oni s filterom u glavi bolje prolaze u zivotu

slidingdoorsoperator wrote:

epikur37 wrote:Jasno inteligencija sve stavlja na dodatnu potenciju...uspjeh i propast.

Upravo to. Inteligencija tu može predstavljati i najčešće predstavlja neku vrstu amplifier efekta.

inteligencija je sama po sebi neutralna, čisto tehnička stvar

Ja sam glup, ali budala.

crvenkasti wrote:Ja sam glup, ali budala.

SAd ako si i ružan uz to imas tris a to je dobra ruka :)

Sviranje kurcu. Bolje prolaze oni bez filtera. Uzimaju šta im treba i bacaju ono što im ne treba.

Leteca Pegla wrote:

Gnječ wrote:

Leteca Pegla wrote:
O Gnjeco Gnjeco, 
pazi samo da taj bog u kojeg tvoje oci bulje, 
mozda Luconosa nije.
Jer opasan je on i tu je,
Cak i kad se tvoje oci prave da nije!  
  

ma da sad ne ulazim u neverending elaboracije, sunce nikako nemože biti lučonoša. sunce je izvor luči svjetla. prije bih rekao da je Mjesec lučonoša jer Mjesec "nosi" luč tj. svjetlo odnosno reflektira svjetlo od izvora tj. zvijezde koju mi zoveno Sunce. tu su žene najebale...mjesec...mjesečnica...lučonoša...lucifer...

pa dajte ljudi šta imate u glavama leteće pegle?

O Gnjeco moj koji  ne vidis,
To se ni na Sunce ni na Mjesec odnosilo nije!
Pazi! Jer ko Luconosu trazi, taj njega i nadje,
A njega opasno je i vidjet i nevidjet,
Jer u ponor tvoja noga ce za njim krocit,
Ako ujedino i pravo Svijetlo ne zelis vidjet.
 

ti imaš neke anomalije u pegli. reci ti meni tko je taj tvoj lučonoša? ja tvrdim da je to Mjesec a ti da je to tko točno? neki kažu da je lučonoša Isus ( planet Venera ) jer najavljuje dolazak boga tj. Sunca.

osim toga taj lučonoša je personifikacija i ili eksteriorizacija nekog zla jer pokušava biti Sunce a nije. fake sunce. vidiš mu samo jednu stranu lica drugu tamnu mu nikad ne vidiš. omađija te svjetlom i onda te satare svojom tamnom stranom . i taj Mjesec lucifer je onaj što te dovodi u napast svake vrste jer djeluje na ljude pogotovo kad najviše svijetli tj. kad ima najveću moć (pun mjesec ) pa kad je pun mjesec ljudi rade svakakve škifece i ludorije opijaju se do nesvjesti, jebadu se ko da je smak svijeta, kradu, ubijadu itd. zato kažemo kad je netko malo maka da je lunatiko. još najveću moć ima nad onima koji mjesečare. spavaju a budni su hodaju ko zombiji. eto koliko taj jebeni mjesec lučonoša djeluje negativno na ljudsko ponašanje.

tako ti ide ona pjesmica oče naš koju ću ja malo prepravit u zagradama da bude bliža oriđinalu:

Oče naš, (Sunce naše )
koji jesi na nebesima,
sveti (svijetli) se ime tvoje,
dođi kraljevstvo tvoje,
budi volja tvoja, ( a nego čija )
kako na nebu tako i na zemlji. (naravno)

Kruh naš svagdanji daj nam danas, (svijetli da imamo žita kruha mlijeka jajca i krumpira )
i otpusti nama duge naše, ( nemoj nam slat ovrhe )
kako i mi otpuštamo dužnicima našim, ( dođemti, bog će ti platit)
i ne uvedi nas u napast, ( nemoj se ugasit jer onda dolazi Lučonoša koji nas jebe uzduž i poprijeko )
nego izbavi nas od zla. ( ujutro se vrati )
Amen. ( Tako je, povikaše seljaci, skidoše gaće i sjedoše golom guzicom u koprive u znak zahvalnosti )

Kad pocinje ugradnja i koliko po glavi?

