Opinion 78

Objects may be pefect, but organisms tend to be far from 'perfect'.

Take hominids, their warning system (pain system is one of such) isn't full on average, for proper joyous absolutely guaranteed safe life in the modern era, nor that of ancient rather as well.

Pain system, is a type of warning system.  Does it work in perfection.  As with any systems, and since that is a system, there are loopholes and way to get around, depending on the 'skill craft' of the infiltrator.

The pain system had endured through testament of thousands of years. While the other pain system: awareness types have yet to develop to adequate levels.  Some humanoids have exceptional great awareness, such as the author of this writing, while others rely on strict-following 'seemingly most prominent message' (they assume it must be right, copies it, believes it at that way) to compensate for the lack of.

An example of awareness pain system is the notice of (being) in danger, by the deers.  There isn't something touching it, but it knows the dangers.


What's interesting about the basic: regular pain system, and the more advanced type: awareness pain system, is that the basic ones are easy to grow, while advanced ones harder to build if not also maintain, they are also harder to detect.  Regular pain systems come on based physical sensory touch, whether through direct contact, or indirect means (inductions).  Awareness takes a whole 'nother level.  Their input bus of data may be of a different set.  Whether they use raw or processed data holds some facinating berries for research activities.








Few men define words before proceeding on using them.

Take the word 'support' for example. It's a noun and a verb, and what does it mean?

Is cheering on a classroom clown giving support?

Now how about giving an inspirational leader their promise of support, would that be support?

The two makes no difference, in an observational sense.  There exists almost no visual difference nor any observable difference between the two - they are highly similar.  A winner of a contest beeing cheered on by the audience, thereon, 'receiving support' or the 'audience lending (giving) support', could very well be a class clown being tamed and controlled.


With men being irrational beasts, impulsive drunks, and intelligent fools, this world would result in more slumber and wreckage than marvelous monuments and musuems.

People (our guys if they wish for a great civilization to come) must follow the rule of 3-5 second rule: analyze everything and move onto the next after 3 second count.  This is the minimum time needed for entire part of the brain to process the given info.  Previous conduct of rushing onto the next sentence 'following' along with the speaker (or stranger) interacting with had to do with their malicious pre-mediated doing.  The strangers wanted faster responses from us, building that to a norm slowly so that the time when their real undoings come, an irrational and rushed thinker will be present at the scene, making decisions (we can imagine how that would turn out).


Many other words are not defined properly in the Ingolish codex.

The famously known Engish language is not a language, but a codex.

It's been falsely advertised as so by its sellers, or the most major stakeholders.

In what ways is Ingolish a language, when many different favored persons (some of them foul some of them semi-foul) are commonly using them, together in the same cafeteria?  It is a codex of syllabals, an alphabet system, and a combination of words, which r pieced together by alphabets.

A true language would be something tied with their deepest wishes.  A kangaroo would want bigger pockets.  A horse would want greener grass.  A camel would want more desert (or do they).  Each speaking their own yearnings, at same time holding their unique cultural heritages.  Person A will be seeking one set, while person B may be seeking another set of wishes.  Their vibe, essence, the world view, attitudes would have differences or similarities.  Ingolish covers this landscape up with the similarity of the words: spelled the same, most of the time from two different cultured persons, when the underlying essence hold major differences.  The two people being compared speak in different tongue, wants different things in life, represent set of different banners, and speak in different languages. But the codex are of the same one, and that's about it.


Ingolish codex is a giant word play.  And has large amount of such elements to it, let's examine:

(whoever tempered or installed these words, probably had that intention)

The word winner and loser: how come the word loss, lose, and lost, has to be draggy to the mouth, forming an exclusive and inescapable downward motion.

The word democracy, how come it sounds juicy as university, viscocity, velocity and casinos.  They can be pronounced in no other ways than immediate approval.

The word America, an utopian sounding word, that could sound like nothing except the greatest marriage ever held on an universal health care.

The word lie, does it have to sound like the person couldn't handle the inflictions observed.


There are many more of tempered-words, proving again the 'language' is a word play.

Whoever did these, besides lacking no life, surely did well with their additional play: adding a meaning to each word signifying the info that they are true and can in ways represent their meaning attached.

If any word, of any codex or language has the meaning de-tatchable from the words, then what were those 'words' in the first place.