Irischelle
LightNews LightNews
banner
schalazeal07.bsky.social
Irischelle
@schalazeal07.bsky.social
75 followers 130 following 1.1K posts
Hi. It's meee. I enjoy reviewing animes, movies, books, video games... We'll see... ✨

I also value philosophizing and writing it down ✍🏻

You'll see.. Hope you'll appreciate and find value in my thoughts and ideas and this side of me.. and the funny
Posts Replies Media Videos
schalazeal07.bsky.social
Huhuhuhu 😶

substack.com/@mileskdonah...

bsky.app/profile/scha...
September 10, 2026 at 4:45 AM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
Part 4 of 4

And just maybe.. I'm really leaning on this idea right now and I know I'm not alone on this.. basic conversation etiquette apart from the humility and curiosity that they're lacking is also something that philosophers and academics ought to learn and be taught

bsky.app/profile/scha...
And just maybe.. I'm really leaning on this idea right now and I know I'm not alone on this.. basic conversation etiquette apart from the humility and curiosity that they're lacking is also something that philosophers and academics ought to learn and be taught and not just their fields of interest if they also want to be instructive and helpful to other people.. and that is also if they want to encourage other people to be interested in philosophy and participate themselves.. and not just when people are abusing and capitalizing on every single instance of disagreement, triviality and misunderstanding on their part. That sounds like a very apt idea at this state.. or maybe people really don't care that much about that part and they just want the status and proof of intelligence and achievement and to show you off and completely destroy you.. Not exactly the most surprising thing ever
August 31, 2026 at 7:47 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
Read 4 screenshots, part 3 of 4

the people.. I guess I know now that that might happen within the next several months starting this month.. but I do hope people keep in mind that if they want to read a paper talking about a hyperspecific subject they can also just do that

bsky.app/profile/scha...
the people.. I guess I know now that that might happen within the next several months starting this month.. but I do hope people keep in mind that if they want to read a paper talking about a hyperspecific subject they can also just do that and it can just come from someone else and I would be totally fine with it since I'm doing things through my own approach that I can manage at the moment.. if you don't mind that much.. this way, that way or another way.. and I'm totally fine not hogging all the attention or credit for every single thing in contrast to their very inexplicable and very mysterious hyperfixation on this aspect.. or I guess be on the lookout for one of those formal dissertation style reactors to their personal abuse and indifference to them.. I'm sure there's plenty of them out there Honestly, I don't get how people even begin to think like this in incredibly rigid stubborn ways.. apart from obviously having incredibly high standards and expectations.. or that you can somehow think in the same exact ways for what purposes as them at any given moment that would not ultimately involve your exact individual thought process and emotional mental psychological state at the time you're writing.. as if their road or the highway.. and this mindset also tends to bleed how they think about and project their culture and education onto other people.. and it's as if they were not once a non-academic at one point and they don't have non-academic friends and people in their lives.. and they just speak and converse like this all the time with each other in every little way they can think of for every possible context which is the worst way to think about things.. just weird It seems people are also forgetting that my audience doesn't just mainly consist of academics and most of the people who are coming from different backgrounds wouldn't have the patience to get through having to read all of my writing that are already much longer than the things I'm currently writing and I also know that because a lot of them also comment on that bit a lot that it seems to them to veer a lot from the usual content from me that they liked from before, whatever it is.. and I don't think it would even interest them that I would have to write about optional extra super niche intellectual things that they could have otherwise read in an actual paper and not in social media posts if they really wanted to. If being accessible to as many people as possible is also the goal, then wouldn't this at least be a good entry level to showing some level of curiosity and in-depth knowledge and individuality in the areas that we are already familiar and knowledgeable in?? That might also make them eventually look up and get interested in much more in-depth, nuanced and detailed essays and research papers and videos in another sense of having knowledge in them Moreover, probably.. (I sort of got lost in there) I tend to think what is also happening is people are solely judging it from their own original linguistic interpretations and not how I might have intended and meant it another way or in a much more subtle way and also clarified them as what I also explained in the last post And I also LOVE that people are making this about them and their ego and not about the effects his habitual long-term cruelty has had on me up until very recently and my responses to him. You can just tell by the lack of empathy and consideration and the misplaced priorities and the constant cherry-picked framing that they just can't let go of.. or at least have the decency to present every side of the argument in a charitable balanced curious inquiring light if they're going to keep doing this and talk much more respectfully in a mature, empathic way is also a probable alternative.. And I will just keep bringing up people's utter lack of empathy and consideration for me, my situation, THE CONTEXT whether people like it or not.. unless what people really have a problem with is having more empathy and consideration and accountability on their part.. and this is about validating their own personal interests, agenda and motives. THIS.. AND knowing that they're motives. THIS.. AND knowing that they're responding to a person who wasn't exposed to all the academic material and training they learned and were exposed to.. and especially, considering that it's not like I haven't been quite open and receptive to their opinions and learnings when I asked them modestly and politely and attempted to talk to them to responding more suitably and considerately with me.... Self-righteous insensitives.... Just gotta say it right there And I decided I would use it as a noun for today #ModalLanguage
August 31, 2026 at 7:43 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
Read 4 screenshots, part 2 of 4

