Pioneer1

frankster Interesting definition. My definition of Liberty is the state of having few restrictions. The fewer the restrictions....the more the Liberty. So while I don't believe in "degrees of freedom", by that definition there can indeed be DEGREES OF LIBERTY. Perhaps it is the detailed expression of ideas and their proper articulation rather than making broad sweeping generalizations and holding extreme beliefs.....that you are CONFUSING with "ambiguity" "switching up" and "dishonesty". A fool will look at a Mayor, a Governor, and a President each occupying positions in Executive Office, and say: "Ok, so which one is in charge? I thought the President held the executive office, but now they're saying the Mayor holds the executive office. And the other day on television somebody said they were running for the executive office of Governor! Somebody is lying to us. Somebody is being dishonest. They are trying to switch it up and confuse us. Everybody can't hold the same office!" It's not that people are lying or being dishonest; it's that he doesn't have the intellect to understand the complexities of the U.S. political system....lol. Instead of trying to engage in intelligent discussions above his grade, his ass needs to be slinging a rag at a carwash somewhere....lol. My point? The confusion that one may call "dishonesty" or "switching up" only ends when you are intelligent and analytical enough in thought to understand the ideas being presented to you. At that point...it no longer confuses you or seems like deception and dishonesty because it makes sense to you now. 🌤️ ......if you ever reach that point, lol.

frankster Which Restriction are not an imposition? There may be many but for the sake of this discussion to lessen the confusion, as I stated previously the ONLY time I will use the word "restriction" is in accordance with a limit that has been imposed by man, machine, or beast. Yes it's happening to you the whole person.....you cannot separate your Aspects from yourself - you and your Aspects are One. Not necessarily. Some people lose their hearing...an aspect of themselves...but THEY are still here. Some people lose a leg or both legs...aspects of themselves...but THEY are still here. Likewise, their legs or hearing can be restricted while the rest of their body is "free" to move about. No not a crime....just intellectually dishonest How so? You consider a person who is not given over to EXTREMES in thought or philosophy, "intellectually dishonest"??? You cannot be generally not free and be unrestrictedly free individually. You can if that which is unrestricted are individual PARTS of you. The individual is confined in the generality....they are free within their limitations - degrees of freedom No "degrees" of freedom. Either it's free or it's not. Perhaps you're speaking of liberty. Physical/bodily aspects are restricted by....Ability Range of Motion Flexibility Mobility Endurance and Sickness I'd rather use the term "limited" rather than restricted. Restricted implies that those limitations were imposed upon them...which is often not the case. If some aspects are free....that is a degree of freedom Only if they have a car and is capable of driving.... Only if that flavor is available..... Those are limitations....not imposed restrictions. Once they have a car...they can drive. Once those flavors are available...they can taste them. Nobody is holding them from it or telling them they can't. Which aspect of their lives has unrestricted freedom?.... In most healthy people: Breathing. Thinking. Moving their limbs. Otherwise it is all degrees of freedom.... Perhaps what you're calling "degrees of freedom" are actually degrees of LIBERTY. Most Freedoms have Limitations....Name the freedom that has no restriction? If it's free...no restrictions are imposed. Imposed by what or whom? Man, machine, or beast Name the Unrestricted Aspects? I just did. See the above. Then name the limit that is neither Natural or Man made? Those set by Divine Forces, such as Out of Body Experiences So now you accept limitations as a part of freedom....That is what is meant by degrees of freedom.. There has always been limitations in freedom. But they aren't imposed by man, machine, or beast...they are natural. You just admitted that your free birds have Limitations Correct. They are limited to this atmosphere. They can't fly to the moon....lol. How then are they free....by your definition? Because for the most part, their limits are NATURAL...and not man, machine, or beast made restrictions. Can they still move eat breathe and flap their wings.....then they are free to those degrees. Now you're qualifying...CERTAIN ASPECTS of their lives are free while THEY are not. What or which birds exist that have no restriction? Again, using "restriction" in the context of THIS discussion....most wild birds. Since we have already that physics/nature imposes restrictions Those so-called "restrictions" are natural limitations and as I've said over and over again, they have been excluded. We don't count those. The only other impositions is Man or Beast Or machine. Which is arguably "man" as well. Where or what are the Freedoms that birds possess that are exclusive of Man Beast and Nature Restrictions? If they are wild, the freedom to fly and to fly where they desire within the boundaries of NATURE. Tell me about the free birds and their freedoms? I just did. *Another interesting thing about freedom is that it works just as well in the negative as it does in the postive. Something can be FREE OF just like can be FREE TO. Free of sugar Free of additives Free of lies Free of corruption When something is FREE OF sugar.....there is NO DEGREE of sugar it contains. If it contains ANY sugar....it's no longer "free of" sugar.

