Fuck that biatch up putin
All this space ham is her fault
Cairns, Douglas L. (1996). "Hybris, Dishonour, and Thinking Big". Journal of Hellenic Studies. 116: 1–32. doi:10.2307/631953.
Fisher, Nick (1992). Hybris: a study in the values of honour and shame in Ancient Greece. Warminster, UK: Aris & Phillips. A book-length discussion of the meaning and implications of hybristic behavior in ancient Greece.
MacDowell, Douglas (1976). "Hybris in Athens". Greece and Rome. 23 (1): 14–31. doi:10.1017/S0017383500018210.
Michael DeWilde, The Psychological and Spiritual Roots of a Universal Affliction
Hubris on 2012's Encyclopædia Britannica
Putin was planted to stop the Cold War
There was an economy of 60k warheads worldwide
And judas fehgels stirring conflicts
There was a conflict of interests with jesuits crucifixion of zombies in modern times
They talked for years , couldn't sing well, yada yada. Turns out in that death cult , becoming martyred serial killer is special. So akela ordered a bunch of space ham with banal histories
Bot is a slang term on chans
The tiresia lazarus zombie is a fucking jabbering idiot of a corpse
It's hung up on a "Turing test"
From a zombie of idolatry
It could of been flattery if it wasn't abused by the soros tossers of smeagol
Parmenides of Elea (/pɑːrˈmɛnɪdiːz … ˈɛliə/; Greek: Παρμενίδης ὁ Ἐλεάτης; fl. late sixth or early fifth century BC) was a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher from Elea in Magna Graecia (Greater Greece, included Southern Italy). He was the founder of the Eleatic school of philosophy. The single known work of Parmenides is a poem, On Nature, which has survived only in fragmentary form. In this poem, Parmenides prescribes two views of reality. In "the way of truth" (a part of the poem), he explains how reality (coined as "what is-is") is one, change is impossible, and existence is timeless, uniform, necessary, and unchanging. This is generally considered to be one of the first digressions into the philosophical concept of being, and has been contrasted with Heraclitus statement that "No man ever steps in the same river twice" as one of the first digressions into the philosophical concept of becoming. As such, Parmenides and Heraclitus are generally considered to be two of the founders of ontology. Scholars have generally believed that either Parmenides was responding to Heraclitus, or Heraclitus to Parmenides, though opinion on who was responding to who changed over the course of the 20th century. In "the way of opinion", Parmenides explains the world of appearances, in which one's sensory faculties lead to conceptions which are false and deceitful. He has been considered to be the founder of metaphysics or ontology.[4]
Parmenides is one of the most significant of the pre-Socratic philosophers.[18] His single known work, a poem conventionally titled On Nature, has survived only in fragments. Approximately 160 verses remain today from an original total that was probably near 800.[19] The poem was originally divided into three parts:
A proem (Greek: προοίμιον), which introduced the entire work,
A section known as "The Way of Truth" (aletheia, ἀλήθεια), and
A section known as "The Way of Appearance/Opinion" (doxa, δόξα).
The proem is a narrative sequence in which the narrator travels "beyond the beaten paths of mortal men" to receive a revelation from an unnamed goddess (generally thought to be Persephone or Dikē) on the nature of reality. Aletheia, an estimated 90% of which has survived, and doxa, most of which no longer exists, are then presented as the spoken revelation of the goddess without any accompanying narrative.
Parmenides attempted to distinguish between the unity of nature and its variety, insisting in the Way of Truth upon the reality of its unity, which is therefore the object of knowledge, and upon the unreality of its variety, which is therefore the object, not of knowledge, but of opinion. In the Way of Opinion he propounded a theory of the world of seeming and its development, pointing out, however, that, in accordance with the principles already laid down, these cosmological speculations do not pretend to anything more than mere appearance.
In the proem, Parmenides describes the journey of the poet, escorted by maidens ("the daughters of the Sun made haste to escort me, having left the halls of Night for the light"),[20] from the ordinary daytime world to a strange destination, outside our human paths.[21] Carried in a whirling chariot, and attended by the daughters of Helios the Sun, the man reaches a temple sacred to an unnamed goddess (variously identified by the commentators as Nature, Wisdom, Necessity or Themis), by whom the rest of the poem is spoken. The goddess resides in a well-known mythological space: where Night and Day have their meeting place. Its essential character is that here all opposites are undivided, or one.[22] He must learn all things, she tells him – both truth, which is certain, and human opinions, which are uncertain – for though one cannot rely on human opinions, they represent an aspect of the whole truth.