you are still grossly misunderstanding or conflating things... and worse.. actually strawmanning me and not really engaging in good faith?? And then basing that on a vulgar misunderstanding of the essential constraints of the very argument

bsky.app/profile/scha...
you are still grossly misunderstanding or conflating things... and worse.. actually strawmanning me and not really engaging in good faith?? And then basing that on a vulgar misunderstanding of the essential constraints of the very argument or formula that you should be familiar of?? I don't know.. maybe something else is going on.. or it might be that you're easily swayed in something that might have to do with other people or the things you already know that you might have a disproportionate stake in. Moreover... **2 BUT THE POINT IS my INTENTION is to bring up those traits to him in particular and not have to overexplain all the particulars and variables in order to get across my reaction or message much more effectively or appropriately or vulnerably and authentically as was needed in that exact moment **1 and he actually uttered these words narcissistic Machiavellian Sadean or talked about these topics multiple times so it's not just my observations and they just supplanted them.. otherwise I wouldn't even begin to characterize his behavior with these terms other than narcissistic if he didn't keep mentioning Machiavelli and Marquis de Sade in his videos.. since I have a tendency of avoiding using big words.. judgy feely words and statements for the most part and that actually happens all the time.. by that I meant like maybe 95% of the time maybe Imagine #Literary #Esoteric #Polysemy #CommunicativeExpressivedevices And this is also what people are incredibly guilty of whenever there is the slightest vague connection to something.. that they have not properly sussed out the contents and the context of what they're reacting to and connecting or conflating to another thing At this point, I'm just waiting for the next deflection and nitpicking so that you can vaguely associate and conflate it with your formula or argument that you learned from academia and the books and papers you read. I'm referring to people in general as well. Maybe some of these statements are going as well. Maybe some of these statements are going to be less applicable to the poster I'm directly responding to.. but I still found he still strawmanned me and conflated a lot of things actually just by scrolling down a bit on his page.. apart from the other posts I encountered from him before concerning this topic right now.. apart from the other person that he restacked from who I also encountered before, also tend to strawman me and conflate things.. and I'm still amused by how people are shifting the burden or responsibility by how grossly they are misunderstanding my communication and somehow made it all my problem or my mistake and never theirs when they are the ones reacting and I am reacting to their dismissiveness and lack of consideration and self-entitlement.. or I don't know about the particular poster with the meme if he consistently did so And as far as I'm concerned I spent a lot of time actually going in-depth and incredibly thorough and detailed with my explanations and further clarifications for weeks!! with the addition of significant examples that help illuminate and argue for my points.. even if that required me to have to outline my specific line of reasoning which people just decided to hate or get annoyed by, that what I'm trying to accomplish adds no value other than I'm trying to accomplish adds no value other than what they assumed to take was just apparently pretentiousness for some reason unfamiliar to my very point about linguistic/language usage which people seem to pay no mind to when they read that confusing very dense part in the last post. First off, sorry if that really appeared to be convoluted.. I acknowledge that it is.. but I hope you got the message at least even if it might have taken you more time to be able to connect the dots or decipher from having a lot of extra thoughts. And also sorry I had many specific thoughts?? And there would be no other way to communicate that value of getting it across at the time I brought it up. But I did try my best to communicate it as clear as I can get. If that is still not enough to some people, they could've just pointed that out without getting caught up in all the things that were already clarified or feigning ignorance in very unhelpful ways that need spoonfeeding and holding their hand from every way you can nitpick someone to the nth degree.. I didn't even consider making a thesis defense response in at least 10,000 to 100,000 words was my agenda and priority to begin with and was the best way I could have initially responded and aired out my thoughts to Joe when I was quite annoyed and insulted and then later on simply clarified my talking points to the people.. I guess I know now that that might
August 31, 2026 at 7:33 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
I didn't expect it would get this long.. ooohh boy

