O QUE LEMBRO, TENHO.

Ask me anything   "Olhar para trás após uma longa caminhada pode fazer perder a noção da distância que percorremos."

twitter.com/sergiorauber:

    Digital Pidgin: The wise man Bernard is not responding, so let me pose the dilemma publicly: →

    digitalpidgin:

    Should we surrender ourselves to the liquefactionary pull of Eros, and let ourselves be repeatedly drained and ruined by it, hoping that with each successive cycle and catastrophe we gain more autonomy over the process (or just abandoning all concern with autonomy entirely)? Or should we try to…

    Dear, no matter you resist and no matter you aquiesce the only important thing is to know what for to do so. What is emotionally bonded to resistance or aquiescense. Freud does put Eros on opposition to Thanatos and said the more we aquiesce to Eros closer we got to its antagonist. I guess that there is no perfect autonomy due the cognitive limitation of senses and reason, and until now we desgracedly managed to  survive. I felt the correct answer remains on to aquiesce and to resist, but somehow I can’t explain why.

    Hope you find the answer. You’re questioning deeply and you deserve that.

    Sorry for these raw lines from a non-English speaker, querying you for a doubled attention reading. 

    (via digitalpidgin-deactivated201112)

    — 1 year ago with 14 notes

    #post  #reply  #digitalpidgin  #link  #ask 
    1. mason-mem said: why do you try to ‘integrate’ philosophical elements? most philosophies barely accord with themselves. some logical structures just don’t hang or frame well together. the problem is scale and flow and aim
    2. courier5 said: the edges of our reality tunnels are coded in binary, demonic conflicts. a transformational, alchemical, majickal approach requires a tertiary stance. chess as experienced from the players’ perspective, rather than the pawn’s. specifics here…unsure