Gnječ wrote:

ti imaš neke anomalije u pegli. reci ti meni tko je taj tvoj lučonoša? ja tvrdim da je to Mjesec a ti da je to tko točno? neki kažu da je lučonoša Isus ( planet Venera ) jer najavljuje dolazak boga tj. Sunca.

osim toga taj lučonoša je personifikacija i ili eksteriorizacija nekog zla jer pokušava biti Sunce a nije. fake sunce. vidiš mu samo jednu stranu lica drugu tamnu mu nikad ne vidiš. omađija te svjetlom i onda te satare svojom tamnom stranom . i taj Mjesec lucifer je onaj što te dovodi u napast svake vrste jer djeluje na ljude pogotovo kad najviše svijetli tj. kad ima najveću moć (pun mjesec ) pa kad je pun mjesec ljudi rade svakakve škifece i ludorije opijaju se do nesvjesti, jebadu se ko da je smak svijeta, kradu, ubijadu itd. zato kažemo kad je netko malo maka da je lunatiko. još najveću moć ima nad onima koji mjesečare. spavaju a budni su hodaju ko zombiji. eto koliko taj jebeni mjesec lučonoša djeluje negativno na ljudsko ponašanje.

tako ti ide ona pjesmica oče naš koju ću ja malo prepravit u zagradama da bude bliža oriđinalu:

Oče naš, (Sunce naše )
koji jesi na nebesima,
sveti (svijetli) se ime tvoje,
dođi kraljevstvo tvoje,
budi volja tvoja, ( a nego čija )
kako na nebu tako i na zemlji. (naravno)

Kruh naš svagdanji daj nam danas, (svijetli da imamo žita kruha mlijeka jajca i krumpira )
i otpusti nama duge naše, ( nemoj nam slat ovrhe )
kako i mi otpuštamo dužnicima našim, ( dođemti, bog će ti platit)
i ne uvedi nas u napast, ( nemoj se ugasit jer onda dolazi Lučonoša koji nas jebe uzduž i poprijeko )
nego izbavi nas od zla. ( ujutro se vrati )
Amen. ( Tako je, povikaše seljaci, skidoše gaće i sjedoše golom guzicom u koprive u znak zahvalnosti )

Zlo...

Leteca Pegla wrote:

Gnječ wrote:

ti imaš neke anomalije u pegli. reci ti meni tko je taj tvoj lučonoša? ja tvrdim da je to Mjesec a ti da je to tko točno? neki kažu da je lučonoša Isus ( planet Venera ) jer najavljuje dolazak boga tj. Sunca.

osim toga taj lučonoša je personifikacija i ili eksteriorizacija nekog zla jer pokušava biti Sunce a nije. fake sunce. vidiš mu samo jednu stranu lica drugu tamnu mu nikad ne vidiš. omađija te svjetlom i onda te satare svojom tamnom stranom . i taj Mjesec lucifer je onaj što te dovodi u napast svake vrste jer djeluje na ljude pogotovo kad najviše svijetli tj. kad ima najveću moć (pun mjesec ) pa kad je pun mjesec ljudi rade svakakve škifece i ludorije opijaju se do nesvjesti, jebadu se ko da je smak svijeta, kradu, ubijadu itd. zato kažemo kad je netko malo maka da je lunatiko. još najveću moć ima nad onima koji mjesečare. spavaju a budni su hodaju ko zombiji. eto koliko taj jebeni mjesec lučonoša djeluje negativno na ljudsko ponašanje.

tako ti ide ona pjesmica oče naš koju ću ja malo prepravit u zagradama da bude bliža oriđinalu:

Oče naš, (Sunce naše )
koji jesi na nebesima,
sveti (svijetli) se ime tvoje,
dođi kraljevstvo tvoje,
budi volja tvoja, ( a nego čija )
kako na nebu tako i na zemlji. (naravno)

Kruh naš svagdanji daj nam danas, (svijetli da imamo žita kruha mlijeka jajca i krumpira )
i otpusti nama duge naše, ( nemoj nam slat ovrhe )
kako i mi otpuštamo dužnicima našim, ( dođemti, bog će ti platit)
i ne uvedi nas u napast, ( nemoj se ugasit jer onda dolazi Lučonoša koji nas jebe uzduž i poprijeko )
nego izbavi nas od zla. ( ujutro se vrati )
Amen. ( Tako je, povikaše seljaci, skidoše gaće i sjedoše golom guzicom u koprive u znak zahvalnosti )

Zlo...

