I have failed my wife.

[Asra]

What advice do you have then? [...]

Since it was requested, I will list my advice below. I didn't include it as people are already offended by as much as naming reality, calling it harsh, or excessively judgmental, since you stress exact wording.

Up to the point of this reply I'm quoting, nobody has said it's "not a problem", nor that it's "not a big deal", nor has anybody encouraged cheating that I can see. I wonder if you were cheated on in the past so this is a sensitive subject for you.

If you insist on clarity, there was a member who called a handjob nothing and leaving over it hysterical. Others did not use these exact words, but the undertone is clear.

I was thankfully not cheated on. I addressed a topic with the gravity it deserves. You are going ad hominem as an attempt to discredit me. I'll let you know it's visible, and that if we go there, I could also assume all people who were not as "harsh" are cheating on their spouse. But you don't see me naming members.

Now, to OP: first of all, I'd say acknowledge and accept this grave mistake as well as the potential divorce as a consequence to one's actions. Don't waste time trying to salvage broken relationships that will be hurtful on both ends and look forced to the children who will be witnessing it and might involuntarily replicate it when they become adults. This is freeing in a way, because the incompatibilities between you are essentially solved, and now you are both able to find partners better suited to you, sexually and otherwise. Before future relationships, I say go for a period of working on the porn addiction, and when dating, be upfront about your expectations, especially sexual, from the beginning. Despite a possible end of the relationship, you are still the children's father, and I think you should be present in their life. If it works for you logistically, you could ask for dual custody. If this can't be achieved, make sure they spend holidays at your place, or have them visit every time possible as per the judge's arrangements. Make sure to pay the child support, it's proof of your involvement in case family members try to alienate the children from you. Children might not be aware of the details (their age also factors), but they will remember whether you fought to see them, and they can be shown proof of the payments when they are older.

 

[Recycler1337]

Something inside me tells me you'll get back together. It's not even outright cheating. She needs to show you she won't accept this in the future, to put pressure on you. Try to get her back after some time; I think there's every chance.

 

[Voice of Enki [SG]]

The relationship was already fatally wounded due to the sexual incompatibility which was present beforehand; this event with the massage parlor was just an outward manifestation of that.

Sexual incompatibility in long term relations where this did not exist prior is also in 99% of cases merely an outward manifestation of deeper rooted unspoken problems in a relationship.

This is very important to recognize. This action at the massage parlor is an escalation of these unspoken problems.

Of course, if it has been building for years, resolving it can be very difficult. This is why people must understand to recognize problems when they are small, and resolve them early on when they are easy to resolve.

However, often times these kinds of things are still not very difficult to resolve if there can be a mutual understanding, communication and openness to each other between partners, before someone makes an impulsive irreconcilable mistake.

They have had children together. They were sweethearts in school.

Deep love certainly existed at one point, however many things have gone wrong to completely shatter this over time, clearly not because his wife "suddenly" became disinterested in the man she had fallen in love with and had children with, while sharing much of her life together.

 

[Voice of Enki [SG]]

It's so weak.. leaving your husband for a handjob. Sorry I just think it's hysterical. In certain countries people are way rougher than that.

You call it weak to leave over this. I consider it weak to cling to someone who doesn't value you or the life you have dedicated to them.

One must talk before doing this. Not after.

Otherwise it is a complete betrayal of the trust that was given and established.

People can make their own choices, and have their own reasons for continuing on together and making something work. Sometimes it is successful.

For some people, there is no worse betrayal than this. Don't try this to a partner with a strong Scorpio or Capricorn for example.

10 years of relationship and such a lack of communication that it resorts to this... That is a real tragedy, and weakness.

 

[MT Kim]

Something inside me tells me you'll get back together. It's not even outright cheating.

It is cheating though, in my opinion. If we consider cheating to be sexual betrayal, by definition this was it. He fulfilled a sexual need from someone else behind the wife's back without telling her. Any other context of betrayal like in mafia type circles gets a finger cut off or something right? I don't understand the double standard when it comes to sexual betrayal or why it's not seen as serious.

I think it's very easy to ask a spouse their opinion about an open marriage, to gauge a response about experiencing promiscuity. He didn't even respect her enough to simply ask her. I wouldn't get back with him

 

[Henu the Great]

Something inside me tells me you'll get back together. It's not even outright cheating. She needs to show you she won't accept this in the future, to put pressure on you. Try to get her back after some time; I think there's every chance.

Clearly it is evident that there is a huge gap in what people see as loyalty and trust. To others, this very much is irrevocable. I can only speculate if this is actual difference in nature, or lack of progress in that particular area.

 

[nema]

You call it weak to leave over this. I consider it weak to cling to someone who doesn't value you or the life you have dedicated to them.

One must talk before doing this. Not after.

Otherwise it is a complete betrayal of the trust that was given and established.

People can make their own choices, and have their own reasons for continuing on together and making something work. Sometimes it is successful.

For some people, there is no worse betrayal than this. Don't try this to a partner with a strong Scorpio or Capricorn for example.

10 years of relationship and such a lack of communication that it resorts to this... That is a real tragedy, and weakness.

Well i have to be honest, i'm probably the worst person on Earth to talk about this stuff. That's how i feel about it but i know less about relationships than you guys.

 

[Mysteries of the Gods]

I'm joining this conversation, if I may. I do believe this is a matter between him and his wife. Personal opinions on what should be grounds for leaving a person in a relationship, I honestly believe it's irrelevant for the Soul writing that help request in despair over what he had done.



To the OP: I do not know, nor cannot for that regard, how things will play out in your life after this incident. I humbly suggest not to act from a heart place of despair, that can take the form of forcing a reconciliation, clinging excessively for your wife to change her mind. Let the dust settle, let the storm pass. It's important, otherwise, chances are she will feel more overwhelmed and this can lead to more strife and escalation.



I also do not know how things are playing out at the moment because situations like this one tend to move pretty fast.



It was an escalation of internal issues (as others rightly said) and also most likely a crack in a relationship that was not working or had unresolved issues since the beginning, like sexual incompatibilities (mismatch of drives) that cause all kinds of problems in relationship. Sexual compatibility is important so both can have their needs met.



Porn addiction alone and lack of self control, if taken far, can on their own cause this kind of situation because the addiction can lead to desire more and more (tolerance) to the point normal sex life cannot satisfy any longer. I don't know if that was your case. This means that potentially what you call high libido, some of it is actually the addiction.



Only you can know.



What I suggest practically is to give your wife some space, let the heat settle (if she wants to be alone). I think you already profusely apologized. Now it's up to her to take a decision. Maybe you can try to speak to her when the heat and the shock have settled, but I cannot guarantee success.



And first of all, be ready for every fortune (https://templeofzeus.org/advancedphilosophy/PreparationForEveryFortune.php).

Whatever happens, if you eventually get back, good, if not, know it's not the end of your life. Even if it's hard, forgive yourself (I know, it's very difficult for me too in life, but it allows you to heal and move on instead of being stuck on the past). Even if you cannot bring back what you did, you can still rebuild from scratch, but first it's vital to honestly get to an understanding of why this happened. Did you choose someone you were incompatible with? Why? Were there other traits that make the relationship not work? Don't settle on her opinion of you but answer to yourself and you honestly. Also, for the abovementioned reason, you should definitely address your addiction and also get to the root of why you have it. Some people use it to fill a void, some people have a lot of fire in them and want that stimulation a lot. Try to recall how you started and why.