Read 4 screenshots, part 1 of 4

ABUSING and MISUSING this argument and abusing UTTER LACK OF SPECIFICITY AND CLARITY and Non-specific incomplete vague allusions and their overconfident dismissive assumptions

bsky.app/profile/scha...
ABUSING and MISUSING this argument and abusing UTTER LACK OF SPECIFICITY AND CLARITY and Non-specific incomplete vague allusions and their overconfident dismissive assumptions and gross lack of context and the clarifications I made and also abusing seemingly detached impersonal impartiality and paralysis by analysis AS IF I am posing an absolute position for every single claim I made and not just I'm more sure or really convinced than usual based on my criteria for some partial but SIGNIFICANT aspect of his as reflected through his behaviour based on my longterm observations and evidence based on his treatment and views towards me and other people or I'm definitely sure for the generally harmful traits AS CONSIDERATIONS (Narcissistic Machiavellian Sadean dispositions (see **1) and utter lack of affective empathy which he confirmed) based on my contextual explanations that affect something that affect another that MASSIVELY CONTRIBUTE AND AFFECT how he forms his worldview, framing and perceptions of other people or everything else in a self-reinforcing and synergistic way (See **2) — because that's how I talked about them and NOT ULTIMATELY UNDENIABLY AS CAUSING some specific trait or action that he made that people imagined out of thin air and cannot stop begging the question and just immediately jumping to conclusions based on their possibilities. If anything it's pointing much more to his longterm pattern and not necessarily towards a few single things he said about me.. that is why I kept bringing up HIS LONGTERM PATTERN AND HABITS and why I talked about that we should count that as evidence and not just a few isolated instances when people asked for credible thorough evidence. I don't think I even used the word "caused" until my very last post alongside those traits when I tried looking it up on Bluesky. I only mostly used "contribute" and that's a very modest reasonable claim. And it's as if this is to suggest both me... and religious apologists who argue from psychophysical harmony are making the exact claim of posing the same number of possibilities and angles we looked at this as like people's Gotcha moment‼️ instead of that I'm just bringing up general contributory synergistic correlations but still incredibly consequential harmful traits IN THE CONTEXT I BROUGHT THEM UP FOR AS A WAY TO TALK ABOUT THEM AND HIGHLIGHT THEM hence.. my choice of words... and that needs to be taken into consideration if he's going to keep making those incredibly harmful judgments and keep treating me so casually cruel FOR MORE THAN A YEAR NOW. And it's as if bringing up a set of traits as a logical and evidential explanation that do contribute to my observations and the resulting behavior themselves would not count as an egregious explanation would not count as an egregious explanation themselves for behavior that makes every thing so much worse than it already is in synergistic and self-reinforcing ways and what it would actually mean to have these traits that people won't even think twice and they're just completely conflating them with non-probable theistic causes that have non-probable consequences when it comes to other possible explanations. Narcissistic Machiavellian Sadean dispositions and utter lack of affective empathy, lack of imagination, foresight, problem-solving ~ More than anything.. it's quite bold to have to very superficially think as like a passing lazy thought that these traits are somehow just words that were made up and dreamed up and hallucinated by someone and got conveniently inserted into the narrative that don't actually seriously measure up to forming a whole person and a whole worldview.. and it's as if how these traits have already egregiously sabotaged his ability to relate with other people and see it from our perspective without merely having to call us as objects that somehow have similar external experiences as him and then treat us beneficially that would also suit his longterm goals would not count as evidence themselves just because he managed to excel in other areas (like also probably improving his imagination, foresight and problem-solving) that come as a result from having problem-solving) that come as a result from having these traits when that's not exactly what I've been arguing for and wanting to bring up to his attention that is already affecting his relationship with me that also heavily negatively impacts or self-reinforces his lack of imagination, foresight and problem-solving in this vein. Why are people struggling to understand.. or at least get what I've tried to explicitly communicate or why are people struggling to focus on the things I communicated?? Why are we conflating things in our minds all the time?? We NEED to be much more specific and clear with our reasoning because this will only keep happening after almost a month's worth of communication if people have their thoughts in chaotic confused shambles, I'm sorry. Especially that the same people are oh so confident and appearing at times (or a lot of times) to be condescending based on their imagined possibilities I mean it's okay to misunderstand something or be wrong and confused with your original interpretations once or twice if you are the charitable curious type.. and I would also understand if people have less obvious blind spots as we all do.. but after several attempts of communication and clarification weeks later and
August 31, 2026 at 7:12 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
I'm back

"Indeed; rather, blessed are those who comprehend that the psychophysical harmony argument is Banana Argument 2.0"

substack.com/@stanpatton/...
Indeed; rather, blessed are those who comprehend that the psychophysical harmony argument is Banana Argument 2.0 notice how gracefully it sits over the human band God is not the Riddler. I'm confident he did not create this world to test how good people are at sifting through logical and mathematical arguments. Christ never says 'blessed are the Bayesians and those who comprehend the implications of psycho-physical harmony'
August 31, 2026 at 6:56 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
People can view the thread in addition to my posts that I clarified

bsky.app/profile/scha...
August 31, 2026 at 5:58 AM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
and would make him think that there is something so much more than my current lack of certain traits

