Spatial thinking

General philosophy discussions. If you are not sure where to place your thread, please post it here. Share favorite quotes, discuss philosophers, and other topics.

Re: Spatial thinking

Postby JohnD on October 2nd, 2020, 10:22 pm 

Obviously we have opposite views of thinking and memory. To me thinking has always come first. We were thinking before we emerged from the womb. Memory however takes time to accumulate. It comes from knowledge obtained from thought. It is tainted with our perception of events yet, come the next adventure we rely on our memory for a logical course. We don’t have to, memories last for as long as we perceive a need for their guidance.
In regards to meditation you confuse it with mind control and hypnosis. Both are very different. Why would you look for more than the quiet of a peaceful mind from meditation? If you can achieve this from normal sleep that’s great however I find when I sleep my thoughts are still present though I may not be consciously aware of them. It takes time for the brain to process the day’s happenings. Meditation properly exercise and practised will do in 20 minutes what sleep takes all night to do. It’s not a superpower however, the brain is magnificent.
JohnD
Member
 
Posts: 754
Joined: 31 May 2012
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby charon on October 3rd, 2020, 1:51 am 

John D -

Who is your post addressed to? I have to assume it's myself since I was the last to post before this. On the other hand you've been talking to others too.

Obviously we have opposite views of thinking and memory.


First, why should we have 'views'? Opinions only breed dissent. Thinking is thinking, which we all do, and memory is memory, the collection of past events recorded in the brain. Why have views? It's factual.

To me thinking has always come first. We were thinking before we emerged from the womb.


I'm sorry, but how do you know that? That's obviously a strange assertion. I certainly don't remember anything like that! You must be different.

Memory however takes time to accumulate.


Memory certainly takes time to accumulate, obviously. Presumably it starts when we're born and begin experiencing life on earth :-) Any other assertion would have to be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

It comes from knowledge obtained from thought.


All right, but where does the thought come from? Is thought independent of knowledge? You're saying thought first, then knowledge.

I'd be wary, personally, of making assertions of things beyond our ken. I don't know how babies think, or even if they do. Presumably the brain is recording events but they have no language. Most of our thinking is done with words, isn't it? But recognition of, say, the mother's face and touch would be there... I really don't know.

I'm also not sure it's relevant. We have to deal with things as they are now, with ourselves as we know things now.

In regards to meditation you confuse it with mind control and hypnosis


Not at all, I'm saying categorically that anything like that is absolutely not meditation in its right sense at all. The word means to think over, ponder over, and so on, that's all. I actually think the purveyors of these repetitive techniques have hijacked the word and used it for their own purposes.

Why would you look for more than the quiet of a peaceful mind from meditation?


Because the 'quiet of a peaceful mind' may be nothing at all. As you say, a bit of restful peace and quiet will do that. It's not much, is it? THe idea that you have to sit in a corner and do some weird stuff to get a peaceful mind seems a bit odd to me. It's a long way round to not much. It's also not very logical.

I find when I sleep my thoughts are still present though I may not be consciously aware of them. It takes time for the brain to process the day’s happenings.


Exactly. If the day's happenings aren't entirely sorted out before sleep they have to be sorted out during it, hence dreams, agitation, and so on. And if the agitation is really bad it's hard to sleep at all.

Meditation properly exercise and practised will do in 20 minutes what sleep takes all night to do.


So what are you saying? That practising a methodical technique will give understanding of the day's events? Why not understand them as they take place?

I don't see how a mind practising a system can understand anything. It's occupied with things that have happened - otherwise it would already be quiet and silent - and is now occupied with its practice. So that's an extra occupation. And apparently all this occupation and activity will produce a quiet mind.

I'm afraid it won't, will it? The events of each day, each moment, have to be understood intelligently so order in the brain is established. Order is silence because everything is sorted out, there's no disruption.

That's why I'm saying it has to be done as we go along. After that it becomes much more difficult. But, since we're not perfect in our attentiveness, some things may have to be looked at later. But all this has to do with daily living, daily events, daily actions, it's not apart from that.

