individualcopycatism

are you an individual or an individual part on the assembly line
i left my house put on an ensemble
entered the train to sit next to my fashion twin
no i have not stooped into the valleys of vanity
i sat next to a guy wearing the same equivalent jeans the same colour
even the same back pack
it started to make me think
i picked this ensemble to fit in
but how many people do
for clothes provide two functions
warmth and statement
and across from me was a guy who have a jacket which i have at home and could of easily worn that day
which gets me onto how does individuality work within the confounds of a city
with regards to clothing
there are three roles
purchase alter or make your own
if you purchase then its possible others can purchase it and how man have been in the position where
their item of clothing or attempt at individualism has been thwarted by someone asking where did you get it
for they'd like to get it also

this is quite a problem for some people but is it only a problem of the vain but is it only a problem of the vain but if you wanted to make a statement you may get to this crossroad also
which have same people going to charity shops looking for retro outfits or altering them which may to a craze where your niche becomes a noose
and are unwillingly swept with the wheelbarrow
like with the glasses i have people come up to me asking
if their prescription
or otherwise which
can be perceived as a crowd follower

so does individualism always spawn into a group society perhaps that might be its aim for
fads die out
and never really get the said statement
but societies normally stay true
so is individualisms main problem the ferocity of fads and those who favour them
for their vain ends and favour the message none
such as che Guevara merchandisers
an anti capitalist malformed for capital
or for cool and type casting and boxing

so does individualism transform into individual grouping
for do originality and individuality collide
coincide and fraternise
or does individualism
transcend the boxes
used to exploit it
such as fashion
fashion accessories
which means you are failing your objectives
instead of rising to them
for the question beckons
can naked people be individuals
or are they really individuals
for the externals are
but the immaterial the abstract the illustrious


possibly

Boxes and open spaces

boxes and open spaces

boxes are used to carry and store things in
boxes are a way of containing controlling contorting
boxes are used for safety emotionally or agenda based
perhaps to protect yourself or protect a concept
some go by the saying those who are not for me are against me
but is everything so clear cut
hand in had with boxes are labels we are pattern based organisms but to what extent
but boxes are created internally or externally
logically if a +b then c
but the important part of the equation is if
proposing their could be an if not
boxes are limited their process is to limit to put a place holder upon something
can everything be boxed and should everything be boxed
 should birds be caged
the thing with boxes is we sometimes forget what the said thing was without a box
also with boxes we can seal them up store them up and never reopen them again
you may have boxes but who are the manufacturers of your boxes
for how ca we have boxes of things we have never solely experienced
this is where the box "society" comes in
it gives you these boxes which over time you identify with
man woman black white old young
and within that architecture gives rise to opposing forces and warring factions
and even hate

But what of the free spirit the wind like wanderer the enemy of the confined this seems to be their countless struggle the struggle against confinement restriction and regulation the cage-less creature perhaps tapping into the inner essence of man


You were born with wings, why prefer to crawl through life? ~Rumi

Become the sky. Take an axe to the prison wall. Escape. ~Rumi

Why do you stay in prison when the door is so wide open? ~Rumi

Questioning why we stay in boxes for humanity is boxed cut off from nature cut off even from itself 

limitless lividness or blissfulness

 limitless lividness or blissfulness

I watched this film quite some moments ago the film resolves around the drug nzt

the film limitless proposes something is limited implying ourselves as well as the characters but it questions the nature of the limited using the premise that we use 10 sometimes 20% of our brain or its potential
the former has been refuted and rebuked time and time again that we use 10 or 20% of our brain and rather we use all of it at different times

which then leaves the potential without philosophical getting into what is potential
could be argued
the film follows the exploits of a failing writer until the introduction of nzt
with his new clarity he finishes his book and looks to be a success but his limited supply means he will back to his limited ways so needs it to become limitless as his potential

He then sets his eyes on financial gain but runs into the counterproductive people but skipping the drama element one of the counterproductive persons gets their hands on the nzt and you see the transformation and he retorts of his transformation using a broader vocabulary and having clearer more defined thoughts/thought patterns

its been quite some moments since i watched the movie but correct me if i am wrong their was a scene where  the nzt was said to heighten the senses and that you still need to input into yourself and i remarked for the most of the movie no one was really seen reading and the drama and action followed from this though they were limitless their imagination was limited and that we are all limitless it is ourselves who limit our power

if we come back to the heightened senses of intelligence if a person was left with a limitless credit card they would probably follow the same sort of trail that one can have intelligence but lack wisdom and that as easy as it came it will also go it reminds me of an intellectual lottery for how many people do you hear of winning the lottery using it to change the world or at least seriously impact their communities

for their is a scene in the movie when he is fighting some people in the tube and he uses scenes of bruce lee he remembered so he can fight off this group of attackers but it wasn't as fluid as if he actually trained in martial arts

the film really challenges the quick fix mentality and in a sense to what happens to people who lack wisdom but also since when did we equate intelligence with monetary gain and if you asked most people what they would do if they got smarter would probably do the same
at the end of movie we see a change in the character not just his hair cut providing some kind of symbolism
but now he has acquired wisdom for most of the film is about the ownership of nzt where you have various people attempting to get ownership of it at the end of the movie we see that the main character had previously been creating his own supply of nzt making his supply truly limitless but also has changed his synapses so he no longer needs nzt so no longer is reliant
and in a sense see him living up to his potential using intelligence in a supposedly less menial self centered way even though its quite tame

which got me onto imagination thinking out of the box and how the patterns of thought is overlooked with regards to intelligence for without previous intelligence the quick fix intelligence is like pearls before swine or building a house on quicksand no foundation the same some say with fiance where there are countless cases of people winning the lottery to then end up back in the place where they first started

for he was limited he could of used his heightened sense to discover the answers to mysteries or helped usher  in a renaissance or perhaps fix problems "societies ills" it for me seemed like an allegory of the philosopher the lover of wisdom that with our insights what do we do with it or limitless potential do we limit ourselves attempting to fit into boxes laid out for us does our imaginations need stimulation or are we in blissfulness in our ivory towers

