|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Aug 20, 2009 5:52:15 GMT -5
Then how do we truly know if we are alive? I will expound later on why this question has been on my mind for sum years now.
|
|
|
|
Post by nsync on Aug 20, 2009 8:09:19 GMT -5
Have we talked about when the soul enters the body, yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Aug 20, 2009 13:17:53 GMT -5
I have heard people talk about that but what if the soul is the very essence that sparks the sexual vibe in the first place. Just like sex of the child is decided at the moment of conception maybe everything else is as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex91 on Aug 20, 2009 13:20:31 GMT -5
I don't associate the two. I have conscious memories from about age 5. Lack of consciousness of the events previous to that age doesn't negate the fact that they happened. I am not conscious of my conception but we know it happened because later events could not have happened without it having happened first.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Aug 20, 2009 13:58:51 GMT -5
I don't associate the two. I have conscious memories from about age 5. Lack of consciousness of the events previous to that age doesn't negate the fact that they happened. I am not conscious of my conception but we know it happened because later events could not have happened without it having happened first. But how do you know though? We are told these things. Why are we not conscious while in the womb? Would we appreciate life better if we were? My earliest memory is around 3. I remember my spanish speaking baby sitter and her dog. Playing in the yard with the rest of the kids she kept. |
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex91 on Aug 20, 2009 14:18:12 GMT -5
I do not think i'd appreciate life better if I had consciousness in womb. What would be gained? Floating in a sac with no mental or visual stimulation......nope, not intereested.
VP, I know you are not telling me you don't know if you're alive because you don't remember your birth. I am clearly missing something. Help fill in the pieces please. Expound..........
|
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Aug 20, 2009 14:31:48 GMT -5
I do not think i'd appreciate life better if I had consciousness in womb. What would be gained? Floating in a sac with no mental or visual stimulation......nope, not intereested. VP, I know you are not telling me you don't know if you're alive because you don't remember your birth. I am clearly missing something. Help fill in the pieces please. Expound.......... So truly knowing from whence you came wouldn't make you appreciate life better? Consciously going through cell divison expanding, growing, everything. You think about "floating in a sac" and not mentioning all of the things that are happening to you at every moment that you could experience and be conscious of. Life to us is predicated on the 5 senses. Sight, Hearing, Touch, Smell, and Taste. All electrical synapses that we are programmed to experience as such. So what makes life real then. We are not conscious of our birth nor or our parents conscious of theirs and so forth from there. The brain is programmed to tell us what we See, Hear, Touch, Taste and Smell. Like for instance a dog gives off an eletrical impulse. The eye takes in the information the brain processes it and says its a dog the color the size everything. So is the Dog real or just merely a hologram? |
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex91 on Aug 20, 2009 14:52:57 GMT -5
I do not think i'd appreciate life better if I had consciousness in womb. What would be gained? Floating in a sac with no mental or visual stimulation......nope, not intereested. VP, I know you are not telling me you don't know if you're alive because you don't remember your birth. I am clearly missing something. Help fill in the pieces please. Expound.......... So truly knowing from whence you came wouldn't make you appreciate life better? Consciously going through cell divison expanding, growing, everything. You think about "floating in a sac" and not mentioning all of the things that are happening to you at every moment that you could experience and be conscious of. Life to us is predicated on the 5 senses. Sight, Hearing, Touch, Smell, and Taste. All electrical synapses that we are programmed to experience as such. So what makes life real then. We are not conscious of our birth nor or our parents conscious of theirs and so forth from there. The brain is programmed to tell us what we See, Hear, Touch, Taste and Smell. Like for instance a dog gives off an eletrical impulse. The eye takes in the information the brain processes it and says its a dog the color the size everything. So is the Dog real or just merely a hologram? VP, did you take the red or blue pill today? Cause that sounds very Matrix-esque. Do you feel yourself growing now? From your first memories at 3, have you marveled in the subtle physical changes you've gone through? I'm not talking about puberty but I'd counter that most of us notice signs of mortality but do not appreciate the complexity of growth. I'd further counter than we don't "feel" the changes and what if we are unconscious in the womb to protect us from painful development? That's a lot of change in a very short time. Divine design is what it is for reasons that we may not understand. I just don't see the additional insight awareness would bring. |