American psychiatrist M. Scott Peck on the other hand, describes evil as militant ignorance.

The original Judeo-Christian concept of sin is as a process that leads one to miss the mark and not achieve perfection. Peck argues that while most people are conscious of this at least on some level, those that are evil actively and militantly refuse this consciousness. Peck describes evil as a malignant type of self-righteousness which results in a projection of evil onto selected specific innocent victims (often children or other people in relatively powerless positions). Peck considers those he calls evil to be attempting to escape and hide from their own conscience (through self-deception) and views this as being quite distinct from the apparent absence of conscience evident in sociopaths.

According to Peck, an evil person:

Is consistently self-deceiving, with the intent of avoiding guilt and maintaining a self-image of perfection

Deceives others as a consequence of their own self-deception

Psychologically projects his or her evils and sins onto very specific targets, scapegoating those targets while treating everyone else normally ("their insensitivity toward him was selective")

Commonly hates with the pretense of love, for the purposes of self-deception as much as the deception of others

Abuses political or emotional power ("the imposition of one's will upon others by overt or covert coercion")

Maintains a high level of respectability and lies incessantly in order to do so

Is consistent in his or her sins. Evil people are defined not so much by the magnitude of their sins, but by their consistency (of destructiveness)

Is unable to think from the viewpoint of their victim

Has a covert intolerance to criticism and other forms of narcissistic injury
--------------
He also considers certain institutions may be evil, as his discussion of the My Lai Massacre and its attempted coverup illustrate. By this definition, acts of criminal and state terrorism would also be considered evil.

Gnječ wrote:


American psychiatrist M. Scott Peck on the other hand, describes evil as militant ignorance.

The original Judeo-Christian concept of sin is as a process that leads one to miss the mark and not achieve perfection. Peck argues that while most people are conscious of this at least on some level, those that are evil actively and militantly refuse this consciousness. Peck describes evil as a malignant type of self-righteousness which results in a projection of evil onto selected specific innocent victims (often children or other people in relatively powerless positions). Peck considers those he calls evil to be attempting to escape and hide from their own conscience (through self-deception) and views this as being quite distinct from the apparent absence of conscience evident in sociopaths.

According to Peck, an evil person:

Is consistently self-deceiving, with the intent of avoiding guilt and maintaining a self-image of perfection

Deceives others as a consequence of their own self-deception

Psychologically projects his or her evils and sins onto very specific targets, scapegoating those targets while treating everyone else normally ("their insensitivity toward him was selective")

Commonly hates with the pretense of love, for the purposes of self-deception as much as the deception of others

Abuses political or emotional power ("the imposition of one's will upon others by overt or covert coercion")

Maintains a high level of respectability and lies incessantly in order to do so

Is consistent in his or her sins. Evil people are defined not so much by the magnitude of their sins, but by their consistency (of destructiveness)

Is unable to think from the viewpoint of their victim

Has a covert intolerance to criticism and other forms of narcissistic injury
--------------
He also considers certain institutions may be evil, as his discussion of the My Lai Massacre and its attempted coverup illustrate. By this definition, acts of criminal and state terrorism would also be considered evil.

Peck kao i Gnjec, ne vidi Zlo...Ili vidi, a namjerno tumaci krivo...

Leteca Pegla wrote:

Gnječ wrote:


American psychiatrist M. Scott Peck on the other hand, describes evil as militant ignorance.