Or opens up a new theater.....lol.

@frankster With all of our discussion about Freedom and Restrictions.....let us not confuse Freedom with Liberty. Although they're closely related, they are actually two separate concepts....lol

frankster Ok..... This misunderstanding occurred because of your "zero sum" statements. Thank you for the Re-Direction.. No problem So there is "IMPOSED" restrictions on your freedom If restrictions are imposed on it, it's no longer freedom. And Natural Limits and Boundaries on your freedom....Natural Restrictions Correct We are all experiencing varying degrees of freedom If you want to call the freedom we have in different aspects of our lives "varying degrees of OUR freedom" you can do so. I don't agree with it because I think it's not specific enough and misleading, but I won't stop you...lol. Most of freedom is in three parts... Knowing(Wisdom)that you are free.. Willingness(Courage) to exercise that freedom. Ability(Diligence/Dexterity) to exercise that freedom If Any of the above is missing....Then that degree of freedom is severely compromised Hmmm..... Interesting take on the components of freedom. So according to YOUR understanding of freedom...which incorporates willingness....if a person doesn't WANT and is UNWILLING to work for a living....they don't have the freedom to work? If you cannot see or admit to where you committed a "STRADDLE" while trying to "HEDGE" your arguments.... No. Although I didn't know straddling was a crime or violation of ethics to be "committed"...lol. Then I see no reason to show you your logical flaws in the future.... Especially when you...based on the reasoning you've displayed in our exchanges...aren't qualified to do so anyway, lol. By Modifying and Qualifying with the Word "IMPOSED" Yes. I figured that would make things a little bit more clear. I should also...instead of using them together...separate the terms LIMIT from RESTRICTION because using those two words together so much seems to also cause a little confusion. From hence forth, when I say "restriction" I mean IMPOSED LIMITATIONS. Exactly... But by your own definition....we should not be free at all in any way Again, it goes back to "generally speaking". If you're talking about the whole person and how they relate to the society they're in -NO, they aren't free. THEY are restricted by rules and regulation in society. If you're talking about individual aspects of their bodies and lives -YES, some aspect of their lives are free. THEY are free to drive to the store THEY are free to choose the flavor of ice cream they want to eat Having some Individual freedom and not being generally free is a contradiction of your definition of freedom It doesn't contradict my definition of freedom. Again, it depends whether we're talking about the whole person and how they relate to society OR individual aspect of a person and their lives? Then you are now saying they are degrees and levels to freedom....but only unwilling to admit it No. Freedom means unrestricted....no imposed limits. But CERTAIN ASPECTS of a person's life may be unrestricted while OTHER ASPECTS of their life is. You're confusing this with "degree" of overall freedom. Here is a confusing statement of yours.... Well I'll see if I can clarify, lol. You are confessing that they do have limits....on that we now agree It's not a confession....because I've never hid or denied it, lol. but Are you saying that birds limitation aren't man made or that they are made by nature? For most wild birds, their only limitations are those by nature. Which is why I consider them free. Now sometimes a human can put devices on wild birds to limit their abilities OR can put obstacles out in the wild to limit their access to certain areas....and at that point they are no longer free. Isn't that a real current and present possible for birds....Capture or and Predation by other animals and birds. Yes. And if they are captured, they are no longer free. Then yes they are restricted....They live in degrees or levels of freedom No, they aren't living in ANY degree of freedom....they are held captive. Is Your basic premise then is that Man is not part of Nature? My premise with the wild birds example is that ANY BEING...man or beast...who IMPOSES LIMITATIONS/RESTRICTIONS on birds, has taken away their freedom. If not imposed by Nature.....then Imposed by Whom or What? If it's IMPOSED....then it would have to be by man or beast. Both Man and other creatures({other}birds included) Impose on birds.... Correct Then they are no longer free at that point. Some wild birds....I'm guessing most...ARE free. But some are not.

🤣 Careful not to smoke TOO much herb while watching a video about Zombies. ....lest you turn from a spectator to a PARTICIPANT, lol.