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Aug 20, 2009 15:13:47 GMT -5
So truly knowing from whence you came wouldn't make you appreciate life better? Consciously going through cell divison expanding, growing, everything. You think about "floating in a sac" and not mentioning all of the things that are happening to you at every moment that you could experience and be conscious of. Life to us is predicated on the 5 senses. Sight, Hearing, Touch, Smell, and Taste. All electrical synapses that we are programmed to experience as such. So what makes life real then. We are not conscious of our birth nor or our parents conscious of theirs and so forth from there. The brain is programmed to tell us what we See, Hear, Touch, Taste and Smell. Like for instance a dog gives off an eletrical impulse. The eye takes in the information the brain processes it and says its a dog the color the size everything. So is the Dog real or just merely a hologram? VP, did you take the red or blue pill today? Cause that sounds very Matrix-esque. Do you feel yourself growing now? From your first memories at 3, have you marveled in the subtle physical changes you've gone through? I'm not talking about puberty but I'd counter that most of us notice signs of mortality but do not appreciate the complexity of growth. I'd further counter than we don't "feel" the changes and what if we are unconscious in the womb to protect us from painful development? That's a lot of change in a very short time. Divine design is what it is for reasons that we may not understand. I just don't see the additional insight awareness would bring. Umm ore like anatomy and physiology and the truth about how humans take in stimuli. Read up on it sometimes... Movies have to draw from some where. Read up on how you actually see, hear, touch,taste, and smell. Get back to me when you are done. |
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex91 on Aug 20, 2009 16:00:51 GMT -5
Nope, not that invested VP. Even if I went and read the Library of Congress, we still wouldn't come to any agreement.
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Aug 20, 2009 16:55:39 GMT -5
Interesting topic
<--x will ponder then answer
|
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Aug 20, 2009 17:06:19 GMT -5
Nope, not that invested VP. Even if I went and read the Library of Congress, we still wouldn't come to any agreement. . If you're not that "invested" to gather intel on the subject matter, then how can you raise any point of contention? If you are going to disagree blindly based sole on association or lack thereof then why dialogue in the first place? |
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex91 on Aug 20, 2009 17:15:23 GMT -5
It's simple. Different goals. I enjoy the exchange of ideas. I don't require that an opinion be formed from a particular base of knowledge, I recognize that everyone has an opinion based on whatever they've been exposed to. You seem to go into convos having already discounted the opposing sides' knowledge of the subject matter and expecting them to justify the basis of their position. I did speech and debate in high school so I know how that game works. A mb isn't that for me. You asked a question, I gave my opinion. You disregarded my opinion as uninformed, and I chose to not "work" to make you see my position because I ultimately believe you won't.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Aug 20, 2009 20:18:54 GMT -5
It's simple. Different goals. I enjoy the exchange of ideas. I don't require that an opinion be formed from a particular base of knowledge, I recognize that everyone has an opinion based on whatever they've been exposed to. You seem to go into convos having already discounted the opposing sides' knowledge of the subject matter and expecting them to justify the basis of their position. I did speech and debate in high school so I know how that game works. A mb isn't that for me. You asked a question, I gave my opinion. You disregarded my opinion as uninformed, and I chose to not "work" to make you see my position because I ultimately believe you won't. The crux of your above assessment is exactly what you are doing right now. You made a statement if I have taken the red or blue pill because what I said sounded matrix-esque... That alone let me know you are uninformed on how we see. So I stated for you to read up on it to give a more informed opinion on the subject and now you getting up in your feelings. So I don't prejudge anyone I go based off of what you state as your point of contention. Anatomy. Physiology and Pathology of the Human Eye..
Light waves from an object (such as a tree) enter the eye first through the cornea, the clear dome at the front of the eye. The light then progresses through the pupil, the circular opening in the center of the colored iris. Fluctuations in incoming light change the size of the eye’s pupil. When the light entering the eye is bright enough, the pupil will constrict (get smaller), due to the pupillary light response.