The original Judeo-Christian concept of sin is as a process that leads one to miss the mark and not achieve perfection. Peck argues that while most people are conscious of this at least on some level, those that are evil actively and militantly refuse this consciousness. Peck describes evil as a malignant type of self-righteousness which results in a projection of evil onto selected specific innocent victims (often children or other people in relatively powerless positions). Peck considers those he calls evil to be attempting to escape and hide from their own conscience (through self-deception) and views this as being quite distinct from the apparent absence of conscience evident in sociopaths.

According to Peck, an evil person:

Is consistently self-deceiving, with the intent of avoiding guilt and maintaining a self-image of perfection

Deceives others as a consequence of their own self-deception

Psychologically projects his or her evils and sins onto very specific targets, scapegoating those targets while treating everyone else normally ("their insensitivity toward him was selective")

Commonly hates with the pretense of love, for the purposes of self-deception as much as the deception of others

Abuses political or emotional power ("the imposition of one's will upon others by overt or covert coercion")

Maintains a high level of respectability and lies incessantly in order to do so

Is consistent in his or her sins. Evil people are defined not so much by the magnitude of their sins, but by their consistency (of destructiveness)

Is unable to think from the viewpoint of their victim

Has a covert intolerance to criticism and other forms of narcissistic injury
--------------
He also considers certain institutions may be evil, as his discussion of the My Lai Massacre and its attempted coverup illustrate. By this definition, acts of criminal and state terrorism would also be considered evil.

Peck kao i Gnjec, ne vidi Zlo...Ili vidi, a namjerno tumaci krivo...

pa dobro daj nas ti prosvijetli. ops! opet zazivam lučonošu svjetlo, prosvjetliti...ne. ne, daj nas potamni da i mi znamo elaboriraj malo to Zlo.

Gnječ wrote:

pa dobro daj nas ti prosvijetli. ops! opet zazivam lučonošu svjetlo, prosvjetliti...ne. ne, daj nas potamni da i mi znamo elaboriraj malo to Zlo.

Evo ti primjer zla koji ne spada pod definiciju tvoga prijatelja amerikanca:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobotomy

Nota bene, obrati pozornost na godine do kad je to zlo trajalo. Ali ni to ti nije Zlo, nego samo manji dio, zlo. Zlo ti je sila koja se najbolje opisuje kao ono sto nastane kad se krsi 10 zapovijedi, eto to ti je Zlo, a manifistira se sa puno simptoma koji se pisu zlo, sa malim z.

Gnječ wrote:

Leteca Pegla wrote:

Gnječ wrote:


American psychiatrist M. Scott Peck on the other hand, describes evil as militant ignorance.

The original Judeo-Christian concept of sin is as a process that leads one to miss the mark and not achieve perfection. Peck argues that while most people are conscious of this at least on some level, those that are evil actively and militantly refuse this consciousness. Peck describes evil as a malignant type of self-righteousness which results in a projection of evil onto selected specific innocent victims (often children or other people in relatively powerless positions). Peck considers those he calls evil to be attempting to escape and hide from their own conscience (through self-deception) and views this as being quite distinct from the apparent absence of conscience evident in sociopaths.

According to Peck, an evil person:

Is consistently self-deceiving, with the intent of avoiding guilt and maintaining a self-image of perfection

Deceives others as a consequence of their own self-deception

Psychologically projects his or her evils and sins onto very specific targets, scapegoating those targets while treating everyone else normally ("their insensitivity toward him was selective")

Commonly hates with the pretense of love, for the purposes of self-deception as much as the deception of others

Abuses political or emotional power ("the imposition of one's will upon others by overt or covert coercion")

Maintains a high level of respectability and lies incessantly in order to do so

Is consistent in his or her sins. Evil people are defined not so much by the magnitude of their sins, but by their consistency (of destructiveness)

Is unable to think from the viewpoint of their victim

Has a covert intolerance to criticism and other forms of narcissistic injury
--------------
He also considers certain institutions may be evil, as his discussion of the My Lai Massacre and its attempted coverup illustrate. By this definition, acts of criminal and state terrorism would also be considered evil.