I don't think a person whose brain is sorted out needs to practice anything. Nor do I think practising something is going to provide an intelligent understanding of daily interaction.

Practising is mechanical, repetitive, after the event, intelligent comprehension in the moment is not.
charon
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2518
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby JohnD on October 6th, 2020, 5:30 am 

Comprehension in the moment is much more practised. It needs focus. In life we focus on singular paths and block out alternatives. Choosing to look at alternatives requires great care. It isn't just a matter of saying don't focus on the singular but rather searching for all alternatives. That's much harder.
The perceived order of the brain and daily events is to sit and sort through the events and place them in some order to be retained or forgotten. This is stressful and the cause of anxiety in many. What is more common is to forget all but the most important events of the day. Every day is after the event, you can't review a day while it progresses.
Meditation becomes like a time-out. Stop your mind from thinking of anything but the basics. Twenty minutes is equal to a whole night's sleep. I believe Gandhi practised it and didn't sleep at all.
My proposal is this can be practised to expand the way we think. Following a system is what we do everyday no matter the work we do, even if it is to fill a ledger at one point you learnt through practice and then eventually you understood.
JohnD
Member
 
Posts: 754
Joined: 31 May 2012
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby charon on October 6th, 2020, 6:48 am 

John -

Comprehension in the moment is much more practised


What is this obsession with practice? Life isn't playing the piano or some other activity, it's ongoing, constantly. Events, relationships have to be understood in the moment. One can't practice such understanding, it's either happening or it's not. What is there to practice?

In life we focus on singular paths and block out alternatives. Choosing to look at alternatives requires great care.


But what's the need of choice at all? Things happen on the instant, we don't choose them. Things are going to take place today. I'm not talking about a business meeting where decisions are made after consideration, I'm talking about life in relationship with each other.

Life is exactly that, isn't it? The interaction with others, at home, in the workplace, a shop, a cafe, everywhere. It's in our contact with others that the difficulties arise.

There's no time to choose. The word, the action, is gone before we know it. Someone who is wary, defensive, choosing every move, is a pain to themselves and everybody else, they're on a wrong footing right from the start. No wonder our lives are so awful.

The perceived order of the brain and daily events is to sit and sort through the events and place them in some order to be retained or forgotten. This is stressful and the cause of anxiety in many.


But that can't be done as the events are taking place. You can't suddenly say to your boss - or your wife or friend - 'Just a sec, I've got to sit and sort my brain out'!

We don't know how to live, that's the problem. We don't know how to live without tension, conflict, worrying, choosing. Obviously that way of life is a nightmare.

you can't review a day while it progresses


You can't review it, no. Reviewing it means to view it again, to go over it after it's gone. But if one is awake at the moment these things take place and our responses are correct, born of attention, then problems don't arise. It's only when we become inattentive and do or say the wrong things that we need to review them later.

So daily living means full attention. It's probably like driving, one has to pay serious attention to the road. It's the inattentive driver who causes accidents. Similarly, the daily living needs just as much attention otherwise things go wrong.

That attention isn't something one practices; it can't be practised. Someone 'practising attention' isn't paying attention at all. So attention has to be there as a natural state, and it is there inevitably when one sees the necessity of it.

Meditation becomes like a time-out. Stop your mind from thinking of anything but the basics. Twenty minutes is equal to a whole night's sleep.


You said that before and you're repeating it. So, for you, meditation is separate from the living. You live, go along, then have to meditate later.

Is that meditation? Is meditation stopping your mind from thinking? CAN you stop your mind from thinking?

Why is your mind thinking? Not how to stop it, you can't, but why? There's usually just a general sort of superficial activity but, when there's a real worry, it's pointing to something wrong, surely? And that something needs looking at, like a cut finger needs looking at.

But we don't look, we practice, which is completely irrelevant. Looking means listening, finding out what's going on so we can understand it. That's the way of intelligence, not practising something. That's idiotic.