I sincerely hope for your family to heal and for you to grow and rise up again with more awareness and knowledge of yourself.

 

[Beauty]

I. The Variable Ethics of Status

Ethical judgment is not a stable function. It bends along gradients of power. Consider two identical acts of infidelity. In the first case, the betrayed partner is the consort of Alexander the Great. Public reaction: "You knew who he was. Be grateful he chose you. You are overreacting." In the second case, the betrayer is an ordinary man. The same public now delivers a lecture on fidelity, character, and the meaning of trust.

The act did not change. The status of the actor changed. Therefore, moral outrage is not a response to the act itself, but to the power differential between observer and subject. The weak are judged by rules; the strong are judged by outcomes.

II. Power as Epistemic Privilege

A person in a position of strength does not need to seek counsel on a forum. He does not require strangers to validate his pain or parse the ethics of his situation. His reality is settled by his own capacity to act. The very act of asking of exposing uncertainty is itself a signal of weakness, and that signal invites a specific response: moral instruction. The powerful are rarely lectured. The weak are rarely anything else.

Thus, the deepest harm of powerlessness is not material. It is epistemic. It places you in a theater where others define reality for you.

III. The Biological Program vs. The Higher Understanding

Every human operates from a layered architecture. The deepest layer is biological a set of ancient, sexually dimorphic scripts shaped by reproductive pressures. Above it sits culture, education, spirituality, and individual will. These upper layers can modulate the lower layers but cannot erase them. To deny this is not enlightenment. It is ego defending itself against an uncomfortable truth.

Women, regardless of education or spiritual attainment, retain a biological response to male status displays and to signs of weakness that threaten the perception of security. Men, regardless of sophistication, retain a biological response to youth and fertility cues. This is not misogyny or misandry. It is species history encoded in flesh.

The educated person does not transcend the program. He merely learns to narrate it differently until he is tested.

IV. The Repulsive Signal: Vulnerability as Unsexing

Among the strongest biological signals is the male cry in a romantic context. Note carefully: this is not about emotional repression as a virtue. It is about context. Tears in response to a dead parent or a dying child are human and often binding. But tears in response to a partner's transgression especially when framed as helplessness or dependency trigger a different register. The man becomes child. The partner becomes mother.

Sexual arousal does not follow maternal scripts. It follows mate scripts. The conflation is fatal to desire.

Most relationship advice of the "new age" variety ignores this. It tells men to be open, to share weakness, to cry freely. This advice is not malicious. It is simply ignorant of the biological substrate. It mistakes what should be true for what is true. A man can cry once in front of his wife and survive it if the balance of power is otherwise intact. But if he makes it a pattern if he brings her his wounds as a child brings a scraped knee the sexual dynamic will calcify into caretaking. And caretaking is not passion.

V. The Paradox of Fidelity and the Signal of Option

What women say about infidelity and what women are aroused by are not the same map. This is not hypocrisy. It is the difference between conscious morality and unconscious mate-selection heuristics.

Most women will sincerely denounce cheating. Most of those same women will also, in controlled conditions, demonstrate increased arousal toward men who display the capacity to attract other women that is, high-status males with options. The ability to cheat signals desirability. Desirability signals genetic and resource fitness. The conscious mind deplores the act. The limbic system calculates the implication.

This is not a justification for infidelity. It is a description of the field upon which fidelity is actually negotiated. Men who understand this do not necessarily cheat. But they understand why a woman might tolerate from a king what she would leave a peasant for.

VI. The Rarity of True Agency

Most people are not driven by deliberate values. They are driven by impulses, shaped by opportunity, rationalized after the fact. Give a person leverage, and they will use it not because they are evil, but because impulse is faster than reflection. The few who possess genuine power (status, intelligence, physical presence) and act from a higher understanding rather than base impulse are vanishingly rare.

The rest are sleepwalking through a psychological battle they do not know they are fighting. They are not strategists. They are reactors.

VII. Conclusion: Strength as Clarity

The original question How deep is this, is it good? cannot be answered with a simple yes or no. The framework is deep where it acknowledges the biological substrate and the variable ethics of power. It is shallow where it mistakes cynicism for completeness. The deepest truth is not that everyone is a predator. It is that most people are neither predators nor prey, but sleepers and the man who stays awake must decide not merely what he can do, but what he will do when no one is testing him.

That decision, made without performance and without audience, is the only genuine power. Everything else is just a more sophisticated form of weakness.

 

[Pammy]

wife "suddenly" became disinterested

And this could be simply a wife being self-conscious about changes in her body after having a baby. The real unrealistic expectation porn creates is not the beauty standards, it is the mannerisms. Those actors are paid to act always ready, excited, whatever.

 

[Henu the Great]

I. The Variable Ethics of Status

Ethical judgment is not a stable function. It bends along gradients of power. Consider two identical acts of infidelity. In the first case, the betrayed partner is the consort of Alexander the Great. Public reaction: "You knew who he was. Be grateful he chose you. You are overreacting." In the second case, the betrayer is an ordinary man. The same public now delivers a lecture on fidelity, character, and the meaning of trust.

The act did not change. The status of the actor changed. Therefore, moral outrage is not a response to the act itself, but to the power differential between observer and subject. The weak are judged by rules; the strong are judged by outcomes.

II. Power as Epistemic Privilege

A person in a position of strength does not need to seek counsel on a forum. He does not require strangers to validate his pain or parse the ethics of his situation. His reality is settled by his own capacity to act. The very act of asking of exposing uncertainty is itself a signal of weakness, and that signal invites a specific response: moral instruction. The powerful are rarely lectured. The weak are rarely anything else.

Thus, the deepest harm of powerlessness is not material. It is epistemic. It places you in a theater where others define reality for you.

III. The Biological Program vs. The Higher Understanding

Every human operates from a layered architecture. The deepest layer is biological a set of ancient, sexually dimorphic scripts shaped by reproductive pressures. Above it sits culture, education, spirituality, and individual will. These upper layers can modulate the lower layers but cannot erase them. To deny this is not enlightenment. It is ego defending itself against an uncomfortable truth.

Women, regardless of education or spiritual attainment, retain a biological response to male status displays and to signs of weakness that threaten the perception of security. Men, regardless of sophistication, retain a biological response to youth and fertility cues. This is not misogyny or misandry. It is species history encoded in flesh.

The educated person does not transcend the program. He merely learns to narrate it differently until he is tested.

IV. The Repulsive Signal: Vulnerability as Unsexing

Among the strongest biological signals is the male cry in a romantic context. Note carefully: this is not about emotional repression as a virtue. It is about context. Tears in response to a dead parent or a dying child are human and often binding. But tears in response to a partner's transgression especially when framed as helplessness or dependency trigger a different register. The man becomes child. The partner becomes mother.