ProfD I just don't see the point in dropping bombs on schools & other places just because a country isn't friendly &/or they are building nuclear weapons. I don't agree with it, but it's to inspire fear and pain. When you're dealing with people who are so brave that they don't care whether THEY live or die in the fight, then you go after their loved ones like women and children who are innocent and THAT will hurt you more than your own death. Again, I don't agree with it...but that's the logic behind it. Seeing your family killed in front of you is worse than death. Much more powerful countries have nukes. The USA isn't bombing Russia. They are supposed to be the biggest threat. We already know it's BS used to justify military spending Russia and the United States are the two nation with the most White people of any other nation on the planet. Why would they actually be enemies? If anything, they'd be sticking together to keep the other nations of color in check...lol.

ProfD I.still don't see how these zombies are productive & constructive in solving problems or liberating their countries from oppressors. Some claim that the practice of zombification is productive in providing a manual labor force; however I think it's DESTRUCTIVE when it comes to the moral and ethical fabric of society. The negatives seem to outweigh the positives. I don't believe a bunch of innocent people should be killed in that regard. Me neither. However if your enemy kills millions of YOUR innocent civilians, how else would you get "even" with them or retaliate?

ProfD Kicking out the French was a start. Haiti did it 222 years ago & fheir sh8t hasn't been right yet. Could take a long time to see positive results. Kicking the French out and inviting the Russians in doesn't look very promising or revolutionary. Right. The proof is in the pudding. Actions speak louder than words & marching around. This is why I say, time will tell.

frankster Ok, I think I MAY see what the issue is....... I mentioned this before but maybe I need to mention it to you again. When I talk of freedom, I'm speaking of being free from IMPOSED restrictions and limitations! In other words, a wild bird is free to fly as high as it CAN fly....as opposed to being tethered or caged or having a dome blocking it. Understand? Man/Being made restrictions and limitations are what I'm referring to that inhibit freedom. Not the limitations and restrictions that occur within nature such as natural abilities, disabilities, or natural limits and boundaries. I thought this went without saying....lol. Being free to walk doesn't mean you can do like Forest Gump and walk around the whole planet until you grow a beard, lol. The Subject is Freedom.....and you have already describe it by the definition you gave Correct me if and when I am Wrong..... You stated "That's because it's a zero sum status. Either you're free or you're not. There is no "degree" or "amount" of freedom that can be negotiated or restricted." Correct. However when I say negotiated or restricted I'm speaking of IMPOSED restrictions. Not natural limits and boundaries. In that case given your definition of Freedom nobody is free but God/Nature....cause all humans are limited in some way. Again, I speak of imposed limits. Not natural limitations. S/He was never free according to your description and definition. It depends on their living conditions before incarceration but generally speaking, nobody who lives in a society is free. If you do not have the ability to do it...... then you are not free to do it You can be free to do it but not ABLE to do it. Think of a person in a wheelchair. They are free to get up and walk if they want to, but are usually not able to practice that freedom. When A doctor asks his or her patience for a semen sample.....are they having sex? No When a Doctor swabs a woman's vagina for vaginal fluid.....are they having sex? No Yes....it suggests that. What is more likely is that the Cubi is reaping emotional energy that they get by simulating sex.....Loosh Speculation found the time Wasted your time, lol. poor example.. Even poorer understanding Those are the ones most susceptible.....to brainwashing How so? How are people who rely on what they've experienced and witnessed for themselves as opposed to believing the 3rd, 4th, and 5th hand information they may get off of the internet, more susceptible to brain washing??? Maybe you would learn something...its up to you. Every time I interact with you I learn something, lol. What's this a trick question?? No, it's a direct and specific question that you failed to answer because you couldn't. Instead you went on a quote-fest trying to find contradictions in my statements INSTEAD of providing the actual statement that you accused me of. Since you only deny your own quote and there implications. You provided 5 or 6 quotes of mine that I just stood by 100%....lol. Based on the Above definition give an example of someone that enjoys and exercises this type of freedom? I don't know of any. Which is why I said we (as humans) are not free, generally speaking. Note your quote in red below..... That is a limitation you have place on freedom.....which as you stated is oxymoronic Saying we are free in "some regards" is a QUALIFICATION. Meaning certain aspects OF our lives are free, while WE aren't free in general. For example -Free to use your left arm -Free to walk to the grocery store -Free to eat These are individual freedoms that most people are allowed to exercise, but it doesn't mean THEY are free generally speaking. How is "generally speaking we are not free" and "we are free individually in some regards"....not freedom of degrees or limited freedom? Because the freedom itself isn't limited (imposed limitation)...or else it wouldn't be freedom. What's being limited is the DESCRIPTION of what we're talking about as we narrow down WHAT specifically is free. As I said earlier..... A person's ARM is free. A person is free to eat food and drink water. .....doesn't mean that person is free in general, because they live under man made rules and restrictions. Generally we are not free but individually we are in some regards......thats a straddle - hence both sides of the fence or hedge That's not a straddle. That's a lack of your ability to think analytically....lol. As individuals are free in SOME regards meaning in some specific details. For example.... A person can be locked up in prison: -THEY aren't free...but their arm is free. -THEY aren't free...but they are free to get up and go to the bathroom -THEY aren't free...but they are free to look at television The person is free in SOME REGARDS but generally speaking isn't. Most wild animals are free in general, while most humans are free in some or certain regards....but generally restricted. Are you saying birds in the wild have...."no limits or restrictions."? No. They do have limits but they usually aren't man made or made by another animal. If they are limited by humans or other animals, then they are no longer free. They are restricted. When we talk of freedom, we're talking about lack of man/being made limits or restrictions. Again, most physical beings have limits and restrictions due to the laws of physics. I'm not talking about the limits and restrictions that come with nature. I'm talking about limits and restrictions that are imposed.

