»Cookies and Candies ?«

intell wrote:

Someone still has to make the connection between 'ingestibles often serving as more than just ingestibles' to 'the cookies make Neo fall in love' or 'the cookies give Neo his powers'. Then we have to get into Cipher's steak and stuff like that. Otherwise, their argument does not exist.

Regarding Cypher's steak "and stuff like that"...

Frued: "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

Thank you Puck. Your continual presence in this thread adds incalcuable value to the dicussion.

* moves topic to chit chat, because of the large number of off topic posts [although I could split!] *

And MeX is still active.

Quote:

Regarding Cypher's steak "and stuff like that"... Frued: "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

Exactly. And you have yet to make the case that the cookies and candies were meant to be seen in a different light.

Quote:

Your continual presence in this thread adds incalcuable value to the dicussion.

Are comments like this really necessary?

Quote:

* moves topic to chit chat, because of the large number of off topic posts *

Might as well.

th3 p4th wrote:

* moves topic to chit chat, because of the large number of off topic posts [although I could split!] * And MeX is still active.

I'd say split...

tozy wrote:

I'd say split...

If you want...
/sign

I just wrote the longest response ever and hit the Backspace key which reset the damn thing.



I'll get the heart up to redo my response later.

intell wrote:

tozy wrote: I'd say split... If you want... /sign

/sign

Aether wrote:

I just wrote the longest response ever and hit the Backspace key which reset the damn thing. I'll get the heart up to redo my response later.

You should do that more often.

RodBell wrote:

Peoples to be aware.

Aware of what exactly?

Quote:

To discuss, and too see connections.

------------------------------
What if I were privy to things that a lot of people don't talk about (and very few write about)? Is it my obligation to explain every intricate experience I've had with it to help you understand (and risk being called a "know it all) or should I just leave it hanging and hope that you make the connection on your own (and risk the complaint that I'm not making a connection)?

Or, does it not matter, and I should just do what I want for the purpose I want?

What do you think?

I had been standing for the first choice since the times of Lux and pre-SOE. But now that you put it this way, and in the light of recent events, I'm starting to see your point

Gina Rink wrote:

What do you think?

I see your point, now. You should just do what you want and for whatever purpose you want. *whispers* But you could explain what your experience has been with it, to those who really want to know.

2/20/2007 edit:

Out of the 6 posts that this board probably had today, I think mine accounted for 3 of them, is that what you call, "alive"?

Gina Rink wrote:

Quote: To discuss, and too see connections. ------------------------------ What if I were privy to things that a lot of people don't talk about (and very few write about)? Is it my obligation to explain every intricate experience I've had with it to help you understand (and risk being called a "know it all) or should I just leave it hanging and hope that you make the connection on your own (and risk the complaint that I'm not making a connection)? Or, does it not matter, and I should just do what I want for the purpose I want? What do you think?

I don't think there's an obligation. Not at all. Are we all to be doomed to follow the Categorical Imperative? Do you feel you are Kantian?

Didn't the movies say that purpose is choice? Do you not believe that?

Let's presume for a moment that you are a very intelligent individual Gina (I can see you are of at least decent intelligence so don't take that personally). Very intelligent people are often good at any number of things and could contribute to society in any number of varied and important ways: medicine, protector of the weak, politics, philosophy, psychology... all of these can be important. Let's then also presume that all things being equal, you can do any one of these things equally well so far as you know or can ascertain currently.

Are you then bound to all of these things, to contributing or doing all of these things? How would you judge where the obligation (or even worse, the greatest obligation) actually lie? Is it with the thing that will do the most good for the most people? How would you know that without knowing the future? How would you know that you wouldn't spend years trying to say, develop a vaccine for AIDS and fail when you could have done more good for more people by writing a ground breaking book in psychology that cured depression.

As I said earlier, these are moral judgements. Keep quiet, don't keep quiet... do whatever you want. Your view of obligation depends on whether your valuation of life is teleological or not. It depends on where your goals are. I depends on how much personal weight you place on a specific goal or outcome and how much you feel you need to be responsible for each of those outcomes.

Every time you open your mouth (and anyone for that matter) you risk being called a know-it-all and you risk people not making the connection. This is possible with anything. I suspect that more than a few of us in these discussions have been called that a time or two anyway.

But notice what you said there... you "hope" we make the connection and what you mean is, you hope we make your connection. You "hope" we understand it the same way you do. But why worry if we do or don't? It's not for our sake, I can tell you that much. It's for your own. Obligation, is another word for failure to appease one's image of self.

There are no altruistic acts but there can be selfless (and I mean that in the most literal way possible) ones.

Or maybe you don't agree with me. Your choice. It's always your choice to believe what you want to believe. Just don't be surprised if it doesn't necessarily get you anywhere with anyone else.

Aether wrote:

I don't think there's an obligation. Not at all. Are we all to be doomed to follow the Categorical Imperative? Do you feel you are Kantian? Didn't the movies say that purpose is choice? Do you not believe that? Let's presume for a moment that you are a very intelligent individual Gina (I can see you are of at least decent intelligence so don't take that personally). Very intelligent people are often good at any number of things and could contribute to society in any number of varied and important ways: medicine, protector of the weak, politics, philosophy, psychology... all of these can be important. Let's then also presume that all things being equal, you can do any one of these things equally well so far as you know or can ascertain currently. Are you then bound to all of these things, to contributing or doing all of these things? How would you judge where the obligation (or even worse, the greatest obligation) actually lie? Is it with the thing that will do the most good for the most people? How would you know that without knowing the future? How would you know that you wouldn't spend years trying to say, develop a vaccine for AIDS and fail when you could have done more good for more people by writing a ground breaking book in psychology that cured depression. As I said earlier, these are moral judgements. Keep quiet, don't keep quiet... do whatever you want. Your view of obligation depends on whether your valuation of life is teleological or not. It depends on where your goals are. I depends on how much personal weight you place on a specific goal or outcome and how much you feel you need to be responsible for each of those outcomes. Every time you open your mouth (and anyone for that matter) you risk being called a know-it-all and you risk people not making the connection. This is possible with anything. I suspect that more than a few of us in these discussions have been called that a time or two anyway. But notice what you said there... you "hope" we make the connection and what you mean is, you hope we make your connection. You "hope" we understand it the same way you do. But why worry if we do or don't? It's not for our sake, I can tell you that much. It's for your own. Obligation, is another word for failure to appease one's image of self. There are no altruistic acts but there can be selfless (and I mean that in the most literal way possible) ones. Or maybe you don't agree with me. Your choice. It's always your choice to believe what you want to believe. Just don't be surprised if it doesn't necessarily get you anywhere with anyone else.

Thank you for those kind words, however, I didn't write those questions for my own introspection. They were target to the "cookie-loving kids" here. Those people here who STILL think the movies were left wide open. When they haven't realized yet, they are the ones who are closed to new information (or at least, are not looking on their own).

But, again, thank you.

I always felt the cookies were perhaps more then just good treats, but it was just fun conjecture. I don't think the cookie did anything proactivly, like say the cake did to the woman in M2. However, the "cookies need love like everything does." line stuck with me, as well as the expression of love from Trinity to Neo beint the link that seemed to bring him back from the dead. I like to think that perhaps the cookie had some kind of dormant code that would activate upon love and maybe played some part in Neo becoming the One.

/wave Tozy and Intell

@ Hex.

/wave