Anyhow I got it right to a certain extent so there's that

bsky.app/profile/scha...
August 29, 2026 at 12:20 AM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
This is why I had to frame it this way — the pattern that is winning out in the end.. even if there is an unlikely moment that being a failed romantic ideal is not causing him any kind of despair

bsky.app/profile/scha...
August 29, 2026 at 12:15 AM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
That is just PART of it

We have to get much more specific and contextual

bsky.app/profile/scha...
August 29, 2026 at 12:04 AM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
Self-reinforcing part 2

bsky.app/profile/scha...
August 28, 2026 at 11:56 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
Read 2 screenshots, part 3 of 3

**1 It doesn't have to be the same things people would think and "believe" or "know" in some sense but would not say when I'm talking about his utter lack of empathy, Machiavellian Sadean dispositions, lack of imagination, foresight

bsky.app/profile/scha...
**1 It doesn't have to be the same things people would think and "believe" or "know" in some sense but would not say when I'm talking about his utter lack of empathy, Machiavellian Sadean dispositions, lack of imagination, foresight and problem-solving as it's all a SELF-REINFORCING CYCLE or FEEDBACK LOOP but it would still cause the effect and greatly affect and impact the entire thing one way or another.. especially the utter lack of empathy and Machiavellian Sadean dispositions that greatly exacerbates his lack of imagination, foresight and problem-solving and vice versa, in an area that concerns me and other people, his perceptions, framing and interactions and his capacity for some kind of self-awareness and personal growth and change. What I meant is.. you could say his longterm habits, dispositions, drives and traits self-reinforces and exacerbates themselves because even though he would fully know what would happen with his choices, you could argue TO MEAN that he would still be regularly in a position to place himself that he would not consider the longterm consequences and have a narrowed view AND THUS he is even more likely to do so.. and he still exhibits tendencies or habits of not really doing much about it because he is focused on tending to his immediate needs and inner lack.. to feel something as I mentioned before.. that is also IN PART WHAT I MEAN when I say he has a lack of imagination, foresight and problem-solving.. apart from his oversimplified unimaginative characterizations of me for a very long time.. that also reflects his treatment of me and the way he talks to me A LOT OF TIMES for a very long time now.. because that's also what he really feels and thinks about me.. and it's continually winning out as a pattern.. even if that is only part of the story.. I NEVER SAID THAT IS THE WHOLE STORY and that is what people keep conflating and interpreting my communication and begging the question
August 28, 2026 at 11:45 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
Read 4 screenshots, part 2 of 3

And I suspect in my case that they are probably not specifically thinking of** what they really have a problem with are big intimidating words that have to do with a PROBABLE explanation for one's behavior

