a few years after i quit the meetings my mum needed her medical directive signed and witnessed and she asked if i'd do it.
i was surprised to say the least!.
i think she was just angling to include me and maybe find some lever to get me involved again.
Yes! Absolutely yes!
I always respect the choices of my relatives even if I disagree. I want my choices to be respected, then...
Of course, before, until the last moment, I will boring it like a crazy to make it change his mind, but at the fatidic moment, I will respect his choice, even if I totally disgree!
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
So what we are describing with these "facts" is not the world in itself but how we've chosen to construct it in communities of meaning. It could be otherwise.
The description of the world is not the world, like a picture of me is not me.
This is a funny semiotic game who made at this time the happyness of Magritte.
But where do we go concretely and pragmatically by saying that, yes, things are how they are, but with another scheme, in another paradigm, they would have been different ? It's stating the obvious!
But why not ? Anyway changing of paradigm to explain and understand the reality don't have any influence of the reality. The earth will still have the same form, independantly of the naming of this form!
the watchtower no 1 for 2016, entitled 'why be honest', has this definition of lying on page 5:.
"saying something false to someone who is entitled to know the truth.".
so if i tell my husband an untruth, i.e.
the watchtower no 1 for 2016, entitled 'why be honest', has this definition of lying on page 5:.
"saying something false to someone who is entitled to know the truth.".
so if i tell my husband an untruth, i.e.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ett8niwgnu0.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xth7j86rdu.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eai1rigvro.
Yes... This presentation really work?
Because if someone show me a draw of a paradise and ask me if I want to live there, I think my first reaction will be to look at him strange...
And if someone comme at my door and ask me if I want advice to make great friends, I think I can't resist long before to laugh
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
That's why, science never speaks about "truth"...
Only the anti-scientific are using "scientific truth" as a pejorative
Science speaks about knowledge!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ett8niwgnu0.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xth7j86rdu.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eai1rigvro.
That shadow is actually the other witness at the door too
Ah ok.. It's me then...
Guys go alone, girls go by too... Everything is normal...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ett8niwgnu0.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xth7j86rdu.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eai1rigvro.
some christians explanation for evil in the world.
i came across this "serpent seed".. it claims that cain was the offspring of eve and the talking serpent (sorry i'm lmao while.
writing this) that christians much later identified as satan.
f God is referring to a literal "snake" what does Gen.3:14-15 mean??
"he shall crush thy head, and thou shalt crush his heel."
SADOMASOCHISM?
on the february 2016 study article :.
and on the study article of april 2016 :.
just found that funny....