My proposal is this can be practised to expand the way we think. Following a system is what we do everyday no matter the work we do, even if it is to fill a ledger at one point you learnt through practice and then eventually you understood.


No, we already think like that. We think in terms of systems, techniques, methods. They are all 'how's' - how to quiet the mind, how to do this and that, how to become a millionaire!

I wonder if you see that it's all based on acquisition? As we want to achieve success in our business life so we want to achieve or acquire serenity, a quiet mind, or some other such thing. And is that really the point of meditation?

If mediation is just a method to achieve success then it's not meditation at all, is it? Like I said at the beginning, it might be all right for those with stressful lives to compensate by 'meditating' - which is really just a different way of having a drink or taking a pill - but let's not call it meditation in its true sense.

So what is meditation in that case? This may not interest someone who just wants to get de-stressed but one should know the difference so one isn't fooled by these things.

Have you any interest in that? Or are you so certain about what you consider meditation to be that you look no further?

I'm not trying to sell you something, by the way, it's not like that at all. Meditation is the attention we pay to life. It's intrinsic in the living itself, not away from it.
charon
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2518
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby BadgerJelly on October 7th, 2020, 12:12 am 

Charon -

I have a suggestion ... read your above post as if it was written by someone else and then offer a rebuttal ;)
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5739
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby charon on October 7th, 2020, 1:23 am 

Why should I rebut it? What's wrong with it?
charon
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2518
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby neuro on October 9th, 2020, 7:15 am 

Interesting post, Badger

maieutic and socratic, eh?
Not kidding, given the topic of the thread: "try and look at things from a different perspective"...

Still, I think charon is playing a nice role here, a role opposed to that of JohnD: charon adopts an existentially RELATIONAL perspective - we are and live in relations and relations are the important part of our life, so how and what we think afterwards is not what matters - whereas JohnD adopts an existentially speculative, philosophical perspective - we are because we think and revising our ideas is the important part of our life...

Is anybody here surprised that Badger the philosopher asks charon - and not JohnD - to try a different perspective...? :°)
User avatar
neuro
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: 25 Jun 2010
Location: italy


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby charon on October 9th, 2020, 7:55 am 

so how and what we think afterwards


Before, during, and afterwards. How and what we think is important at all times. What we think is what we are and if we think wrongly that's the world we create.
charon
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2518
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby BadgerJelly on October 12th, 2020, 4:01 am 

neuro wrote:Interesting post, Badger

maieutic and socratic, eh?
Not kidding, given the topic of the thread: "try and look at things from a different perspective"...

Still, I think charon is playing a nice role here, a role opposed to that of JohnD: charon adopts an existentially RELATIONAL perspective - we are and live in relations and relations are the important part of our life, so how and what we think afterwards is not what matters - whereas JohnD adopts an existentially speculative, philosophical perspective - we are because we think and revising our ideas is the important part of our life...

Is anybody here surprised that Badger the philosopher asks charon - and not JohnD - to try a different perspective...? :°)



See here:

Why is everything based on thought? Mediation isn't thought, meditation is the ending of thought!


Followed later by ...

Not at all, I'm saying categorically that anything like that is absolutely not meditation in its right sense at all. The word means to think over, ponder over, and so on, that's all.


There is another instance from months ago that relates to another thread I started. The pattern isn’t promising so I made a request ... it will be ignored now though due to reasons of the ego (or maybe answered due to reasons of the ego) >:{l
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5739
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby JohnD on October 16th, 2020, 11:32 pm 

Hi Charon, Badger and everyone else who has or may have input into this discussion.
Philosophy considers questions not answerable otherwise. Whether it is of physics, life, genealogy, biology or whatever field of science we ponder. It is not always evidence based, or at least it should not be, because if it were then a lot of ideas are missed. Philosophy is not to be confused with debating, it is about considering, questioning and expanding on the idea of one to hopefully be a subject for discussion by others that follow. We should never qualify it with boundaries pertaining to the style of argument and consider proposals only on the grounds of a person being pro or against a particular school of thought. We need to consider ideas on their own merit. With due consideration, questioning and possible input from others a rational comes to being.
So now lets get back to my original proposal of expanding human thinking.
JohnD
Member
 
Posts: 754
Joined: 31 May 2012
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (2)
BadgerJelly liked this post


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby BadgerJelly on October 17th, 2020, 12:32 am 

Pluralism seems to be a place to start - rather than siding with some ‘pure’ relativism.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5739
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby charon on October 17th, 2020, 4:03 am 

John -

So now lets get back to my original proposal of expanding human thinking.