Initially, the light waves are bent or converged first by the cornea, and then further by the crystalline lens (located immediately behind the iris and the pupil), to a nodal point (N) located immediately behind the back surface of the lens. At that point, the image becomes reversed (turned backwards) and inverted (turned upside-down). The light continues through the vitreous humor, the clear gel that makes up about 80% of the eye’s volume, and then, ideally, back to a clear focus on the retina, behind the vitreous. The small central area of the retina is the macula, which provides the best vision of any location in the retina. If the eye is considered to be a type of camera, the retina is equivalent to the film inside of the camera, registering the tiny photons of light interacting with it.
Within the layers of the retina, light impulses are changed into electrical signals. Then they are sent through the optic nerve, along the visual pathway, to the occipital cortex at the posterior (back) of the brain. Here, the electrical signals are interpreted or “seen” by the brain as a visual image.
Actually, then, we do not “see” with our eyes but, rather, with our brains. Our eyes merely are the beginnings of the visual process.[/b] I think the cliche' Truth is more strange than fiction actually applies here. Matrix you say huh? Again read up to make your point of contention viable and relevant if we are going to dialogue. |
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Aug 20, 2009 21:03:32 GMT -5
The human ear has three main sections, which consist of the outer ear, the middle ear, and the inner ear. Sound waves enter your outer ear and travel through your ear canal to the middle ear. The ear canal channels the waves to your eardrum, a thin, sensitive membrane stretched tightly over the entrance to your middle ear. The waves cause your eardrum to vibrate. It passes these vibrations on to the hammer, one of three tiny bones in your ear. The hammer vibrating causes the anvil, the small bone touching the hammer, to vibrate. The anvil passes these vibrations to the stirrup, another small bone which touches the anvil. From the stirrup, the vibrations pass into the inner ear. The stirrup touches a liquid filled sack and the vibrations travel into the cochlea, which is shaped like a shell. Inside the cochlea, there are hundreds of special cells attached to nerve fibers, which can transmit information to the brain. The brain processes the information from the ear and lets us distinguish between different types of sounds. [/b]
Have you ever wondered what you smell when you "smell the roses" in the spring time? What makes a smell is something that is too small to see with your eyeball alone. It is even too small to be seen with a microscope! What you smell are tiny things called odor particles. Millions of them are floating around waiting to be sniffed by your nose!
You smell these odors through your nose which is almost like a huge cave built to smell, moisten, and filter the air you breathe. As you breathe in, the air enters through your nostrils which contain tiny little hairs that filter all kinds of things trying to enter your nose, even bugs! These little hairs are called cilia and you can pretend that they sweep all the dirt out of the nasal cavity, which is the big place the air passes through on it's way to the lungs. After passing through the nasal cavity, the air passes through a thick layer of mucous to the olfactory bulb. There the smells are recognized because each smell molecule fits into a nerve cell like a lock and key. Then the cells send signals along your olfactory nerve to the brain. At the brain, they are interpreted as those sweet smelling flowers or that moldy cheese.
|
|
|
|
Post by nsync on Aug 21, 2009 0:04:36 GMT -5
Before I could answer this question I would have to know what are all the options? Alive as opposed to what...other options.
Also I would have to know in which definition of alive are we referring.
There's vital signs alive, the there's consciouness alive.
I don't know how being aware at conception proves one or the other.
Also one may not be conscious during their own conception, but they can be conscious of another person's conception.
This hold extremely true for some women who have given birth.
|
|
|
|
Post by nsync on Aug 21, 2009 0:24:41 GMT -5
wrong thread
|
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Aug 21, 2009 7:55:43 GMT -5
How about you give your own rendition of what is alive and what isn't outtie? Remember it is the different parts of the brain that power the organs which give the reading of vital signs in the first place.
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Aug 21, 2009 10:26:37 GMT -5
Then how do we truly know if we are alive? I will expound later on why this question has been on my mind for sum years now.
The only way (IMO) to be truly knowledgable about if we exist, is to be able to observe the world outside of your senses. But it begs the question - would you even KNOW what that state was if you were experiencing it? Could you be sure that you weren't dreaming? |
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Aug 21, 2009 12:46:09 GMT -5
Then how do we truly know if we are alive? I will expound later on why this question has been on my mind for sum years now.