bsky.app/profile/scha...
And I suspect in my case that they are probably not specifically thinking of** what they really have a problem with are big intimidating words that have to do with a PROBABLE explanation for one's behavior and the way that's greatly affecting and contributing, NOT HAVING SOLE INFLUENCE mind you, on someone's decision-making and value judgments.. and they don't necessarily have a problem with probability and the odds itself and the "maybes" and "possiblys" and "perhapses" which every single one of us does to a certain extent and one way or another in every ubiquitous way when we're reasoning or making a decision and thinking, you know.. or thinking and making judgments about other people.. and their behavior.. or reasoning just like he and the others did with me when he straight up assumed things about what I know and discern about Joe.. and they didn't even have awareness and curiosity of their own huge blind spots to be boldly claiming a bunch of things which are highly inaccurate, conjectural and incomplete to a gross extent. It's like when people say to themselves and each other "Your lack of hydration is probably making your cracked lips so much worse or it's causing it or contributing to it" or "I didn't sleep well so maybe that is why I felt so irritable today". Because this is not philosophers and academics' usual domain of their talking points and study, they would not even their talking points and study, they would not even bother overintellectualizing this or pressing other people or themselves whenever they say probable plausible stuff like this casually and it would appear to them of no consequence to say these things or think about them. And it's probably it seems to me they are subconsciously grasping at straws interpreting almost every single thing I said as if I mean it's conclusive, absolute or authoritative or incredibly consequential in some kind of negative sense that they are imagining or maybe fearing would happen.. or they are at least wedded to their concepts and beliefs and motives whatever it takes.. even if they seem to only hint at the word and idea "probability" in their language use that is apparent to us when we're reading their writing.. or probably and I think this might be a more likely one in a broad sense (if not that I'm getting a bit repetitive but incredibly nuanced on this point) that they have a subconscious absolute black-and-white interpretative bias of things (even as it's already being communicated and clarified to them what you're saying and what you mean.. as if they just expect you to overexplain and underline yourself at every single instance, every single word or sentence) so I was saying they have a or sentence) so I was saying they have a subconscious absolute black-and-white interpretative bias of things that is also in constant deference to mainstream academic ideas and established requisite talking points that reduce their cost of earnest curious intellectual inquiry and challenge.. or probably that they have an inadequate conception of how language works and the plethora of its mechanistic expressive fluid use and modalities.. apart from the layers and nuances of our psychological grasp.. and so they are only left interpreting and meandering and ruminating subconsciously (or rather intentionally) on the things I said one way from their mind or I didn't actually say and mean and it just circulates back again to their original interpretations and biases and their reified truths or treating them as if they are already real and outsized.. even especially they were very prone at the time before I had to explain, expound myself, highlight words and clarify myself again... so probably it will go something like this again ~ they also interpret this detailed explanation to mean "authority" and "real consequences" subconsciously and not through their overt linguistic usage.. or intentionally to squander away whatever value or merit my line of reasoning has.. rather than my breaking down and supplanting it with another layer of explanatory probability that might point to a pattern with their reasoning.. and might point to a pattern with their reasoning.. and then just going a couple steps further than most people would be willing to say (a symptom of SPECIFICITY in my reasoning) even if they really are thinking of it and believing it in some sense.. (See **1).. and then they would just say parts of the thrust of what they think to make it look more admissible for the overlord academia who might not necessarily be the most philosophically astute or even the most clever and ingenious. That's what I think of it in terms of empirical probabilistic terms if you ask me **So I was saying I suspect in my case that they are probably not SPECIFICALLY thinking of these things.. or else I really am going to be inclined to think that it's lacking in imagination and thought AND receptivity and openness and they are not particularly the observant discerning type.. or they have different sensory experiences and interactions from another planet Or they are misusing an inappropriate amount of vote of confidence in their logical positivist leanings for every one of the context and degree of nuance they encounter from their armchair edge case Lord of their dreams
August 28, 2026 at 11:40 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
Read 4 screenshots, part 1 of 3

People say you can't be "overconfident" about something to mean something apparently unwise and almost intrinsically inseparable with smugness, arrogance and complacency. It's quite silly and convenient to have to say that

bsky.app/profile/scha...
People say you can't be "overconfident" about something to mean something apparently unwise and almost intrinsically inseparable with smugness, arrogance and complacency. It's quite silly and convenient to have to say that as if you can just generalize that for every single thing that vaguely resembles what it would actually mean if you have emotional psychological investment in something and you sussed out a pattern attentively for a long time.. and you actually took the time to get to know a person for quite a long time from different angles much more than the people who are just reacting and taking the piss on someone from just having learned something and committing the sin of having to air out a bunch of their bold presumptions and conjecture about me and the things that I know that they don't and my methods how I came to my opinion (which they would never mention of course and it would be a huge empirical oversight from their part and it signals their OVERCONFIDENCE in their own interpretations and conclusions about me, Joe and everything else)... Of course you would have a higher degree of confidence! And you would probably be right to do so. Of course you were hurt and felt insulted and again made to feel the unpleasant thing like you're not enough and of course your emotiveness and your usage of words would inevitably reflect your psychological mental state as it's rightly distressed and it's ruthlessly being badgered again. Unless and it's ruthlessly being badgered again. Unless people just want to act as if assuming intellectual detachment and a level of undeterred chill demeanor to their colleagues and to prove to themselves somehow never places them in situations that would probably make them similarly much more emotional, or even full of uncertainty or even become convinced of something in a very unhelpful unhealthy way. People have an unusual familiar relationship with cliché stereotypical views that LACKS CRUCIAL SPECIFICITY apart from their very apparent intellectual dishonesty and lack of self-awareness and curiosity and have a detached impersonal perspective on the matter you don't particularly care about in the same way and how it is actually affecting you and even your situation as it already is. It's really amusing that people are much more invested with hyperfixating with my probabilities which I believe we don't even have the same definitions, implications and imagined possible scenarios and they really have to go to such great lengths to strawman me or deflect a talking point and perpetually repeat their original talking points and constantly talk past me to avoid having to be accountable and answerable for their own failings when the onus becomes something that is also apt to them.. It's because a lot of them don't have to them.. It's because a lot of them don't have particularly good convincing thorough arguments or better ones I believe which are not just entirely selective in their reasoning and already about the things that I ALREADY KNOW AND I BROUGHT UP EARLY ON AND CLARIFIED about our subjectivity, pragmatic utility, emotive contextual language use and whatnot.. as well as the reason being one of challenge and provocation to unjust unimaginative characterizations and constant continual condescension and humiliation and very inadequately unchallenged blind spots. It's really interesting that they are making it seem that they are only reserving the right for self-expression to your own perspectives to him and not to me when he's been continually insulting and putting me down.. and the reason why I say that is because they keep on bringing up subjectivity and cultural individual relativism as if I have not thought about that and brought that up adequately.. and it's as if talking about how I feel and think means I'm completely invalidating and disregarding what he thinks and feels that I also know and aware of.. and I actually took the time to understand and get acquainted, thus why I'm still defending, supplanting and steelmanning him sometimes. Or they didn't really fully understand what I'm trying to communicate as is already very apparent in their one-dimensional takes. They really are hyperfixating on my probable statements about him so much more than they are bothered by Joe's pure judgment, vibes, condescension and the outright harm he's projected to me for a much longer time.. even from the get-go when I first brought this up.. not to mention they really are showing themselves to be much more concerned with appearing right and being incredibly dismissive.. and funnily enough as I would have already implied, never admitted and conceded any one of my critiques and the huge mistakes and fallacies they made. And making it look like being probably wrong about something like a goddamn reasoned thorough or evidenced opinion for crying out loud.. not just mere intuition and insubstantial lackluster arguments.. is the absolute worst thing that you can ever do from how they are making an intellectual mockery out of it.. more than their strawmanning and oversimplified caricatures of my arguments and utter lack of impartiality.. really now?? Just bad empirical attitude and conversationalists.. and very childish Whatever happened to your response to me and what you said about Joe to taking the high road and being a much better illuminating guide and collaborator and much more efficient communicator to him?? Oh so now you just decided to switch tactics and take the meandering repetitive circularity of your framing when it's with me.. How unproductive
August 28, 2026 at 11:31 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
We can just say we can drop the whole act of discussing, teasing out, exploring and imagining the possibility that there is a real God and creator out there since this is a huge extraordinary hypothetical that might not even be as thoroughly reasoned as other people..