What do you mean by 'expanding' thinking?

You said at the start:

Spatial thinking is delimiting the direction of our thinking. Like a 3D hologram, spatial thinking is seeing the problem in its 3D form.


Let's say we see 2+2 = ? on a page. We might puzzle over what those symbols mean. But if we envisage a room with two people in it, and two more come in, then there are four people. We see the whole thing like watching a film.

Is that what you mean? Let's be clear.
charon
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2518
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby BadgerJelly on October 19th, 2020, 5:37 am 

JohnD » October 17th, 2020, 11:32 am wrote:Hi Charon, Badger and everyone else who has or may have input into this discussion.
Philosophy considers questions not answerable otherwise. Whether it is of physics, life, genealogy, biology or whatever field of science we ponder. It is not always evidence based, or at least it should not be, because if it were then a lot of ideas are missed. Philosophy is not to be confused with debating, it is about considering, questioning and expanding on the idea of one to hopefully be a subject for discussion by others that follow. We should never qualify it with boundaries pertaining to the style of argument and consider proposals only on the grounds of a person being pro or against a particular school of thought. We need to consider ideas on their own merit. With due consideration, questioning and possible input from others a rational comes to being.
So now lets get back to my original proposal of expanding human thinking.


Just to be clear. The term ‘pluralism’ (funnily enough) has a plurality of meanings within specific areas of philosophical interest.

Here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluralism_(philosophy)#Logical_pluralism

I’m not sure which use you’re talking of or what it is you’re suggesting exactly?

I completely agree that ‘expanding human thinking’ is important. You seem to have framed this as an item of ‘pluralism’ - the question is what you want to discuss, where you wish to discuss it (within what field of interest) and how you personally are making claims of what possesses ‘merit’: as well as what ‘merit’ within the given context? I think the latter question is probably the most tricky as you seem to be saying that ‘expanding’ is ‘better’ (ie. has greater merit than limited investigation).

Of course we all well know that there is a fine balance. Such is what I find of interest. The ‘optimal’ and the very idea of an ‘optimal’ approach.

There are a number of ways this line of thinking could branch off.

To sum up, it would help the discussion - from my perspective - if you were to use some specific examples (although I do appreciate that maybe you’re actually trying to avoid such so as not to lead into too confined a discussion on one specific aspect of heuristics).
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5739
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby JohnD on November 6th, 2020, 3:11 pm 

Hi Charon, we need to go beyond your example and think of the consequences of two people being in the room then the consequences of two more people joining them. We need to consider the scientific argument of when is the sum of 2+2=4? Then we consider the practical view that 2+2 does for all intents and purposes equal 4. Also, consideration is to be given to the idea that we don't exist in a vacuum and there are consequences to our existence that go beyond our being and includes all other existing matter.
Badger, I tried following your link however Wiki says it doesn't have an article on the subject. I'm not sure where within my writing I mentioned pluralism however to answer your question yes I am trying to keep it as open as possible and invite others to participate and put their own arguments.
JohnD
Member
 
Posts: 754
Joined: 31 May 2012
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby charon on November 6th, 2020, 3:34 pm 

JohnD » November 6th, 2020, 8:11 pm wrote:Hi Charon, we need to go beyond your example and think of the consequences of two people being in the room then the consequences of two more people joining them. We need to consider the scientific argument of when is the sum of 2+2=4? Then we consider the practical view that 2+2 does for all intents and purposes equal 4. Also, consideration is to be given to the idea that we don't exist in a vacuum and there are consequences to our existence that go beyond our being and includes all other existing matter.