Sexual arousal does not follow maternal scripts. It follows mate scripts. The conflation is fatal to desire.

Most relationship advice of the "new age" variety ignores this. It tells men to be open, to share weakness, to cry freely. This advice is not malicious. It is simply ignorant of the biological substrate. It mistakes what should be true for what is true. A man can cry once in front of his wife and survive it if the balance of power is otherwise intact. But if he makes it a pattern if he brings her his wounds as a child brings a scraped knee the sexual dynamic will calcify into caretaking. And caretaking is not passion.

V. The Paradox of Fidelity and the Signal of Option

What women say about infidelity and what women are aroused by are not the same map. This is not hypocrisy. It is the difference between conscious morality and unconscious mate-selection heuristics.

Most women will sincerely denounce cheating. Most of those same women will also, in controlled conditions, demonstrate increased arousal toward men who display the capacity to attract other women that is, high-status males with options. The ability to cheat signals desirability. Desirability signals genetic and resource fitness. The conscious mind deplores the act. The limbic system calculates the implication.

This is not a justification for infidelity. It is a description of the field upon which fidelity is actually negotiated. Men who understand this do not necessarily cheat. But they understand why a woman might tolerate from a king what she would leave a peasant for.

VI. The Rarity of True Agency

Most people are not driven by deliberate values. They are driven by impulses, shaped by opportunity, rationalized after the fact. Give a person leverage, and they will use it not because they are evil, but because impulse is faster than reflection. The few who possess genuine power (status, intelligence, physical presence) and act from a higher understanding rather than base impulse are vanishingly rare.

The rest are sleepwalking through a psychological battle they do not know they are fighting. They are not strategists. They are reactors.

VII. Conclusion: Strength as Clarity

The original question How deep is this, is it good? cannot be answered with a simple yes or no. The framework is deep where it acknowledges the biological substrate and the variable ethics of power. It is shallow where it mistakes cynicism for completeness. The deepest truth is not that everyone is a predator. It is that most people are neither predators nor prey, but sleepers and the man who stays awake must decide not merely what he can do, but what he will do when no one is testing him.

That decision, made without performance and without audience, is the only genuine power. Everything else is just a more sophisticated form of weakness.

It is common courtesy to tell others when LLM has been used.

 

[Beauty]

It is common courtesy to tell others when LLM has been used.

wouldnt it be better if you just said you liked the reply?

Your way of expressing appreciation is complicated.

Jokes aside, under this reply i will include parts from OG message which was better than the above, its just was too agressive, controversial i guess, and would not have gone through moderation, and sometimes vulgar, and also had some personal experiences, so i sent to ai told it remove personal experiences remove weird things remove controversial stuff.

Thats why in the above, you will feel like its hinting to ideas instead of directly stating them

 

[Beauty]

In above text:

[Men, regardless of sophistication, retain a biological response to youth and fertility cues. ]

Original text:

[sexual arousal does not come from higher understanding but its rather animalic in nature, we get aroused following a script, for example man like big breasts because it signals a women will be able to feed his children, but uneducated men thinks its really about big breasts, andhighly educated ones try to mess with the script and add fantasies and so on to push that higher; ]

More from original text:

[The thing is if a women is spiritual or highly educated or whatever in bed she is still an andropod, as is the man]

More:

[If a women is educated or spiritual it does not mean the biological program is not there, any one against this statement is against it just because of ego, since whats opposite of that ?

Opposite is we should go beyond the biological ,the other extreme.. so its ok for man to be with man and to female to be a lesbian and other things, if that its not ok it means we need to play by the standard biological rules even if there are exceptions, but we do not build rules on exceptions but on whats common,

That being said the biological side is to work with not to be repulsed by or deny that it exists]

Those are the least controversial parts. Also know that what i write, i write it in a way that i understand, if i post it as it is , i do not know if members will understand.

 

[Beauty]

In above text:

[Men, regardless of sophistication, retain a biological response to youth and fertility cues. ]

Original text:

[sexual arousal does not come from higher understanding but its rather animalic in nature, we get aroused following a script, for example man like big breasts because it signals a women will be able to feed his children, but uneducated men thinks its really about big breasts, andhighly educated ones try to mess with the script and add fantasies and so on to push that higher; ]

More from original text:

[The thing is if a women is spiritual or highly educated or whatever in bed she is still an andropod, as is the man]

More:

[If a women is educated or spiritual it does not mean the biological program is not there, any one against this statement is against it just because of ego, since whats opposite of that ?

Opposite is we should go beyond the biological ,the other extreme.. so its ok for man to be with man and to female to be a lesbian and other things, if that its not ok it means we need to play by the standard biological rules even if there are exceptions, but we do not build rules on exceptions but on whats common,

That being said the biological side is to work with not to be repulsed by or deny that it exists]

Those are the least controversial parts. Also know that what i write, i write it in a way that i understand, if i post it as it is , i do not know if members will understand.

I just took all ideas from original message and used ai to put them in Trojan Horse to escape moderation

 

[Henu the Great]

wouldnt it be better if you just said you liked the reply?

No, that would not be true, because it is unclear what your original thought is and what is not.

Your way of expressing appreciation is complicated.

I would appreciate it if people openly stated that they use an LLM in their responses. You know, sort of like in the media (at least the ones trying to be responsible). Most people want to take the easy way out and then not mention it. It is alarming in this community. How hard is it to state "AI has been used to edit this message"?

Jokes aside, under this reply i will include parts from OG message which was better than the above, its just was too agressive, controversial i guess, and would not have gone through moderation, and sometimes vulgar, and also had some personal experiences, so i sent to ai told it remove personal experiences remove weird things remove controversial stuff.

Thats why in the above, you will feel like its hinting to ideas instead of directly stating them

One becomes a better writer by writing and revising one's work rather than seeking the easy way out.

Also know that what i write, i write it in a way that i understand, if i post it as it is , i do not know if members will understand.

Then maybe write so that others can understand? People generally are not appreciative of this approach because it gives an inauthentic impression.

 

[Beauty]

No, that would not be true, because it is unclear what your original thought is and what is not.

Ok another confirmation that the thoughts were High Tier, thank you my brother Henu the great for this additional validation. This has been noted

But its not that deep everyone reading will nod and know its true

However my first replies about cheating & reincarnation are more potent by the way

I noticed a thing in forum, sometimes some members are more impressed by how good a thread is written compared to the core ideas,

A thread with extremely good ideas badly written will be ignored, i do not agree with this, i have a siddhi of looking beyond the superficial

I would appreciate it if people openly stated that they use an LLM in their responses. You know, sort of like in the media (at least the ones trying to be responsible). Most people want to take the easy way out and then not mention it. It is alarming in this community. How hard is it to state "AI has been used to edit this message"?

One becomes a better writer by writing and revising one's work rather than seeking the easy way out.


Then maybe write so that others can understand? People generally are not appreciative of this approach because it gives an inauthentic impression.

I will mention this thread has been refined by ai next time even if i assumed it looked clearly like it above given its so polished compared to my old replies.

I will also work on upgrading my writing.
Thank you Brother Henu for the feedback.