Peck kao i Gnjec, ne vidi Zlo...Ili vidi, a namjerno tumaci krivo...

pa dobro daj nas ti prosvijetli. ops! opet zazivam lučonošu svjetlo, prosvjetliti...ne. ne, daj nas potamni da i mi znamo elaboriraj malo to Zlo.

jbte, koji ti kurac,
otkad se su budalama raspravljas o religiji,
vis da im religija popila mozak

Leteca Pegla wrote:

Gnječ wrote:

pa dobro daj nas ti prosvijetli. ops! opet zazivam lučonošu svjetlo, prosvjetliti...ne. ne, daj nas potamni da i mi znamo elaboriraj malo to Zlo.

Evo ti primjer zla koji ne spada pod definiciju tvoga prijatelja amerikanca:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobotomy

Nota bene, obrati pozornost na godine do kad je to zlo trajalo. Ali ni to ti nije Zlo, nego samo manji dio, zlo. Zlo ti je sila koja se najbolje opisuje kao ono sto nastane kad se krsi 10 zapovijedi, eto to ti je Zlo, a manifistira se sa puno simptoma koji se pisu zlo, sa malim z.

kako ne spada pod definiciju? definicija glasi: evil is a militant ignorance. a lobotomija spada u kategoriju militant ignorance.

Gnječ wrote:

Leteca Pegla wrote:

Gnječ wrote:

pa dobro daj nas ti prosvijetli. ops! opet zazivam lučonošu svjetlo, prosvjetliti...ne. ne, daj nas potamni da i mi znamo elaboriraj malo to Zlo.

Evo ti primjer zla koji ne spada pod definiciju tvoga prijatelja amerikanca:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobotomy

Nota bene, obrati pozornost na godine do kad je to zlo trajalo. Ali ni to ti nije Zlo, nego samo manji dio, zlo. Zlo ti je sila koja se najbolje opisuje kao ono sto nastane kad se krsi 10 zapovijedi, eto to ti je Zlo, a manifistira se sa puno simptoma koji se pisu zlo, sa malim z.

kako ne spada pod definiciju? definicija glasi: evil is a militant ignorance. a lobotomija spada u kategoriju militant ignorance.

zato sto nije bilo militantno, to je bilo tima koji su to radili samo eksperiment, znanost. Ljepo ti pise da su cak i nobelovu nagradu dobili neki na tome. Sve sami ugledni znanstvenici, krema nad kremom, koja kao i Gnjec je gledala u Zlo a nije ga vidjela :)

Leviathan2 wrote:

Gnječ wrote:

Leteca Pegla wrote:

Gnječ wrote:


American psychiatrist M. Scott Peck on the other hand, describes evil as militant ignorance.

The original Judeo-Christian concept of sin is as a process that leads one to miss the mark and not achieve perfection. Peck argues that while most people are conscious of this at least on some level, those that are evil actively and militantly refuse this consciousness. Peck describes evil as a malignant type of self-righteousness which results in a projection of evil onto selected specific innocent victims (often children or other people in relatively powerless positions). Peck considers those he calls evil to be attempting to escape and hide from their own conscience (through self-deception) and views this as being quite distinct from the apparent absence of conscience evident in sociopaths.

According to Peck, an evil person:

Is consistently self-deceiving, with the intent of avoiding guilt and maintaining a self-image of perfection

Deceives others as a consequence of their own self-deception

Psychologically projects his or her evils and sins onto very specific targets, scapegoating those targets while treating everyone else normally ("their insensitivity toward him was selective")

Commonly hates with the pretense of love, for the purposes of self-deception as much as the deception of others

Abuses political or emotional power ("the imposition of one's will upon others by overt or covert coercion")

Maintains a high level of respectability and lies incessantly in order to do so

Is consistent in his or her sins. Evil people are defined not so much by the magnitude of their sins, but by their consistency (of destructiveness)

Is unable to think from the viewpoint of their victim

Has a covert intolerance to criticism and other forms of narcissistic injury
--------------
He also considers certain institutions may be evil, as his discussion of the My Lai Massacre and its attempted coverup illustrate. By this definition, acts of criminal and state terrorism would also be considered evil.