Now you accuse me of "switching" by producing THIS quote "Again, that freedom must be qualified" As with the others, I stand by THIS quote 100%! What does THIS quote....of me saying that freedom must be qualified....have to do with YOUR claim, that I said we are free??? Because that's what you accused me of. I said we're NOT free. Then you produce my quote saying: "Sometimes a person's ability is restricted by an outside force. Sometimes a person never HAD the ability in the past, to begin with." Again, stand by this one too. Where in THIS quote did I say that we were free??? 1. You have NOT proven your accusation of me at some point claiming that we were generally free. Something I haven't said at any point in our discussion OR on this site! 2. You've seem to be attempting to show me contradicting myself by saying freedom is unlimited while it also saying it needs to be qualified...as if those two statements contradict eachother. They don't. Let me see if I can make it plainer or clearer for you...... Freedom means no limits or restrictions. Yes "qualifying" something restricts and limits....but not necessary the subject itself but the DESCRIPTION of the subject or the STATEMENT you made ON the subject. It narrows the statement or NUMBER of the subjects we're talking about down to to the SPECIFIC subject or subjects we're talking about and focuses us on it! For example..... You can make the claim: BIRDS HAVE FREEDOM But this isn't necessarily true until you QUALIFY it! How do you do that? By saying BIRDS IN THE WILD HAVE FREEDOM .....because caged birds don't. Now you've taking that statement and qualified it to make it true. Now, did my qualifying OR limiting the statement of WHICH birds I was talking about limit the ability of those wild birds to fly??? I hope you understand the point I'm making.....lol.

frankster Oh boy....... Here you go playing games again. You and your word salads....lol. Now let's put this in perspective............. I asked you: frankster....when did I EVER say that we were free generally speaking??? You said: You said both... I'm not sure what "both" means, but I asked you to SHOW with context where I said WE WERE FREE GENERALLY SPEAKING That's what I asked you to do. Your response??? First you produce this quote of mine: "That's because it's a zero sum status. Either you're free or you're not. There is no "degree" or "amount" of freedom that can be negotiated or restricted." ....which I stand by. Now, where in it do I declare that we are free???? Next, you produce THIS quote of mine: "Freedom is simply the state of being free. It's not a measurement or level of HOW free somebody is. Again, there are no limitations to actual freedom." ....again, I stand by it 100%. And WHERE in it do I say that we are free????? Because that's the question I asked you. Then you ran back through the thread and pulled THIS quote of mine: "There is no such thing as "limited freedom". That's an oxymoron. If it's limited, it's not free." Again, I stand by this quote! And again, where in it do I say that we are free???? I asked you to produce the quote where you accused me of saying that we were free!

