Philosophy – “What Insecurity Does to a Person or People” – 10/11/2021

“Life can be simplified down to the two extremes to follow, if there’s no notion of balance. To be brought towards excess, or to be content to the oneness of truth. To fade into the realm of pleasure, or to comprehend that with truth there could be no discontent without something similar to infidelity.”

– Modern Romanticism

Insecurity follows the road of lies. Those who lead their lives through insecurity are contented with the lies, can believe that ugliness is the same as something beautiful, or to say that living is the same as being dead.

A materialistic nature is objective deception. Materialists are deceivers, since nothing can represent the eternal of what is made to vanish. Our flesh is material, though with a physical nature to it, insecurity is applied through the lustful mindset that craves more of it. It becomes then that the materialist is no different than the compulsive shopper, not ever contented because of lacking the adherence to truth. Through deception, a materialist believe that everything disappears.

If everything vanishes, then nothing is loved. Love is what makes the breakable as unbreakable. Along with making all things once impossible as possible, it allows what was once possible to be impossible for its occurrence. Through knowing what is impossible can be possible, along with what is possible can be impossible, contentment is the result.

Each thing beautiful is what would change, without love. Love is the force of the universe that negates the understanding of change, though the materialist would believe all things begin to alter. Through the materialist mindset, there is no comprehension that human longing is the greatest of illness. Human longing changes the self. Nothing else is altered, except for the self through this sickness of yearning when it is what is being longed for that is expected to not have changed.

All of beauty, on its own, is change. It is the uncontrollable change in the seasons, or the woman who becomes old to no longer dress herself so cleanly nor tidy her hair in the most proper fashion. How many artists remember the prior season, yearn to capture it, because the memory of it did not change? How many men look upon their beloved woman, who became old over so many years, viewing her as still the same in the complexion and glow of youth? Nothing changes, when something is loved.

Though, it is a fear to humans to love. Would not the insecurity be negated, since it is also a fear, when love is truly comprehended of itself? To the loving mind, nothing changes, even when the physical aspects have. Even when someone, who is loved, has died, the love remains to remind an individual of that person’s preciousness.

It can be said that when the insecure person has an immense yearning, they have been in the state of themselves to change. It is of themselves, that in being once beautiful, have turned themselves towards deception. Their changes are within. As beauty is truth when it is loved, it becomes a deception when it always changes. If an insecure person longs, then their yearning is being stretched towards a living thing with a mind that did remember them. It becomes soon a necessity to move on towards change.

Quote – “When Humans & Money are Equal” – 10/5/2021

“To give the pauper the sum he won’t forget, cannot occur. He will forget it. If you have given it to him, you just might turn your back to move on with your day. Give the homeless pauper the entire world’s wealth to build a kingdom, and perhaps soon the king, once a pauper, for their kingdom will become a treasure hunter. They might seek out the true treasure, being the one who allowed their kingdom to be built. But, perhaps that person, that treasure, has disappeared. With their disappearance, all the wealth that was spent to build a kingdom is also gone. Both giver and wealth is at the same level. Just a thing made to vanish. There is nothing left to this, besides emptiness.”

– Modern Romanticism

Philosophy – “Why Neither Rights nor Life is a Gift” – 9/17/2021

“We each wonder when something will run out. Some believe the time for life runs out, as though this could be equivalent to money drying up in someone’s bank account. Is time more valued than life? Is time, for which relates to survival, to hold more value than the money that is said to be necessary for such survival?”

– Modern Romanticism

A right cannot be a gift. Life cannot be a gift. These things earned. It is because no tyranny whose purpose was first to strip a people of their rights, will give them back. No people will stand in the streets, begging as any common pauper, demanding that very tyranny to give their rights back. The person’s rights, even if not wearing the rags of a literal pauper, were stolen. Now they are poor. Impoverished, to belong to the life of nothingness where such souls beg.

What compares to an addiction? It is the material. Each thing that can be depleted is materialistic, by nature. Life cannot be this way. We cannot compare life to an addiction, because an addiction does not feed nor uplift the life. Then, to uplift addiction, being of the pauper whose life is of nothingness, would mean to give to this person their power. Uplifting those who had never earned a thing for themselves means to lend power. However, in lending power, further rights are taken away. Neither rights nor life is a gift, when power is being included for those former two things to be stolen.