bsky.app/profile/scha...
August 27, 2026 at 5:36 AM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
If you are still unconvinced that people can have convictions or leanings based on truth or based on opinion.. which I think it would be a huge mistake if you are not going to make a distinction between these when you're reading, interpreting and judging something

bsky.app/profile/scha...
August 27, 2026 at 4:45 AM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
Read 3 screenshots 👓👩🏻

Or other examples that may or may not interest us, how many of us ever really fact-check and corroborate each and every one of the ingredients that are in a nutrition label and their corresponding percentage and just assume them as a given??

bsky.app/profile/scha...
Or other examples that may or may not interest us, how many of us ever really fact-check and corroborate each and every one of the ingredients that are in a nutrition label and their corresponding percentage and just assume them as a given?? How many of us have ever really corroborated each and every single one of the claims that are in scholarly academic history books, autobiographical non-fiction works and all the scientific facts and theories of the world?? Now I'm sure we have complicated methodologies, and systematic approaches, not to mention the vast meta-evidence that we can use and refer to to verify the scientific facts of the world.. so do we have rigorous evidence gathering and analysis and the strict peer review process that need to be followed in order to bring together scholarly academic sources of information. I'm not saying we should give Appeal to Authority the undue justification and reliance that might not warrant it in every contextual situation, nor does probably deferring to one single individual really ideal when we haven't analyzed and reviewed for ourselves each and every one of their methods and their supposed evidence, claims or trends that they sussed out, but that sometimes, other than these situations, it might be necessary to just defer to a trusted legit authority (or even a lot of times we trusted legit authority (or even a lot of times we tend to defer to our friends and strangers who we might not necessarily judge to be THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY based on our usage) for reasons that might be because it's certainly convenient, useful or necessary in the moment, not to mention it saves us a lot of time and the work of doing trial and error if we already found certain patterns or habits that work for us and tend to place us in safer or more conducive situations or ways of approaching things. The justification that we need a rigorous demanding method for every single one of our beliefs and claims and specific points of discussion I believe is overstepping its bounds a lot of times to the point of needing to view these things with an absolute black-and-white mindset to make light of them in the most absolute black-and-white way of looking at them (not to mention we have such things as first principles and more intuitive notions about beauty and truth). And it doesn't even begin to reflect or account for every single facet of our lives or the way we live our lives and every single way we take in and use information and interact with other people and understand ourselves. I think this is certainly a fatal flaw in thinking that tends to seep into specific groups of our academic scholarly philosophy sphere where they tend to have such an allergic dismissive reaction and inaccurate misapprehension at the mere mention of specific points of view or ways of looking and approaching things outside the usual methods that they're already used to when it comes to "knowing something" or having a discussion. I think what philosophers are missing is we need to be able to separate or distinguish the different ways and levels we can know something.
August 26, 2026 at 9:02 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
Scenario:

