So I was having an online discussion with my younger brother a little more than a week ago about abortion. Being a devout and pro-life Catholic he held the opinion that life starts at conception, that it a fertilized egg is human and should be treated as human because it is a unique life different than the host parent. I have also been reading bio-ethics and many different places on the debate and they all seem to revolve around trying to justify scientifically what I can best describe as trying to answer the question, "when is an embryo tantamount to a human being?"
Of course, that one question gave way to the larger question, "What makes us human?" Where do we define the limits of humanity? Is it strictly in a biological sense as in form, shape, and structure? Is it in potential in the case of infants? Is it in behavior; could someone act in a way that they are no longer considered, if even for a moment, a human? Is it in ability whether physical or mental? Is humanity a transitive property; in other words, is it a label that can be taken away or does it last regardless once it has been gained? Are their varying degrees of humanity where a person could be considered "more human" than someone else?
I am very curious to hear all of your thoughts and ideas!
"I imagine relating two events. I relate two events. Two events are related."
"We just notice some of them for some reason."
I imagine noticing an event for some reason. I notice an event for some reason. An event is noticed for some reason.
This process does indeed happen all the time.
Something very similar to what you imagined ends up happening. You do not imagine it perfectly.
And if you perfectly imagine something that perfectly comes to pass, you just have a mind that was good at extrapolating probability of the exact future circumstances based on previous experience with similar or related things.
This was my line of thinking as well. Also, even subconsciously we can effect certain scenarios to a limited degree, or at least increase their likelihood of happening. Observing patterns. Visualizing results. Capitalizing on patters. Actualizing visualized results. If done consciously, it is wholly unremarkable (unless done with uncanny skill). Done subconsciously or in a way we would rather not consciously acknowledge, it probably seems pretty wild.
I mean, if we actively ran from our imaginings and they still came to pass, that might be a little freaky, but more realistically, some coincidences are actually self-fulfilling prophecies of a sort.
"Self-fulfilling prophecies" how do those work?
It means that your belief that something is going to happen has such a dramatic effect on your behavior that these changes in behavior caused by that belief, set things in motion for the prediction to come true.
It is a prediction that causes its own fulfillment.
Let's say I have a premonition that someone is going to hit me today. That premonition makes me feel a bit paranoid, so I start acting edgy and paranoid as a result. Later on in the day someone accidentally spills soda on me. Because I'm feeling paranoid, I misinterpret the harmless accident as an act of aggression. Because I'm edgy, my reaction causes the situation to escalate until it is a fight. The person who spilled soda on me then hits me because I'm being a tool.
Now imagine I hadn't had the premonition. I wouldn't be paranoid or edgy, the soda situation wouldn't escalate into a fight, and I wouldn't get hit.
In a similar vein, I sometimes decipher my mood by the morning traffic I encounter on the way to work. When I'm in a great mood, there are tons of good drivers on the road. When I'm in a pissy mood, there are tons of asshole drivers on the road. Strange coincidence, right? Well, obviously not. My mood largely just impacts how I interpret reality and how I weight the significance of unfolding events. Barring some exceptional days, there isn't any significant difference in the number of good or asshole drivers on the road day in day out, but it's hard to figure that out unless you actually retrace your experiences and filter them through whatever degree of objectivity you can muster.
Why do I do this? It amuses me, but also my mood impacts how my interactions with the world will play out that day. I can capitalize on good moods and mitigate bad moods with a bit of conscientious effort.
The trouble is that there is no way to know that you have remembered something perfectly so there is no way to know if something perfectly comes to pass. One can be of that impression, but no more.
Maybe, since everyone here seems to agree that "perfection" doesn't exist, or at least we can't know it, we should "choose" (if we can) another group of words. I was okay with "similar" and "related". "Accurate" can serve well, depending on the intention.:)
If that's not perfection Blaine, it'll have to do til something better comes along!
I dunno. Lovely girl, but those looks like a recipe for back pain. The composition is also a little awkward and the lighting is decent enough, but far from great. Also, technically I'm looking at the words 'Your looking at it' when that point is made. That being the case, I have to point out that the sentence is not grammatically correct (and consideration for meme tendencies doesn't really satisfy me here). On a more subjective note, I think the font selection is questionable.
Also, using the word 'Perfection' there tempts dick heads into making stupid, contrarian statements.
Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play --?
You're loading the dice by taking on "for some reason" all the time. How about simply...
I imagine noticing an event. I notice an event. An event is noticed.
Note, BTW, that the last two sentences are the same sentences, one of them simply the passive form of the other.