A philosophical banquet in the divide

   The divide a philosophical buffet

Let me go on record saying the film was a philosophical banquet but by no means a masterpiece of a film due to dire dialogue racism and the like
i will not be going through the films plot because it was so dire for my taste that i had to skip through most of the film

So the film was a film set in the apocalyptic vein the film touches on so many points i will touch on the few that reached out to me

Many have talked about the films gory and sexual content as detractors for the film but it invoked so many questions about sexuality i feel i should point out the sexist nature that all the male characters were fully clothed and one out of the two female characters had to be in a dressing gown and nobody offered her more clothes i also knew straight away when seeing her something of a sexual nature was going to happen to her
and before things did i remarked at the male to female ratio and it would or could be a cause for concern

and as i thought she ended up in a sex scene first willfully and after that it became less willful and finally sex slave with her hands raised and tied after being dragged kicking and screaming and by the end of the film (of what i saw) relegated to just an object a sex object nothing more sometimes less

It really got me thinking about sexuality and how sexuality in its essence was about life and giving had been become about subjection and giving also you the reader may have caught on this already why could i see this coming before it came which brings us on to three inter-related topics

one sexuality for males

two sexuality for females

three sexuality in society/societies

for can we imagine a room where the male to female ratio is 8:1 or 15:1 or 25:1 how do we see it ending for the female is it possibly like the for mentioned scene i posited before or one even more dire for said female

it got me questioning what is sexuality for males for the male can be polygamous and the male plays only one real role in the fertilization process
one of fertilizing and for fertilization to happen the man must ejaculate this can lead to a male centered view of superiority and can cast the woman in the role of objectified
and give the man a kind of "god status" in a sense of having no repercussions for his role in fertilization and can simply move on to the next female for the fact the woman has a dual role in the fertilization process
Also the process of ejaculation and coitus is another factor for it can turn into the thruster and thrustee
a dual act separated into solo roles giver and receiver or in the previous case taker and receiver

then we have the females role in sexuality that females can be polygamous also for the fact that women don't need a rest period and can have coitus through all the stages of pregnancy
but the same outcome as the previous scene doesn't suddenly jump to mind if there is a 8:1 female to male ratio or 15:1 or 25:1
the film also highlights female attire and its sexual implications for what is sexual attire for males
and that sexuality for females can be one of submission there is even a porn niche for such things as their is for males but the difference is we can see both as niches but only one as a reality

This then brings us onto sexuality in society and how even the film portrayed her as the object and the night gown she was wearing as the gift wrapper
which bring us to the crossroads of is our society over sexualised or are the males over sexualised
And since the film is only a window to some peoples ordeal in the apocalyptic affair what would be others

though films never like to admit they are a segmented view

and how apocalyptic movies follow the same themes that in general the same people are rarely a high percentage of the strongly religious or the highly intellectual or idealists a point i picked up in the film that only one person in the film i saw read a book and in these movies females rarely ever are able to really defend themselves which is not the the case in the movie pandorum which i will review on a later date ( females able to protect themselves)

which are segments of society portrayed as the whole of society which for them wouldn't make an exciting movie but do films such as these just raise issues or perpetuate them do they show you what could happen or  provide a model to follow

and not to forget it is only viewing heterosexual sexuality in a spectrum

The film does make you think about yourself and how you would act in that situation and your views on sexuality and sexualism

And is female sexuality reactive in general and what is if there is healthy sexuality

and are there many women who escape that ordeal

problems of philosophy part 1

philosophy the love of wisdom
has been forgotten is a way of life
one cannot be a philosopher if one is merely text books and jargon
and they are just really fancy footed notion of simplistic ideals

philosophy is life it is ones being one reshapes one is remolded one is like water it can be of many states

philosophy has lost that people regurgitate without ever producing or improving on ideas writing papers of quantity not of quality
 why spend a thousand words mumbling over a subject which may be better said with a few lines

if philosophy is a way of life should it not deal with it not rummaging through ideas of archaic nature

philosophy is estranged from the very people it is here to influence the like minded and the not so

hiding behind doctorates yet professing to be ideally descendants of socrates who is so far away from the grotesque image they are.

the power of ones reasoning and ones argument meant one was qualified not their degrees

But corruption has sunk in selling books holding talks for name and office only

philosophy has fallen so far behind the other sciences it merely gives lips service to it

using science as back up yet it is not the case the other way round

philosophy begs importance begs to be acknowledged for works or yesteryear's

 siring scholars of impotent natures in matters of ideas and innovations

Originality??

originality is such a hard thing to do and the effort one needs to take to ensure it the problem arises of originality 

and publication

one can be original but the absence of publication then makes the originality at threat to thieves and eyes of lesser minds 

and to search if you are original gives opportunity of being found and no longer being original 

i now denounce descry 

 

i am rebel reasoner

this is a digression but this a showcase of my thoughts and interactive soliloquy 

What Happened to philosophy (introduction)

My first blog....
So i am descry the philosopher
so to begin with you may find it unusual or even confusing that i don't use all the types of convention punctuation
quirk or rebellion i will let you philosophise about that..


So to dive straight in i am dissatisfied with a few things which i will address in the subsequent blogs
For information is out there but we cannot always see
sometimes others are torches illuminating certain objects
or are pathways to higher consciousness
some just point us in the right direction

So the descrier is here asking "What happened to philosophy"