Someone: *clearly insulted and hurt.. decides to vent about his family problems at a pub to a philosopher and refers to them as disrespectful and lacking in imagination and problem-solving*
August 25, 2026 at 4:17 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
Read 4 screenshots

He really doesn't seem to have an eye for details that would seem to other people even precious or loveable or specific to a person.. or at least human worthy of our attention and care.. and maybe it also has to do with their kind of people or subculture.
He really doesn't seem to have an eye for details that would seem to other people even precious or loveable or specific to a person.. or at least human worthy of our attention and care.. and maybe it also has to do with their kind of people or subculture. The way that other people would perceive who I'm sure he will condescend and judge and fail to fully appreciate because of maybe their immediate apparent attributes.. and their intellect and tastes he would often say.. I can relate with the people I have in mind as well who seems to care much more about these things the way that they tend to notice and even appreciate the little things about their beloved despite the differences and even during their moments of weakness and lack of ability and not necessarily judge them so harshly for it or make them feel that they're failing miserably at life and failing to meet my standards because there is always something to learn from other people despite the stage you are at intellectually and emotionally, even from those who are not quite like you.. not like the ones who hate and cringe at hearing anything that somewhat resembles expressing yourself this way.. especially when it's the inferiors who are doing this. These people who "superior people" are so readily scornful and condescending towards have at least the normal understanding and likeability and level of vulnerability that comes with having to sit with another human being other than you being a less than ideal human being yourself.. and they might even possibly suss other people out when they're showing a tendency or idiosyncrasy from looking at it from different angles and layers and other possible explanations and ways of understanding that are likely to be incredibly helpful and insightful because they are not merely looking at it from the most stereotypical one-dimensional surface-level angle and interpretation that is characteristic of their utter lack of interest and care and myopicness when it comes to other people other than being crudely useful and worthy of them and their time for what purposes. They will not solely see you and measure you up from having grand exciting eventful narratives and romantic idealistic daydreams and subjecting you to a relentless test that can make or break your perception and idea of them easily despite being far from being a high value total catch yourself... but it is from the more grounded catch yourself... but it is from the more grounded simple susceptible receptive sense when they notice things like the way he has certain mannerisms and tendencies, that time you remembered when he got quite nervous and quiet.. and preoccupied and lost in thought and then after some time later that evening he decided to open up about his family problems and insecurities, the type of songs that he loves listening to and how he is his most lighthearted childish self when he gushes talking about his favorite film or video game especially the particular moment you remember where he cried himself so hard after finishing a video game or film and he related at length his experience or review about this with you. Or the way you remember him and appreciate him from having a certain nuanced subtle thought process and mindset that can shoot into different directions and still be able to dig in having to entertain certain ideas that he is trying to figure out and piece together what it would mean to see it a certain way having to mesh it with his own way of viewing it and in what sense it would feel a certain way as for what purposes and what it would entail out of you.. or the way he has a deep sense of curiosity, fascination and vitality for a variety of things that is not just limited by the books and subjects he has known, read and studied that would not carry on its own to having a fluid understanding and way of seeing things outside these things It's always sifted through his PURE JUDGMENT on his high horse if not already his own excessive self-consciousness. Funny how he considers himself a romantic but he can't even get himself to appreciate, imagine and romanticize the little things about what makes a person herself and an imperfect lived-in human being that points to her being much more uniquely individual and very real in a self-aware curious way and that's reflective of a phase and journey and she's not just pretending to be somebody else just to please you and give you half-baked short-sighted narratives and being the it girl you've been waiting for all along. At least that's the type of romantic that I want who is not so obnoxiously offputingly naive, clueless and wretchedly self-absorbed And also.. with that said.. can we just allow people to express themselves for a moment and stop overintellectualizing every little thing that doesn't really need overintellectualizing and especially at the moment they need it?? And we might also need to pay attention to the specific words which are being used to avoid jumping to conclusions and conflating things again in our mind
August 22, 2026 at 7:01 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
Read 2 screenshots