The only way (IMO) to be truly knowledgable about if we exist, is to be able to observe the world outside of your senses. But it begs the question - would you even KNOW what that state was if you were experiencing it? Could you be sure that you weren't dreaming? Not necessarily as I have stated on her before Cells have a sense of touch ,sight, smell, sound but don't have hands, eyes, noses, or ears. But your answer isn't really forthcoming. Its kinda like you're saying my premise is a misnomer on one end but then state in order for us to truly know if we exist is to observe outside the scope of our 5 senses. Basically I don't know if you are in agreement or disagreement....  |
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Aug 21, 2009 13:35:27 GMT -5
So I think the question is a misnomer and here's why. If you were conscious of your birth, by what mechanism would you be conscious of it? Would it not still be the same biological network that you use now? Would it not still be my brain interpreting electrical signals sent to it by my eyes, ears, nose, mouth, and tactile senses?
The only way (IMO) to be truly knowledgable about if we exist, is to be able to observe the world outside of your senses. But it begs the question - would you even KNOW what that state was if you were experiencing it? Could you be sure that you weren't dreaming? Not necessarily as I have stated on her before Cells have a sense of touch ,sight, smell, sound but don't have hands, eyes, noses, or ears. But your answer isn't really forthcoming. Its kinda like you're saying my premise is a misnomer on one end but then state in order for us to truly know if we exist is to observe outside the scope of our 5 senses. Basically I don't know if you are in agreement or disagreement....
What I am refuting is this: without consciousness of your birth you can't know that you're alive. I don't think you can confirm that you're alive on THAT basis either if trusting your senses to confirm that you're alive is faulty. If you retained memories of your birth you STILL couldn't be sure you were alive (IMO) because all your observations are still based on and limited by your brain interpreting signas sent to it.
If you were somehow hooked into a matrix and someone sent your brain false signals, how would you distinguish it from the true reality? Maybe you were talking from a less metaphysical angle than what I was thinking. Can you explain any further your rational how memories of your birth would/should convince one that they're alive that is not sufficiently evidenced already by using your 5 senses now? |
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Aug 21, 2009 14:41:11 GMT -5
I see someone has been reading... I can dig it. lol. You do have a point but consider if we are conscious at the cellular level there are no eyes, ears, nose, etc. Quantum consciousness is achieved in this manner. Kinda like the force from star wars or non thinking of martial arts.
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Aug 21, 2009 15:25:43 GMT -5
I see someone has been reading... I can dig it. lol. You do have a point but consider if we are conscious at the cellular level there are no eyes, ears, nose, etc. Quantum consciousness is achieved in this manner. Kinda like the force from star wars or non thinking of martial arts.
But what exactly is your theory? That the quantum interplay at the cellular level can't be spoofed? Cause it seems to me, if we say the theory is true, it still relies on a system of signals, receptors, methods of transmissions etc. If there is physical system, bound by phyical laws, why can't it be physically exploited? (This is a rhetorical question - with your exposure to aspects of medicine you already know we can spoof parts of the biological system)
Interesting topic though |
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Aug 22, 2009 23:09:35 GMT -5
I see someone has been reading... I can dig it. lol. You do have a point but consider if we are conscious at the cellular level there are no eyes, ears, nose, etc. Quantum consciousness is achieved in this manner. Kinda like the force from star wars or non thinking of martial arts.
But what exactly is your theory? That the quantum interplay at the cellular level can't be spoofed? Cause it seems to me, if we say the theory is true, it still relies on a system of signals, receptors, methods of transmissions etc. If there is physical system, bound by phyical laws, why can't it be physically exploited? (This is a rhetorical question - with your exposure to aspects of medicine you already know we can spoof parts of the biological system)
Interesting topic though Life is a theory as well. This being real is a theory too. The only way we can get to the truth is when we are able to control what we see, hear, touch, taste, and smell. If I can make a hot dog taste like cake then that's freedom. So its not the mechanism that we use for consciousness that's the problem its the lack of control of it that is. You mention Physical Laws but what is really physical if photon waves that are turned into electrical signals that are interpreted by the brain makes what we see a "reality"? Yes even our bodies emit a signal which is interpreted by our brain that gives us the image that we see in the mirror. So then we must ask are we growing and getting older or are our "bodies" emitting a different signal which the brain interprets as such? Did you really leave your kitchen and enter your bathroom? Are you really walking or is it perception of change? Does time really exist? Are we inside of the room or is the room inside of us? Are we inside of the world or is the world inside of us? |
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Aug 24, 2009 6:55:27 GMT -5
Quantum Consciousness is a theory though Bruh. It's an interesting one, but it's a theory, a minority one - even in among the scientific community. That doesn't mean it's wrong - I'm just saying - if you don't already ascribe to the whole Quantum Mechanics Connection (i.e. how Quantum Mechanics can be used to model/describe consciousness) then discussion trails off kind of fast.
But what exactly is your theory? That the quantum interplay at the cellular level can't be spoofed? Cause it seems to me, if we say the theory is true, it still relies on a system of signals, receptors, methods of transmissions etc. If there is physical system, bound by phyical laws, why can't it be physically exploited? (This is a rhetorical question - with your exposure to aspects of medicine you already know we can spoof parts of the biological system)
Interesting topic though Life is a theory as well. This being real is a theory too. The only way we can get to the truth is when we are able to control what we see, hear, touch, taste, and smell. If I can make a hot dog taste like cake then that's freedom. So its not the mechanism that we use for consciousness that's the problem its the lack of control of it that is. You mention Physical Laws but what is really physical if photon waves that are turned into electrical signals that are interpreted by the brain makes what we see a "reality"? Yes even our bodies emit a signal which is interpreted by our brain that gives us the image that we see in the mirror. So then we must ask are we growing and getting older or are our "bodies" emitting a different signal which the brain interprets as such? Did you really leave your kitchen and enter your bathroom? Are you really walking or is it perception of change? Does time really exist? Are we inside of the room or is the room inside of us? Are we inside of the world or is the world inside of us?
Control is an illusion. I mean technically, as best you can tell, you control what you see, hear, touch, taste, and smell now. You do it just by activity. You can't be sure that the flavor you associate with a hot dog is really what it's supposed to be, but if you want that flavor you can experience it. Inasmuchas you control anything, you can control what stimuli you encounter. Being able to rewire the system (i.e. making the flavor of a hot dog into the flavor of cake) doesn't do you a whole lot of good if you don't know what the system ought to be.
You mentioned a photon being translated into electrical signals that are interpreted by the brain...
...how do you even KNOW that there IS a photon? I mean it's an interesting question that you propose are we growing and getting older or are our "bodies" emitting a different signal which the brain interprets as such but how do you know you even HAVE a body? Your brain tells you that you do, but if you can't trust your senses - you can't be sure that you do.
That's why I said consciousness of your birth would not be enough to confirm that you were alive. It would still rely on your senses, which are interpreted by your brain, which you can't be sure isn't being spoofed. |
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Aug 24, 2009 13:46:25 GMT -5
A theory is a generalization about a phenomenon, an explanation of how or why something occurs. Indeed, any statments that explain what is measured or described--any general statements about cause or effect--are theory based, at least implicitly.
You have agreed in this post we are not conscious of our birth. You have also agreed in this post on how we see, hear, touch, taste and smell. It seems to me you are attempting to disagree just to disagree. Question.. Why are you alive? Why were you born? What is your purpose? What happens when you die? See if you can answer any of the above questions in absolute terms.....
Again you attempt to disagree just to disagree. Well written but it lacks relevance and merit. If this were the case when you see a dog I can visually skew it and make it a mouse. Unless someone smoking that wet... your above statement doesn't happen.
How do you arrive at this? If you are in control the system becomes what you want it to be. At this point the "system" is slavery. So who cares what the system "ought to be" if you can control the mechanism and every outcome.
We don't know if there is a photon as if photons are not disturbed then they are basically undetected. Now you ask the question how do we know if we have a body. We can't trust our senses etc. So again are you in agreement or not. Turning the wheels keeps you at a stand still. Its like we both in chains you'd rather sit still in the chains when I on the other hand will atleast try to break free even if it seems impossible.
[/color][/quote] Again how do you arrive at this? To be conscious while in the womb or even before would do wonders. It would put us closer to the truth. Everything is step by step basis. Being conscious In-vivo would answer many questions... but who knows we all could be in the womb at this very moment living out our lives in our minds. Anything would be better than our present state. The very reason for us to be conscious in the womb from conception goes against everything that you are stating. We wouldn't have a mouth to speak, an ear to hear, a nose to smell, a tongue to taste and a eye to see but we still would be able to see, hear, speak(yes cells make "noise"), taste and touch. It is but one step out of bondage and a step closer to the truth.
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Aug 24, 2009 14:44:17 GMT -5
LOL - first things first - I am hardly disagreeing just to disagree, but if I was Bruh you would be the LAST one I would expect to have a problem with it. I'm disagreeing because I believe what you said is incorrect.
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory
Word parsing aside, if you had the ability to choose what you wanted to see, do you follow what I am saying when I state that manipulating the system is not the same as arriving at truth? You have only the freedom to replace uncertainty with another uncertainty - if a creature appears to you as a dog, but you have the ability to see it as a mouse, what truth have you captured if it's actually an eagle?
You haven't. You have replaced one deception with another and declared freedom because you had choice. Let me boil down what I'm saying because I'm arguing a point that makes yours moot, and you apparently don't see it.
Let us assume that this existence is real.
Let us also assume that the theory of Cellular Consciousness turns out to be correct
The medium through which external stimuli is transmitted, received, translated and interpreted is STILL a biological pathway. Whether you are a blastocyst, a zygote, a fetus, or a grown adult - whatever you experience is STILL going through a biological pathway for processing. If that bilogical pathway can be compromised and fed false data, then it wouldn't matter if you could retain the memories from natal days because they ALSO could be false. Thus if you cannot trust your senses to tell you, you are alive right now, you cannot trust what you sensed at earlier stages of development (assuming C.C. is even true) Q.E.D. being able to remember your birth is NOT necessarily proof that you're alive.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Aug 24, 2009 17:22:12 GMT -5
Oh ok your aim was to make my point moot... lol Listen you're tripping over yourself bruh. You've painted yourself in a corner by agreeing that the brain interprets signals and gives us what we see, hear, taste, smell and touch. Therefore your dog, mouse, really an eagle is woefully fradualent if all are but eletrical signals interpreted by the brain. Basically none of them really exist as you have stated yourself we can't rely on the senses. To arrive at a fundamental truth it takes steps. Let's say a light is being shined in your face very bright. Let's also state if you turn away from it the light stays in ur face temporarily blinding you. The first step to fix this problem is to put ur hand up to your face to block the light. This is an attempt to control how the light is observed. Next would be to find the source of the light. Lastly would be to finally control the light by either turning it in an opposite direction or turning it off completely. I feel (since I'm not afraid to state where I stand) the same holds true for this game we call life. The first step would mean to be conscious before the brain is even developed and all other mundane devices i.e. Eyes and ears. Next would be to control the interpretation of the signals. Basically making the signals do what you want them to do. Lastly would be to find the source of the signal and do with it as you may.
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Aug 24, 2009 20:33:36 GMT -5
You're not reading what I'm saying Bruh... you're interpolating. My point happens to makes yours moot, no one said it was the aim. To sum this up quickly, if you can't trust the medium by which you receive the signals as an adult human male, you cannot trust the ones you receive (provided C.C. is even true) at an earlier stage of development - they are the SAME medium.
You are unconscious every night when you sleep - do you need confirmation that you still exist during those time periods? Do you question whether the day before existed because you were unconscious over night? It's the same argument Bruh... you can either say no you don't need evidence, and destroy your own argument or you can say yes you do need evidence - and essentially destroy your own argument LOL. Pick your poison.
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Aug 24, 2009 20:34:44 GMT -5
Also just because I routinely walk the dog on your logic and arguments doesn't mean I don't appreciate you starting the subject matter. There would probably be no debate going on at all if you didn't. You gon' challenge what I say, I'm gonna challenge what you say - that's just what it is. But I do still appreciate the debate.
|
|