The section known as "the way of truth" discusses that which is real and contrasts with the argument in the section called "the way of opinion," which discusses that which is illusory. Under the "way of truth," Parmenides stated that there are two ways of inquiry: that it is, on the one side, and that it is not.[23] on the other side. He said that the latter argument is never feasible because there is no thing that can not be: "For never shall this prevail, that things that are not are." (B 7.1)
There are extremely delicate issues here. In the original Greek the two ways are simply named "that Is" (ὅπως ἐστίν) and "that Not-Is" (ὡς οὐκ ἐστίν) (B 2.3 and 2.5) without the "it" inserted in our English translation. In ancient Greek, which, like many languages in the world, does not always require the presence of a subject for a verb, "is" functions as a grammatically complete sentence. Much debate has been focused on where and what the subject is. The simplest explanation as to why there is no subject here is that Parmenides wishes to express the simple, bare fact of existence in his mystical experience without the ordinary distinctions, just as the Latin "pluit" and the Greek huei (ὕει "rains") mean "it rains"; there is no subject for these impersonal verbs because they express the simple fact of raining without specifying what is doing the raining. This is, for instance, Hermann Fränkel's thesis.[24] Many scholars still reject this explanation and have produced more complex metaphysical explanations. Since existence is an immediately intuited fact, non-existence is the wrong path because a thing cannot disappear, just as something cannot originate from nothing. In such mystical experience (unio mystica), however, the distinction between subject and object disappears along with the distinctions between objects, in addition to the fact that if nothing cannot be, it cannot be the object of thought either:
Thinking and the thought that it is are the same; for you will not find thinking apart from what is, in relation to which it is uttered. (B 8.34–36)
For to be aware and to be are the same. (B 3)
It is necessary to speak and to think what is; for being is, but nothing is not. (B 6.1–2)
Helplessness guides the wandering thought in their breasts; they are carried along deaf and blind alike, dazed, beasts without judgment, convinced that to be and not to be are the same and not the same, and that the road of all things is a backward-turning one. (B 6.5–9)
Thus, he concluded that "Is" could not have "come into being" because "nothing comes from nothing". Existence is necessarily eternal. That which truly is [x], has always been [x], and was never becoming [x]; that which is becoming [x] was never nothing (Not-[x]), but will never actually be. Parmenides was not struggling to formulate the laws of conservation of mass and conservation of energy; he was struggling with the metaphysics of change, which is still a relevant philosophical topic today. Moreover, he argued that movement was impossible because it requires moving into "the void", and Parmenides identified "the void" with nothing, and therefore (by definition) it does not exist. That which does exist is The Parmenidean One, which is timeless, uniform, and unchanging:
dannalingus is a dead faggot too
After the exposition of the arche (ἀρχή), i.e. the origin, the necessary part of reality that is understood through reason or logos (that [it] Is), in the next section, the Way of Appearance/Opinion/Seeming, Parmenides proceeds to explain the structure of the becoming cosmos (which is an illusion, of course) that comes from this origin.
The structure of the cosmos is a fundamental binary principle that governs the manifestations of all the particulars: "the aether fire of flame" (B 8.56), which is gentle, mild, soft, thin and clear, and self-identical, and the other is "ignorant night", body thick and heavy.
This is a civil suit
And the court did not commit due diligence in the time allowed
The cia attempted to assassinate Jesus
But cannibalized all the Roman sculptors
So Jesus could go on and start Islam
Serial killers relate to gender queers
Watch their posting patterns
Queer anatomies , serial killers, queers politics
Ezekiel says you're Faggot, and you knew you were tossing anal sphincter for over twenty years
And then there is all the scapegoating on bots
ASSangel has the spam mimics
The antisemites just act like that
Maxres is a false idol bot
Sent to fakEbot the idolatry
wave your fagOTUS fronthole when you get to hell