ProfD Right. I reject the belief that white supremacists are thr smartest people on the planet. A willingness to gain power & control by any means necessary doesn't make a person smarter. True. However if you can't come up with an idea or plan to resist it or defeat them, what does that make you? If a person is constantly cheating you out of your money....over and over again...that says a lot about both them AND you, lol. Most old people aren't producing much of anything. I'm not sure how true that is.....lol....however the fact that they even MADE it to an advanced age in this world is worthy of some respect. There were so many things that could have took them out, from violence to disease. There were so many things they could have killed themselves over from loss of love ones to extreme physical distress. .....but they're still here and made it to be "old"....lol. They're still in the race and didn't give up. If they don't do anything else...that in and of itself is commendable. In my opinion, unless you were institutionalized all of your life...if you made it past 50 in THIS world...you deserve to be cared for by the government for the rest of your life while you live a life of comfort and ease. Focus on your health and having fun. This falls under the ridiculous & absurd. This is because you probably don't know the history of zombies in both Africa and Haiti and what a zombie really is. I suggest you get the movie/television version of what zombies are out of your mind and research the TRUE history of zombies in Haiti to have a better understanding of it. They went to war just fine without it. Same objective. Killing people. The objective of most wars isn't JUST to kill people...but to WIN the war and protect one's interests. Like Tom Hanks said in Saving Private Ryan....our objective is to win the war.

frankster Were you or were you not qualifying the subject? Again, to qualify is to limit the DESCRIPTION of the subject....not the subject itself The more Ability the more freedom Not necessarily. A person in prison can be wounded to the point of being disabled then completely healed of their wounds and able bodied again all WHILE still incarcerated. They are intimately Related if not co-joined You cannot exercise a freedom with the ability to do it Correct, you can't EXERCISE it....but you still have it. Just because you don't have the ability to EXERCISE something...doesn't mean you don't have it in your possession. Sex is biology and biology is genetics.... Gender is Social.....Role or Behavior I wouldn't say that biology IS genetics. I would say that genetics IS A FORM OF biology; one of the many components of it. But I agree. Sex is biological where as gender is social. My understanding is that both Spirit and Soul Transcends Sex....but not necessarily Gender. I used to believe that Spirits/Souls didn't have a sex assigned to Them, but now I'm not sure. Plenty of Spiritual Beings have been known to engage in sexual acts. Like the Incubus and Succubus. This suggests that THEY are of a particular sex Themselves. When I use the word sex...I am not referring to the Act I know, neither was I. When I have the time...I will I don't think you HAVE enough time to find that which doesn't exist...lol. Using a stick shift one must shift the gear stick and some it is back and forth....only the stick shifts - the car is always going forward and accelerating according to how much gas it is being given. Between gears the car is not going backwards....it is no longer accelerating - it maintains the momentum before the shift was initiated if left out of gear long enough...it will eventually decelerated - at no time during the shifting is the car going backwards. For it to go backwards the driver must stop the car and shift it into reverse and then it will only go backwards Hence your example makes no sense You're missing the point by being too technical...lol. The point is for someone who does NOT understand how a stick shift works, the driver constantly changing gears doesn't make sense to THEM. They don't understand...so they can't make sense of it. That was the point of that analogy. No need to explain how clutches work...lol. Yes...and that precisely why you are - brainwashed or duped by the constant propaganda I'm talking about what I've seen IN THE UNITED STATES....not what I heard or saw on the internet about what happened elsewhere. It's hard to brainwash somebody on what they've actually seen and witnessed repeatedly. If you want to go into this start another thread..... Well....YOU the one who brought up that scenario in the first place. I was just responding to it. Don't START no distractions - won't BE no distractions, lol.

ProfD I've heard the greed & corruption in under-developed countries is the reason wages are low & high-ranking government officials & contractors work together stealing money while doing the bare minimum to build the country &/or sustain it. That and brain-drain. A lot of the best talent and intelligent people....especially the youth...often LEAVE these nations and come to places like the United States where they feel their intelligence and talent will pay off best and get them the most benefits. The people would have to overthrown the corrupt government & put folks in place who are working for the greater good of their country. Captain Ibrahim Traore is a good example of a leader who appears to be working to make his country...Burkina Faso better. We'll have to see..... I need to see more than just armed men with big football shoulders walking around in military uniforms with masks over their faces talking about how they kicked out the French. I need to see how the infrastructure and buildings are improving. I need to see paved streets and roads. I need to see farms with crops being produced. I need to see how they're building new better hospitals for the people.