature" given as is and your/my/our "natures"?  ^-^

This time joego, for the greatest joy of our handsome mods I will not answer you with molish mumbo jumbo but with a short say from my parts:

il culo è democratico (asshole is democratic)  ^-^

Not republican! What the heck!!  :whistle:

Not sure me too what I'm going on about Jonathan  . After all we could think in this exchange which has started now  what depends on you doesn't/shouldn't depend on me and viceversa. But if I now  proposed to you a neologism:

a farnhamality  ^-^

denoting a not so common attitude to interact with the queer philosophical proposals (of the mole Agis) this could of course  be deemed as arbitary but not depeding on a "nature". Depending instead exclusively on me or, if you prefer, on "my nature".*

• BTW this term seems to be polysemantic since we could have a "nature" in general and a "nature"of yours/mine/ours/even singuar things. How comes? ??? 

there was the philosophy.

Butt… butt... butt...

the ancient Greek sophist Gorgias thought it had to be characterized by a sceptical attitude towards the things appearing to our eyes;

according to Socrates the philosopher is aware of not owning the knowledge; so he has to actively go to look for it, being the art of questioning
the veritable art of thought and the dialogue the only possibe way to attempt to reach the truth;

according to Immanuel Kant and his "noumenos unreachability" philosophy has nothing to say about the things and/or the world but it aims, for a general interest, to rectify the human knowledge;

according to Ludwig Wittgenstein the philosophical problems stem from a bad/unappropriate use of the words; so philosophy should be an activity aimed to clarify and semantically amend the obscure and indistinct thoughts;

according to Friedrich Nietzsche there are not truths but only lies to unmask; so philosophy would be above all an artof interpretation and evaluation.

And according to you what should it be? And what should be the role of the philosophy in a forum?

yumm yummy  :cheesy2:

Where music, dance, painting (body art)  and love making are made overlap, thence, aware of that or not, the Authors drive us to consider what do you/I/we all make/do when we look to a "quid" aestethically.

www.gaytorrent.ru/details.php?returnto=%2Fmytorrents.php&id=151500

… and I go on saying  "yes", Andy, it should be obvious to you/me/us all that some things are there as "facta" and not as "data" if it didn't happen every now and then we seem to forget it though being back to make us problems for instance on a bi- or a straight sexuality as if those things had to endorse again an ontological statute 

Could sound obvious Andy but if the term "homosexuality" was invented in 1869 if we had happened to live in 1868 it seems we wouldn't have had a way to name ourselves even if there was already a term. The term "sodomite" right?

• Diversified Sexuality:  As we all know, sexuality is not simply a matter of being gay or straight. It is a continuum that ranges from gay to bisexual to straight and all points in between. Accordingly, Tom wanted the full spectrum of sexuality represented on the site to satisfy the diversified interests of the membership. However, GT.ru remains first and foremost a site for the GAY community.

But, dear Tom, if this was the point, where, according to you, was the need of stating  rigid semantic divisons?

For  the classical music orphans I think there are anyway interesting royalities free initiatives in the internet.
For instance sites offering old records remounting to 50 years ago or more. Sometimes even less in case of releases under creative commons not commercial licences. For all the old nostalgic melomaniacs who still remember the good ol' vinyls some of these records have even preserved those so romantic scratch noises  and stand anyway for an unbeatable opportunity of double historical check.

A first interesting site from Italy can be found here:

hxxp://www.liberliber.it/musica/index.php

I'd ask to the moderation the permission to duplicate this post in the music forum with a title like "Freeware classical music" or stuff. Every member could then have there the possibility to share infos about sites of this kind ^-^

What do you do/make/think when you pray Allah? 

oh damn…forgotten that!  :afr:

oh  well...  :blondmom:

"I snooped in my mother's journal one day after I had come out and she'd written, 'I'd rather have found out from a doctor that I had terminal cancer than have a gay son.'"

What d'you wanna do LBC  :blownose: in this low, low, very low world it may happen to be  born as the son of a bitch like our poor Timmy.
Nothing to be worried about I'd say though, don't panic my poor Timmy :cool2: . Jesus Christ himself, in fact, was the son of a bitch if we didn't want to give credit to strange tales concerning a spiritual pneumatic breeding of his mother. So there  is still hope!   :hug: Useless to say this thing  found extremely careful theological treatments during all the middle age but, unbelievably, even to nowadays  as the unlucky case of Tissa Balasuriya showed. Vilified, excommunicated, forced to retreat and practically banned from the internet itself.

hXXp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tissa_Balasuriya

Live links not allowed ~ leatherbear

Sure LBC we look for and find the values and maybe, if we happened to be a little pissed off, even the… "disvalues" . So one could even emit the hypothesis that we put more than find these thingies somewhere.
Back in topic though, the lesson Bayazid felt to give us may be seen as interesting and useful but, at a given point, since  all the mystics coming from different religions (the sufism was and is an islamic form of mysticism) end with resembling each other, the most interesting lesson we could get from the all of them is about a vision of a "god" who speaks for my/your/oursingularselves common denominator. Mysticim was seen in fact as the purely individual art of penetrating the "secret", the mystery (mystikòs) hiding in the nature of the things through not conventional instruments: neither the words, nor the writings, nor even the thought. Its instrument was the breath: breathing first the air, then the environment, the beings populating it and, in the end, god. So, like the apophatic god, not an authoritative god but a god who cannot lend her/him/itself to a human, too human will to power. Including the power of bashing some other than ourselves ones: gays, jews, niggas, women…

Thank you for reading LBC :). Religion and phiosophy often come together especially in those works of historical framework where the theology branch gets mixed with philosophy as a religion philosophy. Choosing religion and philosophy as topics of a web forum seems to imply though the necessity of considering also different perspectives right?  ^-^

uè hard ciao! ^_^

Said the sufi master Bayazid : "When I was young I ​​was a revolutionary and my only prayer to Allah was:"Lord, give me the strength to change the world. "When I was, by then, close to middle age and realized that half of my life had passed without I could change anything, I changed my prayer:"Lord, give me the grace to change all those who come into contact with me. Just my family and friends, and I'll be happy".
But now that I am old and my days are numbered, I begin to realize how foolish I was. So my only prayer to Allah is now: "Lord, grant me at least the grace to change myself cause, If I had prayed this way from the beginning, I would not have wasted my life".

https://www.gaytorrent.ru/details.php?id=149221