Okay, but I just want to be clear first that this idea of spacial thinking means seeing things in a sort of 3D, hologramish way. Then, presumably, by building or expanding on that, bringing in the other things you mention.

But, of course, consequences and scientific arguments aren't the same as seeing something spatially. Spacial presumably implies space, no?
charon
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2518
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby BadgerJelly on November 9th, 2020, 2:41 am 

For some reason the link cut off the last part of the text. You can most certainly find a page on “pluralism” (just look).

Other than that, I still don’t see what YOU are saying? Do you have an argument, or are you just looking for suggestions of possible arguments vaguely in this area?

You mentioned an ‘original proposal’ you spoke of earlier, but I honestly don’t see what you were proposing?
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5739
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby JohnD on November 19th, 2020, 3:24 pm 

Hi Charon, thinking spatially implies expanding your thinking base, thinking beyond a narrow field of focus, giving your thoughts space in the philosophical sense.
Every problem has more than one level. Yet, when doing analysis, we concentrate our attention on that one level that proves most obvious. An example is COVID 19. From the start, the concentration of thought has been on finding a vaccine while other implications are being waylayed. Now, those other issues are seen as paramount. This hasn't been by design rather it is a symptom of reactive thinking.
JohnD
Member
 
Posts: 754
Joined: 31 May 2012
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby charon on November 22nd, 2020, 2:54 pm 

John -

Sorry for the delay, I wasn't ignoring your post. Thanks for the answer.

expanding your thinking base, thinking beyond a narrow field of focus, giving your thoughts space in the philosophical sense.


Well, let's think carefully. Thinking is always based on knowledge, right? In fact, it's entirely limited by its knowledge because we can't know everything. So, presumably, expanding the thinking base means acquiring more knowledge. Would that be right?

You say 'thinking beyond a narrow field of focus'. I'd go for that. If one's myopically concerned with only one thing one misses everything else. Like concentrating only on one part of a picture, one doesn't see the rest properly.

So, presumably, one has to step back, as it were, to see the entire picture. That seems reasonable.

Every problem has more than one level.


Yes, inevitably. It's always related to other issues as well, it doesn't just exist in isolation.

when doing analysis, we concentrate our attention on that one level that proves most obvious.


Yes, that's what I was saying above. Analysis in particular is a limiting process. One's examining one cause after the other and that takes time. It's very slow.

From the start, the concentration of thought has been on finding a vaccine while other implications are being waylayed. Now, those other issues are seen as paramount. This hasn't been by design rather it is a symptom of reactive thinking.


I'm not sure the other issues have been overlooked. I mean they were hot on distancing, masks and travel pretty quickly. But the search for some kind of prevention, like a vaccine, was always the bottom line. But vaccines take a long time to discover and make, of course.

I think what we're saying is we need to know more about the subject, whatever it be, and try to see as wide a picture as possible. As you would say, give it space. Then, out of that, come far greater insights.

Would that be about right?
charon
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2518
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby JohnD on November 26th, 2020, 3:23 pm 

Hi Charon, it's OK I understand. I work on a tight schedule and in a highly secure environment. When I converse on these sites I prefer to be relaxed.
If only a pandemic only involved wearing masks, isolating, and finding a vaccine. Unfortunately, there is so much more to consider. The rudimentary building blocks of society have been and still are under threat. The construct of society depends on social contact and during the pandemic this is absent. Added to this are the psychological implications of isolation. Everyone considers isolation differently, for some underlying mental constraints are brought to the surface. Included in this is the disruption to normalized routines. For many work is more than earning an income, it is a routine that allows an individual to live a 'normal' life. Added to this is the use of stimulants including alcohol and coffee as a boredom disrupter when it should be well known by now that if you're confined to a small space stimulants should be the last thing you have.
News and media are full of articles relating to demonstrations and false news about the pandemic, yet this is to be expected with isolation comes disbelief and any news must have some possible truth to it.
But, it isn't just people, it involves all creatures. The disruption has caused so much stress in the animal kingdom. Strandings of whales and dolphins are common, shark attacks have become more frequent, zookeepers report animals are missing human contact and are showing signs of anxiety.
There is, of course, another factor that is demonstrated by our immediate reaction to the pandemic which is to kill as many of the creatures we associate with the disease as we can. We can't seem to be bothered to take the time to think of other solutions that don't involve the destruction of so many lives.
I think the psychological effects will be felt for a very long time.
Yet, this is just one topic that we should be thinking more about and yes what we are saying is that we need to see a much wider picture when looking at any problem because the implications are far greater than we allow ourselves to think about.
JohnD
Member
 