Continue reading “Philosophy – “Why Neither Rights nor Life is a Gift” – 9/17/2021″

Excerpt from “From Delicate Heart to Resourceful Mind” – “To Disprove Materialism” – Philosophy – 6/13/2021

There is no method for the matter to improve, by replacing the heart with material knowledge or a mindset of materialism. Materialists would be those who find value in what can disappear, at a sudden. It is the objective notion of value that what should not disappear remains protected. To protect one’s own or another’s heart is to guard what others cannot be close to, enough for undeserved trust to become betrayal of given care.

To care is not to just be responsible with one’s resources, since one commits theft as the inevitable result to believing materialism can replace another’s necessity. One is not able to replace the loss of care or a heart with material substance, just as addiction should not be the attempt to fill the void of depression. Teaching another to care has no merit to what is needed for the individual, as such will become the dependence on the addict’s part in the belief there is another provider to it. To teach someone else to care inevitably has the result of cultivating addiction, due to what repeats itself as a pattern of dependence and self-doubt. It is then impossible to teach someone else to care for an issue, without believing sheer resources will grant the opportunity’s opening.

All else, besides the necessity of care, will be in comparison to sheer resources. Resources make up all knowledge at the disposal of one who is addicted to them, or it is responsibly that makes use of their availability. To any resource, it can become an addiction, since a lack of responsibility is all on part of those who treat them as endless in supply. Being irresponsible for resources is through the mindset of an addict, due to lacking care or to the outright negligence of their division. One cannot divide resources among those who would be irresponsible with them. Feeding an addiction is to feed the mindset of a person who shows their lack of individualism.

Philosophy – “The Idiocy Behind Self-Love” – 9/13/2020

“One should name themselves as weak, and forever such, when they dislike the idea of attaching themselves to a non-material thing, being a person. For if they were to lose that person, it could not be seen as expendable. It would be seen as forever lost. True strength is only ever bred when one can rebuild from non-material things being lost.”

– Modern Romanticism

One realizes the extent of pain, once their heart has been shattered. One, as a generous sort, might say that their act of trust upon people, going into their act of generosity upon people, was taken for granted. Could it not be that these supposedly generous sorts took for granted what they allowed in their own lives? As in, the person who easily trusts took for granted all those who entered their lives, in treating them as expendables? One can only take something for granted, when what exits their own lives, is an expendable, and cannot be something the same as them.

When one loves themselves, one will be stagnant, in the belief that should one lose something never to be seen as an expendable, it was of no real consequence. That stagnancy amounts to perpetual weakness. For weakness can only be imagined of the person who could not endeavor to love someone else, more than themselves. If they did love someone else, more than themselves, they’d comprehend what it means to lose something that wasn’t a mere inconvenience in their life.

Self-love is only ever the idea of maintaining a materialistic mindset, when they cannot differ the material from the non-material. For of the non-material, there is love being given to those who are people of flesh and blood. How selfish can a person be, to love only themselves, always more than someone else, because all others cannot be attached, non-materially? Selfishness has to be defined only as attaching oneself to material things, and never to the non-material things that would be protected.

To love another person, more than yourself, allows one to understand the meaning of loss, were they to lose that person. More importantly, they’d understand the meanings of words like “dishonor” and “disgrace”. For loss can only ever be felt, when that non-material someone was loved more than the person who is loving. A loving person must love someone else, more than themselves, or it is not love. Love is sacrifice. Love is honor.

To believe one is strong, through loving themselves, makes them perpetually weak, because they are stagnant in materialism. One can imagine this as the morbidly obese person whose literal stagnancy has made them unwilling to give material and expendable sustenance to those who are starving. For if they did, they’d have fasted, and understand the meaning of sacrifice, not loss.

For to sacrifice, is not the same as loss. We lose, when we lose what we love, being something always non-material. We sacrifice, when we sacrifice what we cannot love, being something always material.