“What is it like to sever all ties with your demons? What would remain of you? Who would you be? Would you want that? Would that mean complete loneliness? Or would it be heaven?”
link
“It is like there is hell inside of us all. But we run away from it. We try our best to. However, we have to go there. We have to visit it. We have to see what is there. And when you have people who seemingly care about you go there with you, it is easier. Going to personal hell together, exploring it. Holding hands there facing Lucifer. It becomes not that scary anymore. Because you are not alone. Paradoxically, that is what teaches us to be able to be alone.”
link
“Are you honest? Then have faith in yourself and your journey that you are undertaking.”
link
“Does truth matter or any reasonable explanation for inexplicable feelings will suffice for the alleviation of pain caused by no answers? Does truth exist? Can you ever be sure of anything?”
link

What is objectivity?
Can objective moral claims be made?

"There is a tree!" - I say.
"I agree, there is!" - you respond.

We agree that it is objectively true and empirically verifiable (you can call your friend and tell them there is a tree, and then they can come and check it out for themselves). Can the same be done for morality?

Lets assume there is a button. If you press this button, there will be no rape committed today (without any consequences, just no rape). Would you press this button?

Could people who do not press this button be categorized as evil? Can't we say they are objectively wrong?

"There are sadists, psychopaths who would not press this button! Ha! I win!" - you say.

There are some people who would not see the tree. The blind, or the psychotic who are hallucinating and so on. We would say they are lacking something. Can't we say the same for the ones who would not press the button?

Moral claims are just expressions of emotions, an emotivist would say. But does it mean objectivity cannot be reached? What is the difference between seeing a tree and strongly feeling something is right or wrong? Aren't both of these things just perceived by us? Don't they just appear in our consciousness? Are sight and other senses more real than feelings? How are senses different than feelings, thoughts, dreams, fantasies? Does objectivity exist at all? Or is everything objective?
link
“Contentment is brought by influencing others in a positive way.”
link
“A hypothesis for previously inexplicable feelings, no matter how wrong it is (are there any true ones..?), lead to relief. It gives some sense of control in the world that is otherwise truly mad and unintelligible to a human mind. Stories and explanations, no matter how delusional (which they always are), prevent people from being in hell. But it also prevents them from being in heaven. It just leads to numb despair.”
link
“Memories are formed more strongly when associated with emotions. If there is a moment of a useful insight, it will be more therapeutic when it is accompanied by emotions. Affect evocation and its analysis is a powerful duo.”
link
“Great conversation is better than sex. A cigarette after sex that was preceded by a great conversation leads to the place of the Kingdom of God that Jesus was talking about.”
link
“What makes me alive and be in awe is the same thing that makes me sometimes be in complete and total anguish - the truthful clear understanding that I possess no answers nor I ever will.”
link