 

[Ol argedco luciftias]

Ok another confirmation that the thoughts were High Tier, thank you my brother Henu the great for this additional validation. This has been noted

But its not that deep everyone reading will nod and know its true

However my first replies about cheating & reincarnation are more potent by the way

I noticed a thing in forum, sometimes some members are more impressed by how good a thread is written compared to the core ideas,

A thread with extremely good ideas badly written will be ignored, i do not agree with this, i have a siddhi of looking beyond the superficial

I will mention this thread has been refined by ai next time even if i assumed it looked clearly like it above given its so polished compared to my old replies.

I will also work on upgrading my writing.
Thank you Brother Henu for the feedback.

What you describe can not be called a siddhi. This is a basic personality trait or mental habit.

Using AI to create a response is distracting and usually does not make it easier to read. It is better to say something with your own voice instead of trying to get a robot to say it for you. If writing something is difficult for you, that is normal. This was very difficult for me also when I was young, and it is difficult for most people. But this is a very important skill that everybody should develop.

AI for example does not know about the Gods, does not know about spiritual things, and does not have the knowledge to create a valuable response about these kinds of topics. So most people notice AI generated posts and have the emotion that it is low-effort slop content, and is not as important as a real post written by a real person.

What I said is my opinion, and I think is most people's opinion.

 

[Henu the Great]

Ok another confirmation that the thoughts were High Tier, thank you my brother Henu the great for this additional validation. This has been noted

That is called confirmation bias. Please note that no one has praised or agreed with your message so far.

 

[Beauty]

What I said is my opinion, and I think is most people's opinion.

That is called confirmation bias. Please note that no one has praised or agreed with your message so far.

 

[Beauty]

What you describe can not be called a siddhi. This is a basic personality trait or mental habit.

I did not mean it is a Siddhi, its just a way of talking

it was an auxesis: ancient greek word αὔξησις

Using AI to create a response is distracting and usually does not make it easier to read. It is better to say something with your own voice instead of trying to get a robot to say it for you. If writing something is difficult for you, that is normal. This was very difficult for me also when I was young, and it is difficult for most people. But this is a very important skill that everybody should develop.

AI for example does not know about the Gods, does not know about spiritual things, and does not have the knowledge to create a valuable response about these kinds of topics. So most people notice AI generated posts and have the emotion that it is low-effort slop content, and is not as important as a real post written by a real person.

I talked about refining with ai and thats what i did, so your reply is irrelevant. You did not engage with what i said, maybe you skimmed through my reply.

Concerning the ai generated texts i dislike them too.

AI for example does not know about the Gods, does not know about spiritual things, and does not have the knowledge to create a valuable response about these kinds of topics.

It depends on how to use it, and AI is evolving.

 

[Henu the Great]

I think you fail to understand how little people, in general, appreciate the approach you took in your reply. It is not the first time this has happened, and every time someone notifies that this is not appreciated. In each case, if the writer had simply stated that AI has been used as part of the process, much, if not all, of the confusion would have been avoided.

 

[Ol argedco luciftias]

Like I said. Nobody appreciates low-effort AI slop content in any media, whether it is a written comment, an article, a video, audio. If anybody wanted some meaningless Chatgpt reply, they would have went and asked Chatgpt instead of coming here and asking us.

It also does not feel good how you are using this to try to put ideas that you think people will disagree with, and try to get AI to hide them in a larger message in a way to try to disguise what your message actually is or try to trick people into agreeing with it. If your ideas or opinions were valid, helpful, and correct, they would not need to be hidden like hiding a pill for a sick dog inside a piece of cheese. Your ideas should be able to hold up on their own, and trying to trick anybody by disguising your message is not something that anyone appreciates.

 

[serpentwalker666]

Something inside me tells me you'll get back together. It's not even outright cheating. She needs to show you she won't accept this in the future, to put pressure on you. Try to get her back after some time; I think there's every chance.

Yes it is cheating.. you can't just say it isn't. Hopefully there is some positive resolution, either a new start in life when it comes to love, or they work out the problems that exploded to this extent in the relationship.

 

[Beauty]

like hiding a pill for a sick dog inside a piece of cheese.

that was funny.

But let me explain one thing, i do not know if this will get approved, if it does not, i understand.

honesty in some cases is disrespectful and inappropriate, and when people say they appreciate someone honest 100%, thats false, no one can handle 100% honesty. Me included, not necessarily put of weakness, its just not appropriate.

I personally, will not want to hear some peoples opinions on me, i am ok with them thinking that, just do not tell me especially if its disrespectful since that blurs the lines.

Let me expand on that, imagine if someone goes to a girl that he does not know and tells her : Hello, i want to have S*x with you.

Thats 100% honesty, he did not pretend something else.

He will literally be labeled mentally ill, disrespectful and every bad thing,

Instead he needs to sugar coat it, Hello, do you know where the mall is ?( even if he knows where the mall is) Yes turn right then left then etc.. ok thank you i was just looking for X Y Z and thought i will find that there. Yes or check here, ah you know places you must be from here. ….. some time later having a dinner then probably engaging in S*x.

I personally hate this, it reminds me of how we treat animals, peak andropod behavior, when a horse is old enough for a briddle, he refuses it for first time, so instead there is a technique, you have to put honey or sugar on the briddle the horse likes the taste, and start tasting it then he accepts it in his mouth , and then you put the briddle on, repeated few times and the horse becomes ok with the briddle. And even may starts playing with the iron part on his mouth. Instead of rejecting it in agressive way.

so having a dinner with a girl before engaging in s*xual activity and using gifts etc.. feels to me like taming a mare, i dislike this, i dislike viewing girls as objects, or as andropods, and i talked to some about it, but it turns out for some reasons, they like the metaphor.

So should i be honest instead and just be straight to the point ? It just does not work like that, theory is not real life. And if one realise something it does not mean necessarily that the world will react good out of recognizing the truth.

Me myself if someone comes to me and say hello do you like ancient Gods, even something like this i will see him suspecious, start thinking why he asked that, and i will flag him, if someone needs to ask me something as simple as that, he needs to know me, gain my trust and then ask, and do not talk too much.

So all ideas in my opinion, should be presented in big or lesser extent, inside the Trojan Horse. Not manipulation, but respect, this can be in some cases manipulation, it all depends on the use. And do not blame the player nor the messenger, blame the game.

No one appreciates the ‘straight to the point’, thats rookie mistake, building up slowly is so good, and makes the interactions last longer.

 

[Beauty]

that was funny.

But let me explain one thing, i do not know if this will get approved, if it does not, i understand.

honesty in some cases is disrespectful and inappropriate, and when people say they appreciate someone honest 100%, thats false, no one can handle 100% honesty. Me included, not necessarily put of weakness, its just not appropriate.

I personally, will not want to hear some peoples opinions on me, i am ok with them thinking that, just do not tell me especially if its disrespectful since that blurs the lines.

Let me expand on that, imagine if someone goes to a girl that he does not know and tells her : Hello, i want to have S*x with you.

Thats 100% honesty, he did not pretend something else.

