/jp/ - Otaku Culture

>>22243123
>My contention is that it's impossible to move through life without going through moments of instability and dependence.
That's where you misunderstand, I agree that you can go through moments of instability, but that does not make you dependent. Your mistake is that any amount of instability automatically leads an individual to become dependent on others by putting their life in the hands of another. It's the difference between losing your job, going through a rough time but persevering, and losing your job, becoming homeless and dying within the week.
Again, you're misunderstanding the conceptual difference between reliance and dependency. If you were to lose X, would you survive? If you say yes, that means you were merely reliant on it, not dependent. If you say no, then you die because you were dependent.
You're going through improper epistemological semantics by conflating the two. All you're doing is lamenting that your strength, knowledge and creativity are not omnipotent, omniscient or omnipresent. You refuse to accept that, no matter what, the metaphysical law of identity that limit our consciousness and bodies. To live, you have to co-exist with reality by accepting its limitations and flourish. That's what it means to be self-sufficient, not this false understanding that you are always dependent on something when you're not.

Humans are animals that live in a society, meaning that we are social animals that come together to elevate our standing in reality by forming a civilization. It enables individuals great benefit, but it is nonetheless something that we mustn't become dependent either. If X country were to fall, would you survive? The same conditions do not change.

>does that disqualify you from being a rational animal because you put your life in someone elses hands?
Yes. If you put your life in someone else's hands, it is no longer yours. You are permanently living on borrowed time until you live by your own strength, knowledge and creativity, and the moment that cuts their dependency from you, you will be weaker and at the mercy of reality. This puts you in a worse position to survive. You must always enhance your strength, knowledge and creativity as to never become dependent on others.

>And by what "strength" do you find the time to educate yourself in the first place?
Volitional focus. My persistence to my excellence is the cognitive strength that allows me to educate myself, succeed and thrive.

>The answer is that for the most part it's made possible for you by others.
Yes, I relied on others for my benefit, and it is a great boom to my existence and well being through its knowledge. It would have taken me more time to learn on my own, but that doesn't negate its utility. This passing on of conceptual knowledge is what gives us an advantage over other organisms.

>Every kid that goes to school in a first world country does so thanks to the efforts of people who came before them, and even when you become an adult you never stop being "mediated" by the society you are a part of. Acknowledging that weakness and learning when it's okay to rely on others is also a part of being human.
I have nothing to acknowledge, as what you subtly want to advocate is a sense of obligation and duty. I am respectful of all those that came before me, but these people are dead; I owe nothing. Again, you misunderstand the difference between 'rely' and 'depend.' I've earned what I have. And I am grateful for the past efforts of every human that has brought me here; I owe nothing more. What you advocate is the rejection of living for one's self.

>>22243123
>My contention is that it's impossible to move through life without going through moments of instability and dependence.
That's where you misunderstand, I agree that you can go through moments of instability, but that does not make you dependent. Your mistake is that any amount of instability automatically leads an individual to become dependent on others by putting their life in the hands of another. It's the difference between losing your job, going through a rough time but persevering, and losing your job, becoming homeless and dying within the weak.
Again, you're misunderstanding the conceptual difference between reliance and dependency. If you were to lose X, would you survive? If you say yes, that means you were merely reliant on it, not dependent. If you say yes, then you die because you were dependent.
You're going through improper epistemological semantics by conflating the two. All you're doing is lamenting that your strength, knowledge and creativity are not omnipotent, omniscient or omnipresent. You refuse to accept that, no matter what, the metaphysical law of identity that limit our consciousness and bodies. To live, you have to co-exist with reality by accepting its limitations and flourish. That's what it means to be self-sufficient, not this false understanding that you are always dependent on something when you're not.

Humans are animals that live in a society, meaning that we are social animals that come together to elevate our standing in reality by forming a civilization. It enables individuals great benefit, but it is nonetheless something that we mustn't become dependent either. If X country were to fall, would you survive? The same conditions do not change.

>does that disqualify you from being a rational animal because you put your life in someone elses hands?
Yes. If you put your life in someone else's hands, it is no longer yours. You are permanently living on borrowed time, and the moment that person lets go, you will be weaker and at the mercy of reality.

>And by what "strength" do you find the time to educate yourself in the first place?
Volitional focus. My persistence to my excellence is the cognitive strength that allows me to educate myself, succeed and thrive.

>The answer is that for the most part it's made possible for you by others.
Yes, I relied on others for my benefit, and it is a great boom to my existence and well being through its knowledge. It would have taken me more time to learn on my own, but that doesn't negate its utility. This passing on of conceptual knowledge is what gives us an advantage over other organisms.

>Every kid that goes to school in a first world country does so thanks to the efforts of people who came before them, and even when you become an adult you never stop being "mediated" by the society you are a part of. Acknowledging that weakness and learning when it's okay to rely on others is also a part of being human.
I have nothing to acknowledge, as what you subtly want to advocate is a sense of obligation and duty. I am respectful of all those that came before me, but these people are dead; I owe nothing. Again, you misunderstand the difference between 'rely' and 'depend.' I've earned what I have. And I am grateful for the past efforts of every human that has brought me here; I owe nothing more. What you advocate is the rejection of living for one's self.

Happy birthday you smug little nerd

>>17215810
I'd play her on the tabletop if you know what I mean

>>16940769
female G-spot is ON the vagina you fucking illiterate faggot. Haven't you ever (insert literally anything related to sexuality) ?
Male G-spot is the prostate, female one is the clitoris. It's not in the asshole.

>>16948166
You might be retarded.

>>16654922
''I've solved humanity, now die''.

>>16279281
Oh ho ho ho. I like you.

>>16019833
That's because love is an illusion.

>>15608081
I prefer to be called a rapist.

>>15595291

<Very Good>