bsky.app/profile/scha...
And for what it's real worth and value, it might be wise, thorough and considerate for Joe and the other detractors and naysayers to also put their focus and attention to the "next explanatory level" so to speak, down the series or line of his causation of his attributes, habits, preferences and inclinations.. and not just MERELY focus and consider even through the reasoning that it's all downstream, foundational or underlying on his core inimitable traits where he was impacted and influenced early on by a variety of sociocultural factors and psychophysiological genetic factors self-reinforcing themselves.. if he keeps on condescending and belittling and hurting me, then don't blame me for having to point out that he is LACKING in imagination, foresight and problem-solving when he keeps framing things a certain way that is incredibly egocentric and surface-level and there is an utter lack of depth and substance with how he continually characterizes and talks about me that takes about as little time as possible in contrast to how I would perceive myself IN THE DETAILS AND NUANCES AND COMPLEXITIES and a few other things about other things we are not quite in agreement with.. that is because he refuses or is unable to think about them and imagine them and entertain them as they are (other than HIMSELF and how these are all sifted eventually through his egocentric Me Me Me lens and how he alone feels and thinks for 95% of the time and his despair) that is also characteristic how a lot of other people lack imagination, foresight and problem-solving to begin with and the ability to truly know and feel for the other person.. which explains why he has this great tendency to often say I probably will eventually bore him to refer to my whole personality and that he will come to see me like everyone else as if to compare me to everyone else like for like and he continually talks about me as if I'm no one special who failed to meet his incredibly high standards Continually referring back to some unbeknownst uncommunicated thing especially considering his communication and his patterns is just going to be an epistemic bind that doesn't lead to much more meaningful critique and assessments and even accurate ones
August 20, 2026 at 10:13 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
And for what it's real worth and value, it might be wise, thorough and considerate for Joe and the other detractors and naysayers to also put their focus and attention to the "next explanatory level" so to speak, down the series or line of his causation of his attributes

bsky.app/profile/scha...
August 20, 2026 at 10:01 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
And for what it's real worth and value, it might be wise, thorough and considerate for Joe and the other detractors and naysayers to also put their focus and attention to the "next explanatory level" so to speak, down the series or line of his causation of his attributes

bsky.app/profile/scha...
August 20, 2026 at 10:01 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
My take on this is: Don't conflate probabilities having varying degrees of confidence with having evidence, observations and patterns that you eventually sussed out and followed through in much more depth and detail..

substack.com/@ishmaelh/no...
August 20, 2026 at 7:45 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
Read 3 screenshots 👩🏻👓

🌌

bsky.app/profile/scha...
In other news, I think there is the ongoing tendency to confuse posing an insight into necessity when someone is expressing themselves and clearly insulted, offended and hurt and affected. I'm not sure if this is just a habit that's perpetuated when people are conversing with each other and interpreting that other people have this tendency or lapse in their thinking and then getting it right most of the time among the people in their circles they engage with after thoroughly confirming it maybe with the same people or establishing a pattern or robust evidence. And this still tends to bleed into the highbrow philosophy sphere even after the essential learnings and competencies have been dealt with and studied to be able to move on, I should say as a curious learner of the highbrow philosophy sphere, to other fascinating in-depth topics.. But that said, I don't even agree with Mary's Room just to set it straight and just in case, since people brought this up apart from this post, I quickly had to look it up. We do things for different reasons, some of the time, in some opportune moment where I might be subtly getting into a kind of fluidity and non-binary way of reasoning and looking at things as my pattern even if the opposite might seem to people at the immediate outset and then I tend to layer my train of thoughts as it occurs perhaps in the subjective private details as well as getting it across one way or another along the public vocal ones that I am confident in the moment. But sometimes, there are other reasons being a direct reaction to repeated felt cruelty, condescension, egotism and emotional psychological harm over time, it all keeps adding up despite my resilience and growth and inner peace, and then I also sometimes tend towards or am deeply incited and forced by people being their usual selves towards provocation and challenge to them.. and then also the other reasons I talked about in detail how they also have merits and value that people don't often gravitate towards or would likely find only unproductive at best. So far, I wonder if these things need to be communicated and pointed out and discerned more often if this is really particular to an individual or group within a widespread phenomenon or trend. At least, that's putting it out out there where it's supposed to land. But then, lastly, I should say maybe I would better appreciate the compliment there some other time.. but it is still received nonetheless and thanks to that part. But I guess this post is just prioritized this time to deal with the first part.
August 18, 2026 at 12:08 PM
schalazeal07.bsky.social
In other news, I think there is the ongoing tendency to confuse posing an insight into necessity when someone is expressing themselves and clearly insulted, offended and hurt and affected. I'm not sure if this is just a habit that's perpetuated when people

substack.com/@abbenmaguir...
One of the best treatments of Mary's Room ever, and the line about Philosophers Syndrome, the act of mistaking a failure of imagination for an insight into necessity, is one of the sharpest single "bars" (so to speak) of any post WWII analytic philosophy book ever written. Then there's the point about the spiral color illusion which is like a mind-blowing aha moment. Gosh, maybe I should re-read it. I also think Dennett is an uncommonly fantastic writer, uncharacteristic for analytic philosophers, which helps his books go down smooth.
August 18, 2026 at 12:03 PM