He will literally be labeled mentally ill, disrespectful and every bad thing,

Instead he needs to sugar coat it, Hello, do you know where the mall is ?( even if he knows where the mall is) Yes turn right then left then etc.. ok thank you i was just looking for X Y Z and thought i will find that there. Yes or check here, ah you know places you must be from here. ….. some time later having a dinner then probably engaging in S*x.

I personally hate this, it reminds me of how we treat animals, peak andropod behavior, when a horse is old enough for a briddle, he refuses it for first time, so instead there is a technique, you have to put honey or sugar on the briddle the horse likes the taste, and start tasting it then he accepts it in his mouth , and then you put the briddle on, repeated few times and the horse becomes ok with the briddle. And even may starts playing with the iron part on his mouth. Instead of rejecting it in agressive way.

so having a dinner with a girl before engaging in s*xual activity and using gifts etc.. feels to me like taming a mare, i dislike this, i dislike viewing girls as objects, or as andropods, and i talked to some about it, but it turns out for some reasons, they like the metaphor.

So should i be honest instead and just be straight to the point ? It just does not work like that, theory is not real life. And if one realise something it does not mean necessarily that the world will react good out of recognizing the truth.

Me myself if someone comes to me and say hello do you like ancient Gods, even something like this i will see him suspecious, start thinking why he asked that, and i will flag him, if someone needs to ask me something as simple as that, he needs to know me, gain my trust and then ask, and do not talk too much.

So all ideas in my opinion, should be presented in big or lesser extent, inside the Trojan Horse. Not manipulation, but respect, this can be in some cases manipulation, it all depends on the use. And do not blame the player nor the messenger, blame the game.

No one appreciates the ‘straight to the point’, thats rookie mistake, building up slowly is so good, and makes the interactions last longer.

100% honesty, is aligned with izfet, i did not want to mention that earlier but i will go for it in this message:

On top of that, the Trojan horse, is good to the point, i tried several times, having A way of approaching, it works. Then i try B, it does not work,

Tried it some few time, its accurate, which raises question, when i get a relation, is it because the girl wants to get in relationship with me, or my approach is irresistible ? Is it me or the approach, given that the approach B is taken by same me but does not work, its actually the approach, but the approach might be part of the me. Still if it was about ´me ´ the change should not be that big. Especially if the two approches are both ´good’.

Given the fact honesty can stand in the way, and that we all consent to appropriate behavior over everything, i believe 100% honesty is Izfet, since it creates problems, causes disrespect, causes failures and more.

If a quality sounds good it does not mean its aligned with Maat, i believe se should judge by results and by consequences of the use of a specific quality, not just by how good it sounds.

Imagine a general in middle of war, stopping defending his people and let every one on his side perish, because of ‘ Peace ‘ and ´ Forgiveness’. If something sounds good it does not mean its necessarly aligned with Maat.

Ethics should not be built on things that sound good, its deeper than that,

A general in war, when he captures the enemy, one can argue:

A: release the enemy and forgive him. We already won, and lets be good example and have even more honor, the enemy cannot do anything anyway we already won=>Thats backing the decision by ´forgiveness’

B:destroy the enemy he attacked us and he deserves that, not doing so is not being loyal to us , we all choose you to be general, and we want the enemy to be destroyed especially that he attacked us, if you dont do that you are not being loyal=> backing decision by ´loyalty’ to the duty.

C: we promised enemy that whoever wins should not destroy the other, lets release him, we should be honest and not manipulate => thats backing it with honesty

D: we do not care if we promised something, refusing to destroy enemy is weakness => thats backing the claim with ‘strenght’

E: lets release him, we cannot fear that peasant, let him be, if he does something we will humble him agaain => thats backed by bravery

We can have multiple contradicting decisions and all backed by ´virtues’

Being aligned with Maat is not backing decision by a virtue.

The decision itself should be aligned with Maat not the virtue we use as backup being aligned with Maat.

So wisdom enters into play. Thats how i view the matter.

Acting from virtue is not necessarily being aligned with Maat.

And we see people acting from virtue, but because of ignorance, ending up with decisions aligned with Izfet.

 

[Hidden Warrior [SG]]

that was funny.

But let me explain one thing, i do not know if this will get approved, if it does not, i understand.

honesty in some cases is disrespectful and inappropriate, and when people say they appreciate someone honest 100%, thats false, no one can handle 100% honesty. Me included, not necessarily put of weakness, its just not appropriate.

I personally, will not want to hear some peoples opinions on me, i am ok with them thinking that, just do not tell me especially if its disrespectful since that blurs the lines.

Let me expand on that, imagine if someone goes to a girl that he does not know and tells her : Hello, i want to have S*x with you.

Thats 100% honesty, he did not pretend something else.

He will literally be labeled mentally ill, disrespectful and every bad thing,

Instead he needs to sugar coat it, Hello, do you know where the mall is ?( even if he knows where the mall is) Yes turn right then left then etc.. ok thank you i was just looking for X Y Z and thought i will find that there. Yes or check here, ah you know places you must be from here. ….. some time later having a dinner then probably engaging in S*x.

I personally hate this, it reminds me of how we treat animals, peak andropod behavior, when a horse is old enough for a briddle, he refuses it for first time, so instead there is a technique, you have to put honey or sugar on the briddle the horse likes the taste, and start tasting it then he accepts it in his mouth , and then you put the briddle on, repeated few times and the horse becomes ok with the briddle. And even may starts playing with the iron part on his mouth. Instead of rejecting it in agressive way.

so having a dinner with a girl before engaging in s*xual activity and using gifts etc.. feels to me like taming a mare, i dislike this, i dislike viewing girls as objects, or as andropods, and i talked to some about it, but it turns out for some reasons, they like the metaphor.

So should i be honest instead and just be straight to the point ? It just does not work like that, theory is not real life. And if one realise something it does not mean necessarily that the world will react good out of recognizing the truth.

Me myself if someone comes to me and say hello do you like ancient Gods, even something like this i will see him suspecious, start thinking why he asked that, and i will flag him, if someone needs to ask me something as simple as that, he needs to know me, gain my trust and then ask, and do not talk too much.

So all ideas in my opinion, should be presented in big or lesser extent, inside the Trojan Horse. Not manipulation, but respect, this can be in some cases manipulation, it all depends on the use. And do not blame the player nor the messenger, blame the game.

No one appreciates the ‘straight to the point’, thats rookie mistake, building up slowly is so good, and makes the interactions last longer.

100% honesty, is aligned with izfet, i did not want to mention that earlier but i will go for it in this message:

On top of that, the Trojan horse, is good to the point, i tried several times, having A way of approaching, it works. Then i try B, it does not work,

Tried it some few time, its accurate, which raises question, when i get a relation, is it because the girl wants to get in relationship with me, or my approach is irresistible ? Is it me or the approach, given that the approach B is taken by same me but does not work, its actually the approach, but the approach might be part of the me. Still if it was about ´me ´ the change should not be that big. Especially if the two approches are both ´good’.

Given the fact honesty can stand in the way, and that we all consent to appropriate behavior over everything, i believe 100% honesty is Izfet, since it creates problems, causes disrespect, causes failures and more.