Posts: 754
Joined: 31 May 2012
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby charon on November 26th, 2020, 9:28 pm 

John -

First of all, all thinking at any level is limited. That has to be understood. It means that however much we expand it, it will still be limited. That's first.

Then do we start with the general or the particular? The general is the whole mess the world is in. The particular is our own locality. Also, going further, ourselves, you and I.

Who is responsible for the mess which is the world? Outer space? Aliens? Or us? As human beings we are responsible for it because we're totally irresponsible and destructive.

Then, are we also like that? Or are we free of that so we can criticise the world?

So the problem isn't the world, it's ourselves, you and I. As long as we are destructive so the world will be.

So then what is the place of thinking? Just to do a job? Or a shopping list? Or prattle on about politics? Or philosophise about life?

What is thought for? Not much, is it? Whatever it does, it's still limited. It may produce good technology and medicine but it's only a tool along with knowledge.

So what's the real problem? We can think till doomsday, invent spacial thinking, or lateral thinking, or upside-down thinking, but the mess carries on.

So what's the real issue? You tell me.
charon
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2518
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby JohnD on November 27th, 2020, 4:59 am 

There's an old proverb, 'a river starts with just one drop.'
It is the cry of all those who are frustrated by a world they find difficult to change, who is responsible? Those that make the errors are responsible for what they do, our responsibility is to seek to fix what we can. It is difficult to fix all that has been done wrong. There are too many people on a very small planet and each has their needs. What has been done has been ingrained over millennia. Of course, there are as many views as there are people in our little corner of the universe. But that is why we need to expand our thinking so we don't keep making the same mistakes.
You ask if we would start with the general or the particular, which would make more sense to you? The point is to start thinking and to expand that thinking as far as you can. What happens after that is dependent on how far you manage to expand your thinking and what you choose to take into consideration.
The danger lies in our unwillingness to do what we find has to be done and in our excusing ourselves of responsibility. We must be ready to rip apart all that we hold dear, history is not always something we should preserve.
JohnD
Member
 
Posts: 754
Joined: 31 May 2012
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Spatial thinking

Postby charon on November 27th, 2020, 11:47 am 

I understand, but what do we mean by expanding thinking? Let's be clear.

Apart from a very few, most peoples' thinking centres round themselves, their own immediate environment, their own lives, family, jobs, worries and problems. That's very limited, isn't it? And most people would say it's inevitable and justify it.

Of course we can read books, travel, explore unexplored areas of knowledge, science, art, and all the rest of it. That will expand our thinking to some extent. It may even be a good thing. But, in itself, it's still limited, right?

My point is, can thinking ever be anything else but limited? There's no whole thinking, it's always tied to something or other. So I'd ask what is a free mind?

A free mind is surely one that is not tied. It's not bound by any belief or ideology. It's not the prisoner of its own conclusions. It's not a mere reflection of its environment. It doesn't respond from prejudice or bias. It's not a petty, local mind, a provincial mind... and so on.

Such a mind, being free, will resolve the problems of the world because it's not causing them. But I doubt if anyone's really interested in that because we're too invested in things as they are. There's profit in it, both financially and in personal terms.
charon
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2518
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Previous

Return to Anything Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests