 |
|
 |
Corruption is a conflict with reality. The medium of reality is so objectionable to corrupters that they wall themselves off from reality and live in a bubble. They then convince themselves that they get better results without reality. What is the methodology without reality. There is none. Corrupters aren't for anything; they are against everything. They are stuck with that position when they try to separate themselves from reality. Of course, they will say the opposite, but that habit is nothing but a compensation mechanism. The words are short, empty quips which have no meaning. With no reality creating limits, the claims of corrupters are stated as absolutes. Partial something would require an analysis, but absolutes require nothing but short quips. The quips are stated as if they were superior purposes and values and no one else were attempting to do the same thing. Sometimes, no one would claim to be attempting the same thing due to the total ridiculousnes. Ridiculousness sets no limits when disconnected from reality. An existence made of empty claims creates an assumption of invincibility. Since the purpose of walling off reality is to eliminate the problems in handling reality, the absence of problems stemming from reality creates an assumpton of invincibility. It would be like a military force that can repell all bullets. Being uninfluenced by bullets would create an assumption of invincibility. Corruption requires an assumption of invincibility. If a persons had problems, the reality medium would be necessary to determine what the answers are. Shutting out reality requires the assumption that no problems need to be solved. How can conservatives create problems and create problems without expecting any price to be paid? They conditioned themselves to assume invincibility due to their corruptness. Certainly, corrupters have problems. They are overwhelmed by problems, which is why they take such extreme measures. But they convince themselves that the reality medium is unrelated to their problems, because they are totally incompetent at handling realities. So they assume enemies must be creating their problems and defeating enemies is the solution. Totalitarianism wouldn't be possible otherwise. It is a total disconnect from real laws and government. Destroying enemies is the only solution to problems that totalitarians know. What is a discussion, argument or debate with contempt for reality? Corrupters never lose an argument, because they don't argue realities, while their opponents do. Corrupters take absolute positions based on lies. They throw out lies faster than anyone can straighten them out. Persons who try to correct the lies always lose. The only thing that can be said in the arguments of corrupters is that their standards and purposes are corrupt, invalid and not respectable. No one wants to attack the person, but there is no other issue with corrupters. It's about them, not their lies. Methods Of Argument Devoid of Realities Corrupters are in the reality dismantling business. There is no wrong way to screw things up, so they need no competence in destroying realities. The first problem is that corrupters are always in a subjective position, because they are disconnected from objective reality. Subjectivity is not valid in the public domain, because it is not definable but shaped by values. There is no way to argue against values. From the subjective position, the most common method of argument is ad hominem attack, which means degrading the person for no other reason than defeating them. That's like trying to win a basketball game by throwing a bucket of slop at one of the players. It's not a valid part of the process. Another method of subjective attack is to use examples. Examples do not represent. There is no definable link between an example and something it is supposed to represent. Try to argue a claim which has no relationships between the realities. Usually, the example is something negative being pinned onto someone or something where it doesn't apply or generalizing the example as a characterization of a group. The worst thing about examples is that they don't have the meaning which corrupters claim. Examples can be painted into any frame corrupters want. Then they try to pin the framed reality onto someone where it doesn't apply. It's like picking up a rock and saying it was put there through the criminality of the opponent. Similar to examples is scavenging for negative claims to pin onto opponents with no logic or relevance. The negatives are usually inverted values of something others would view as positives. In other words, accuse, accuse and accuse as a method of generalizing or proving a philosophical point. Accusation is not a valid argument; it is subjective and indefinable. None of those corruptions could exist if rational explanations were required. What it means is that corrupters exist in a nether world imposing themselves upon human existence in a destructive manner. The biggest question is what do corrupters do that is right and rational? Nothing. They need to be held accountable for their absence of what they are supposed to be doing. |
 | ||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