If a quality sounds good it does not mean its aligned with Maat, i believe se should judge by results and by consequences of the use of a specific quality, not just by how good it sounds.

Imagine a general in middle of war, stopping defending his people and let every one on his side perish, because of ‘ Peace ‘ and ´ Forgiveness’. If something sounds good it does not mean its necessarly aligned with Maat.

Ethics should not be built on things that sound good, its deeper than that,

A general in war, when he captures the enemy, one can argue:

A: release the enemy and forgive him. We already won, and lets be good example and have even more honor, the enemy cannot do anything anyway we already won=>Thats backing the decision by ´forgiveness’

B:destroy the enemy he attacked us and he deserves that, not doing so is not being loyal to us , we all choose you to be general, and we want the enemy to be destroyed especially that he attacked us, if you dont do that you are not being loyal=> backing decision by ´loyalty’ to the duty.

C: we promised enemy that whoever wins should not destroy the other, lets release him, we should be honest and not manipulate => thats backing it with honesty

D: we do not care if we promised something, refusing to destroy enemy is weakness => thats backing the claim with ‘strenght’

E: lets release him, we cannot fear that peasant, let him be, if he does something we will humble him agaain => thats backed by bravery

We can have multiple contradicting decisions and all backed by ´virtues’

Being aligned with Maat is not backing decision by a virtue.

The decision itself should be aligned with Maat not the virtue we use as backup being aligned with Maat.

So wisdom enters into play. Thats how i view the matter.

Acting from virtue is not necessarily being aligned with Maat.

And we see people acting from virtue, but because of ignorance, ending up with decisions aligned with Izfet.

Your whole basic assumption is wrong. Do you think that being 100% honest about something is aligned with Izeft only because you are analyzing how normal people react to a person being 100% honest?
High Priest Zevios Metathronos and all the Clergy have been honest all these 20 years, telling the straight Truth over and over on multiple topics. There have been people who have called them crazy, lunatics, and worse. Does it mean that they are aligned with Izfet only because they have been straight to the point, and people didn't believe them?

Moreover, among the Ten Pathologies, where does it fall, being 100% honest? Truth is truth; if people are not able to handle it, it is not a problem if Divine Laws.

 

[Beauty]

Your whole basic assumption is wrong.

Dear SG, kindly, this specific idea, i guarantee no one can argue against it, i guarantee.

I am talking about the main idea, i will repeat the idea:

Backing a decision with a virtue, does not mean the decision itself is aligned with Maat.

as i said, we can have opposing decisions backed by virtues, and some of them will be aligned with Maat some with Izfet.

Do you think that being 100% honest about something is aligned with Izeft only because you are analyzing how normal people react to a person being 100% honest?
High Priest Zevios Metathronos and all the Clergy have been honest all these 20 years, telling the straight Truth over and over on multiple topics. There have been people who have called them crazy, lunatics, and worse. Does it mean that they are aligned with Izfet only because they have been straight to the point, and people didn't believe them?

Kindly, i want to point to you something, this is the second time you mention the High Priests in reply to me, i do not appreciate putting them in front line of ideas like if when i say 100% honesty is bad, i mean by consequence the High Priests are aligned with Izfet, or they are dishonest,

That is not what i mean, the subject is complex just read again my messages please,

I also i believe it is better if we do not mention the High Priests as example in this,

Its like when i debate someone about girls for example, and he tells me : lets take example of your sister.

No, do not talk about my sister and do not bring her into this. Lets talk about the ideas, that is why it will be better not mentioning the High Priests. Lets discuss the ideas without mentioning them.

Moreover, among the Ten Pathologies, where does it fall, being 100% honest? Truth is truth; if people are not able to handle it, it is not a problem if Divine Laws.

Dear SG, kindly, is not that simple, with all my respect SG, let me explain to you my idea,

We can have 3 actions, all threee backed by the virtues that you will align with the cures,

And then when we examine the 3 decisions, we will find that 2 are aligned with izfet and 1 is aligned with Maat,

Backing a decision with a virtue DOES NOT mean the decision is aligned with Maat. Ignorance and wisdom play big role in this.

This is impossible to debate by the way, i guarantee you.

It is not about handling the truth, you did not get what i mean,

Decision1 => backed by Virtue X
Decision2 => backed by Virtue Y
Decision3 => backed by virtue Z

The three decisions backed by virtues does not mean the decisions themselves are aligned with Maat, one can be ignorant and do an act that is backed by virtue and in same time aligned with Izfet.

Please do not bring High Priests or Clergy on this, and we all know the efforts and all good things they did. Do not position me against everyone please,

Now i am paying more attention to not slip and say something inappropriate more than i am paying attention to give idea, but still, what i said, is impossible to debate, since it is the truth. I am talking about the main idea, impossible to debate, believe me.

Thank you SG for your reply!

 

[Beauty]

….

Since i saw before how many talk like no one can have better opinion than a clergy i want to kindly adress this.

The High Priest himself ( since you love mentioning High Priests) said the High Priests are chosen in a way that they are 99.99% right, he left himself margin of mistake even if i do not agree with that notion and i believe above a level one is always right, since i see it from journey perspective, it becomes all about refining rather than right wrong.

HPS Pythia herself, ( since you love mentioning High Priests) did mistakes ( which i do not label as mistakes, my personal take is that she never did a mistake, she was walking a path, the path is right, so its all about refining and getting to next level, not right and wrong).

I do not understand the forum attitude which some have of : a new member cannot correct an established member or give an idea better than a clergy member, this is 100000% wrong.

And i saw this stated by established members and i do not want to quote, i also do not want to quote some things, i am going as clean as possible.

[Argumentum ad verecundiam]
ἐπίκληση στην αυθεντία (epiklisi stin afentia)

if a child gives an idea better than Platon, then the child DID give an idea better than Platon.

When we talk ideas, we talk ideas, appealing to authority is a fallacy. If the idea is good the idea is good, it cannot be weak just because its not Platon saying it.

And its a weakness to praise anything just because Platon said it.

‘The sky is blue, the birds are singing’ by some famous philosopher

=> Oh man , you saw what he said, he means he is focused on simple things even he engages in complicated topics, crazy man, that was some deep quote, i will meditate on it, oh man.

Some random guy gives some very sophisticated ideas:

=> ( mental process: who is this guy? I do not know him) => idea not that good, its just meh.

I know now many will want to say how titles are backed by things and people not having those titles means they are not of that level so it means they cannot give something of that caliber, if someone thinks that, he did not understand the above.

 

[Beauty]

Since i saw before how many talk like no one can have better opinion than a clergy i want to kindly adress this.

The High Priest himself ( since you love mentioning High Priests) said the High Priests are chosen in a way that they are 99.99% right, he left himself margin of mistake even if i do not agree with that notion and i believe above a level one is always right, since i see it from journey perspective, it becomes all about refining rather than right wrong.

HPS Pythia herself, ( since you love mentioning High Priests) did mistakes ( which i do not label as mistakes, my personal take is that she never did a mistake, she was walking a path, the path is right, so its all about refining and getting to next level, not right and wrong).

I do not understand the forum attitude which some have of : a new member cannot correct an established member or give an idea better than a clergy member, this is 100000% wrong.