Peck kao i Gnjec, ne vidi Zlo...Ili vidi, a namjerno tumaci krivo...

pa dobro daj nas ti prosvijetli. ops! opet zazivam lučonošu svjetlo, prosvjetliti...ne. ne, daj nas potamni da i mi znamo elaboriraj malo to Zlo.

jbte, koji ti kurac,
otkad se su budalama raspravljas o religiji,
vis da im religija popila mozak

a šta ću pričat s vama pametnima? evo 5 minuta razmišljam što bih s vama pametnima mogao debatirat i ništa mi ne pada na pamet konkretno osim onog famoznog nedefiniranog pitanja koji glasi: inače?

Gnječ wrote:

Leviathan2 wrote:

Gnječ wrote:

Leteca Pegla wrote:

Gnječ wrote:


American psychiatrist M. Scott Peck on the other hand, describes evil as militant ignorance.

The original Judeo-Christian concept of sin is as a process that leads one to miss the mark and not achieve perfection. Peck argues that while most people are conscious of this at least on some level, those that are evil actively and militantly refuse this consciousness. Peck describes evil as a malignant type of self-righteousness which results in a projection of evil onto selected specific innocent victims (often children or other people in relatively powerless positions). Peck considers those he calls evil to be attempting to escape and hide from their own conscience (through self-deception) and views this as being quite distinct from the apparent absence of conscience evident in sociopaths.

According to Peck, an evil person:

Is consistently self-deceiving, with the intent of avoiding guilt and maintaining a self-image of perfection

Deceives others as a consequence of their own self-deception

Psychologically projects his or her evils and sins onto very specific targets, scapegoating those targets while treating everyone else normally ("their insensitivity toward him was selective")

Commonly hates with the pretense of love, for the purposes of self-deception as much as the deception of others

Abuses political or emotional power ("the imposition of one's will upon others by overt or covert coercion")

Maintains a high level of respectability and lies incessantly in order to do so

Is consistent in his or her sins. Evil people are defined not so much by the magnitude of their sins, but by their consistency (of destructiveness)

Is unable to think from the viewpoint of their victim

Has a covert intolerance to criticism and other forms of narcissistic injury
--------------
He also considers certain institutions may be evil, as his discussion of the My Lai Massacre and its attempted coverup illustrate. By this definition, acts of criminal and state terrorism would also be considered evil.

Peck kao i Gnjec, ne vidi Zlo...Ili vidi, a namjerno tumaci krivo...

pa dobro daj nas ti prosvijetli. ops! opet zazivam lučonošu svjetlo, prosvjetliti...ne. ne, daj nas potamni da i mi znamo elaboriraj malo to Zlo.

jbte, koji ti kurac,
otkad se su budalama raspravljas o religiji,
vis da im religija popila mozak

a šta ću pričat s vama pametnima? evo 5 minuta razmišljam što bih s vama pametnima mogao debatirat i ništa mi ne pada na pamet konkretno osim onog famoznog nedefiniranog pitanja koji glasi: inače?

eo onako, zima na bausteli pa se zaletavam u kontejner, inace ok, inace kod tebe? casa , lavoro?, tutto bene?

Leviathan2 wrote:

Gnječ wrote:

Leviathan2 wrote:

Gnječ wrote:

Leteca Pegla wrote:
Peck kao i Gnjec, ne vidi Zlo...Ili vidi, a namjerno tumaci krivo...

pa dobro daj nas ti prosvijetli. ops! opet zazivam lučonošu svjetlo, prosvjetliti...ne. ne, daj nas potamni da i mi znamo elaboriraj malo to Zlo.

jbte, koji ti kurac,
otkad se su budalama raspravljas o religiji,
vis da im religija popila mozak

a šta ću pričat s vama pametnima? evo 5 minuta razmišljam što bih s vama pametnima mogao debatirat i ništa mi ne pada na pamet konkretno osim onog famoznog nedefiniranog pitanja koji glasi: inače?

eo onako, zima na bausteli pa se zaletavam u kontejner, inace ok, inace kod tebe? casa , lavoro?, tutto bene?

kod mene? tutto a posto e niente in ordine.