And i saw this stated by established members and i do not want to quote, i also do not want to quote some things, i am going as clean as possible.

[Argumentum ad verecundiam]
ἐπίκληση στην αυθεντία (epiklisi stin afentia)

if a child gives an idea better than Platon, then the child DID give an idea better than Platon.

When we talk ideas, we talk ideas, appealing to authority is a fallacy. If the idea is good the idea is good, it cannot be weak just because its not Platon saying it.

And its a weakness to praise anything just because Platon said it.

‘The sky is blue, the birds are singing’ by some famous philosopher

=> Oh man , you saw what he said, he means he is focused on simple things even he engages in complicated topics, crazy man, that was some deep quote, i will meditate on it, oh man.

Some random guy gives some very sophisticated ideas:

=> ( mental process: who is this guy? I do not know him) => idea not that good, its just meh.

I know now many will want to say how titles are backed by things and people not having those titles means they are not of that level so it means they cannot give something of that caliber, if someone thinks that, he did not understand the above.

I believe the High Priest, is a very noble example and someone one can strive to be like, and i understand that no one is in his level, so i do not expect everyone to be like him, i just stated the idea but i truly believe it wont change something big, since those realization are not mental, but instead they come with levels of advancement in certain aspects. And i see that as normal since we are not all on same levels, and each one of us is more developed in certain things than in others, so i do not expect change or seek it, but i am very Grateful the High Priest embodies those noble traits. I saw many times some threads or messages dismissed, and he engaged with them. And many other things, I notice details. And i recognize nobility.

 

[Ol argedco luciftias]

100% honesty, is aligned with izfet, i did not want to mention that earlier but i will go for it in this message:

On top of that, the Trojan horse, is good to the point, i tried several times, having A way of approaching, it works. Then i try B, it does not work,

Tried it some few time, its accurate, which raises question, when i get a relation, is it because the girl wants to get in relationship with me, or my approach is irresistible ? Is it me or the approach, given that the approach B is taken by same me but does not work, its actually the approach, but the approach might be part of the me. Still if it was about ´me ´ the change should not be that big. Especially if the two approches are both ´good’.

Given the fact honesty can stand in the way, and that we all consent to appropriate behavior over everything, i believe 100% honesty is Izfet, since it creates problems, causes disrespect, causes failures and more.

If a quality sounds good it does not mean its aligned with Maat, i believe se should judge by results and by consequences of the use of a specific quality, not just by how good it sounds.

Imagine a general in middle of war, stopping defending his people and let every one on his side perish, because of ‘ Peace ‘ and ´ Forgiveness’. If something sounds good it does not mean its necessarly aligned with Maat.

Ethics should not be built on things that sound good, its deeper than that,

A general in war, when he captures the enemy, one can argue:

A: release the enemy and forgive him. We already won, and lets be good example and have even more honor, the enemy cannot do anything anyway we already won=>Thats backing the decision by ´forgiveness’

B:destroy the enemy he attacked us and he deserves that, not doing so is not being loyal to us , we all choose you to be general, and we want the enemy to be destroyed especially that he attacked us, if you dont do that you are not being loyal=> backing decision by ´loyalty’ to the duty.

C: we promised enemy that whoever wins should not destroy the other, lets release him, we should be honest and not manipulate => thats backing it with honesty

D: we do not care if we promised something, refusing to destroy enemy is weakness => thats backing the claim with ‘strenght’

E: lets release him, we cannot fear that peasant, let him be, if he does something we will humble him agaain => thats backed by bravery

We can have multiple contradicting decisions and all backed by ´virtues’

Being aligned with Maat is not backing decision by a virtue.

The decision itself should be aligned with Maat not the virtue we use as backup being aligned with Maat.

So wisdom enters into play. Thats how i view the matter.

Acting from virtue is not necessarily being aligned with Maat.

And we see people acting from virtue, but because of ignorance, ending up with decisions aligned with Izfet.

You realize that your skills for communication need to be improved. You are not very good at communicating in an effective way. That is fine, most people have this same problem. So the only way you will get better at this is by actually practicing this skill. You will never improve if you are getting a computer to try to do the work for you and you are never actually working on building this skill for yourself.

Plus you can give us the basic amount of respect to treat us as functional humans who have some consciousness who can understand what you are saying. We might agree with you or we might disagree, but you can talk to us like we are functional humans. We are not horses so you don't need to treat us like horses.

 

[Beauty]

Plus you can give us the basic amount of respect to treat us as functional humans who have some consciousness who can understand what you are saying. We might agree with you or we might disagree, but you can talk to us like we are functional humans. We are not horses so you don't need to treat us like horses.

ἐπίκληση στην αυθεντία (epiklisi stin afentia)

´Man is by nature a social animal.‘ aristotle
´Man is a reasoning animal.’ Seneca

Will you tell them that ? Or when its Aristotle or seneca you nod and affirm? I personally im not a slave of anyone, Aristotle himself i will disagree with him. And Aristotle himself will see no issue with that.

I am not in shortage of quotes i can bring many philosophers, which said same or worse than what i said, would you tell them that? No, you will shake your head, nod, and admire how the quote was a genius.

Thank you for this reply, in my previous one i did not mention examples for the fallacy, because i wanted to quote no one, but you proved it here.

ἐπίκληση στην αυθεντία (epiklisi stin afentia)

 

[ModernHeathen88]

First of all, thank you to everyone who took the time to read and respond, positive and negative. I appreciate it.

There's many things I haven't shared and won't share here. I am not going to go through and reply to everyone, although I have read all of them.

I understand and take full accountability of my actions, there are no excuses and I will not beg my wife to stay.

I'm working on being a better person for myself.

Again, thank you all for the replies. I deeply appreciate all of you.

 

[Beauty]

I had some weird near misses, near misses not the ones that look normal, but ones who caused by being extremely unlucky, also the way they missed me was extreme good luck, on top of that i found an accident on road, which made me think its a sign and canceled night drive, on top of that a neighbor abnormally appeared and caused me to change road i normally take. And started telling me how wonderful i am. Those events were abnormal. And they happened all in span of less than 1 hour.

I find it cringy to write this but i suspect someone tried cursing me, those may be just normal occurrences, but this was weird, anyway, tomorrow i will do Goddess Nemesis ritual and report to her this like a child reporting a scrapped knee to his mom.

On my side i forgive in case ( 0.1% probability ) someone tried doing something. But from tomorrow i will start taking my psychic defense seriously.

In the same time, i will indeed take this as a sign, to stop arguing with members on ideas since its futile, for reasons i explained above.so i will not reply to future comments.

I also find it weird that the moment i took this decision i found my previous messages got approved.

again, the above may have been (99.99% probability) just coincidence. I do not want to join they have cursed me club. First and last time i mention this.

No one can do something to a true Devotee.

O son of Kuntī, declare it boldly that My devotee never perishes
-Bhagavad Gita

Hail the Zeus and all the Gods

 

[Henu the Great]

I had some weird near misses, near misses not the ones that look normal, but ones who caused by being extremely unlucky, also the way they missed me was extreme good luck, on top of that i found an accident on road, which made me think its a sign and canceled night drive, on top of that a neighbor abnormally appeared and caused me to change road i normally take. And started telling me how wonderful i am. Those events were abnormal. And they happened all in span of less than 1 hour.

I find it cringy to write this but i suspect someone tried cursing me, those may be just normal occurrences, but this was weird, anyway, tomorrow i will do Goddess Nemesis ritual and report to her this like a child reporting a scrapped knee to his mom.

On my side i forgive in case ( 0.1% probability ) someone tried doing something. But from tomorrow i will start taking my psychic defense seriously.

In the same time, i will indeed take this as a sign, to stop arguing with members on ideas since its futile, for reasons i explained above.so i will not reply to future comments.

I also find it weird that the moment i took this decision i found my previous messages got approved.

again, the above may have been (99.99% probability) just coincidence. I do not want to join they have cursed me club. First and last time i mention this.

No one can do something to a true Devotee.

O son of Kuntī, declare it boldly that My devotee never perishes
-Bhagavad Gita

Hail the Zeus and all the Gods

No one cursed you, and messages are approved by moderator, and usually in a batch.

 

[Hidden Warrior [SG]]

Dear SG, kindly, this specific idea, i guarantee no one can argue against it, i guarantee.

I am talking about the main idea, i will repeat the idea:

Backing a decision with a virtue, does not mean the decision itself is aligned with Maat.

as i said, we can have opposing decisions backed by virtues, and some of them will be aligned with Maat some with Izfet.

Kindly, i want to point to you something, this is the second time you mention the High Priests in reply to me, i do not appreciate putting them in front line of ideas like if when i say 100% honesty is bad, i mean by consequence the High Priests are aligned with Izfet, or they are dishonest,

That is not what i mean, the subject is complex just read again my messages please,

I also i believe it is better if we do not mention the High Priests as example in this,

Its like when i debate someone about girls for example, and he tells me : lets take example of your sister.

No, do not talk about my sister and do not bring her into this. Lets talk about the ideas, that is why it will be better not mentioning the High Priests. Lets discuss the ideas without mentioning them.

Dear SG, kindly, is not that simple, with all my respect SG, let me explain to you my idea,

We can have 3 actions, all threee backed by the virtues that you will align with the cures,

And then when we examine the 3 decisions, we will find that 2 are aligned with izfet and 1 is aligned with Maat,

Backing a decision with a virtue DOES NOT mean the decision is aligned with Maat. Ignorance and wisdom play big role in this.

This is impossible to debate by the way, i guarantee you.

It is not about handling the truth, you did not get what i mean,

Decision1 => backed by Virtue X
Decision2 => backed by Virtue Y
Decision3 => backed by virtue Z

The three decisions backed by virtues does not mean the decisions themselves are aligned with Maat, one can be ignorant and do an act that is backed by virtue and in same time aligned with Izfet.

Please do not bring High Priests or Clergy on this, and we all know the efforts and all good things they did. Do not position me against everyone please,

Now i am paying more attention to not slip and say something inappropriate more than i am paying attention to give idea, but still, what i said, is impossible to debate, since it is the truth. I am talking about the main idea, impossible to debate, believe me.

Thank you SG for your reply!

I think you really don't understand. You cannot guarantee anything of this kind. You are not a supreme authority in Theological studies. You just keep affirming again and again whatever comes to your mind like they are 100% true facts, which are not.

I will bring High Priest Zevios Metathronos and the Clergy in my replies every time I want. Your opposition really makes me wonder whether you are just trying to inject you ideas as truth by bypassing the authority of this Temple.
Moreover, this is confirmed by your victim behavior after being confronted about your ideas.

 

[Recycler1337]

Yes it is cheating.. you can't just say it isn't. Hopefully there is some positive resolution, either a new start in life when it comes to love, or they work out the problems that exploded to this extent in the relationship.

This is an extremely mild form of cheating; they have children and a family, and he confessed right away and didn't have affairs on the side.

 

[Hidden Warrior [SG]]

Since i saw before how many talk like no one can have better opinion than a clergy i want to kindly adress this.

The High Priest himself ( since you love mentioning High Priests) said the High Priests are chosen in a way that they are 99.99% right, he left himself margin of mistake even if i do not agree with that notion and i believe above a level one is always right, since i see it from journey perspective, it becomes all about refining rather than right wrong.

HPS Pythia herself, ( since you love mentioning High Priests) did mistakes ( which i do not label as mistakes, my personal take is that she never did a mistake, she was walking a path, the path is right, so its all about refining and getting to next level, not right and wrong).

I do not understand the forum attitude which some have of : a new member cannot correct an established member or give an idea better than a clergy member, this is 100000% wrong.

And i saw this stated by established members and i do not want to quote, i also do not want to quote some things, i am going as clean as possible.

[Argumentum ad verecundiam]
ἐπίκληση στην αυθεντία (epiklisi stin afentia)

if a child gives an idea better than Platon, then the child DID give an idea better than Platon.

When we talk ideas, we talk ideas, appealing to authority is a fallacy. If the idea is good the idea is good, it cannot be weak just because its not Platon saying it.

And its a weakness to praise anything just because Platon said it.

‘The sky is blue, the birds are singing’ by some famous philosopher

=> Oh man , you saw what he said, he means he is focused on simple things even he engages in complicated topics, crazy man, that was some deep quote, i will meditate on it, oh man.

Some random guy gives some very sophisticated ideas:

=> ( mental process: who is this guy? I do not know him) => idea not that good, its just meh.

I know now many will want to say how titles are backed by things and people not having those titles means they are not of that level so it means they cannot give something of that caliber, if someone thinks that, he did not understand the above.

Here again trying to push you ideas as an absolute truth. You do really think that your ideas are confronted only because you are "new", and not because they are not correct.
The idea that what you say is wrong doesn't even cross your mind apparently.

 

[Henu the Great]

This is an extremely mild form of cheating; they have children and a family, and he confessed right away and didn't have affairs on the side.

It is a breach of trust regardless... And many, if not most (no data on this), people find this repulsive.

 

[Ol argedco luciftias]

ἐπίκληση στην αυθεντία (epiklisi stin afentia)

´Man is by nature a social animal.‘ aristotle
´Man is a reasoning animal.’ Seneca

Will you tell them that ? Or when its Aristotle or seneca you nod and affirm? I personally im not a slave of anyone, Aristotle himself i will disagree with him. And Aristotle himself will see no issue with that.

I am not in shortage of quotes i can bring many philosophers, which said same or worse than what i said, would you tell them that? No, you will shake your head, nod, and admire how the quote was a genius.

Thank you for this reply, in my previous one i did not mention examples for the fallacy, because i wanted to quote no one, but you proved it here.

ἐπίκληση στην αυθεντία (epiklisi stin afentia)

Keep trolling. You are only turning yourself into the joke, as you have done on your previous account names.

 

[616Taysha]

Keep trolling. You are only turning yourself into the joke, as you have done on your previous account names.

Another GoldenWings account?

Ah well, at least people will see what miserable wretch one can become if they resort to just trolling, and not actually improving themselves