"I Win"
(www.wikihow.com)
Comments (19)
sorted by:
Thes people are insane
Insane aka IN (being within) SANUS (perceivable sound)...
The game ends if someone knocks off the Pope's hat.
Holy shit, I'll make room on my bucket list.
That's not actually how you win. But nice try. Even if that were a rule of the game, which it is not, it is not the rules or basic principle of games.
I read this in there:
"Still others believe that the Game can only be won when someone knocks the hat off the Pope."
Yes. You read that in there. It tells you what others believe. But you are not understanding what I am telling you about rules.
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/the-game
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_(mind_game)
I get it, not for me. But what the hell, anything to keep the brain spinning for the masses.
Yes. You understand that it is a psychological conditioning device. But do you see how it works? Why it works? What in fact is wrong with it? How to win the game.
Conditioning the dispersal of bad thoughts right around the corner?
Just a mind game to keep you occupied but slowly changes you?
They've added new superfuck to the website of loser?
Dont know.
https://communities.win/c/Funny/p/16aAIY9IFk/so-do-i-get-the-job-and-a-nap/c
The game represents "suggested information", the work represents "perceivable inspiration"...
That being said...if one thinks in words, then one already lost.
No.
And you can too. Simply by understanding the basic rules of games. ͔̦͉̮̦̇̈́ͯ̈̽͂ͅ ̏
Understanding implies ones consent to "stand under" the suggested information by another.
No, it fucking doesn't.
a) how can one exist without being "in-between and among" others?
b) how can one consent by choice to a suggestion by the choice of another without putting ones free will of choice "under" that of another?
c) "is not"...what within perceivable everything "is nothing"?
d) how can one consent to suggested without ignoring perceivable?
e) how could one "comprehend" perceivable if one consents to suggestions by others about perceivable? Can one comprehend breathing by consenting to what others are suggesting about breathing or does one need to breathe to comprehend breathing?
a) three times you suggested negation (no)...where did I suggest affirmation (yes)?
b) how can there be a conflict of reason (yes vs no) without the consent of both sides?
No means no.
a) is there a difference between perceivable and suggested input towards mind/memory?
b) is there free will of choice in-between perceivable and suggested input towards mind?
c) if one doesn't consent to what others are suggesting, then would ones mind be empty?
d) what comes first for memory...binary input (suggestion) or energy foundation (perceivable)?
e) is there a difference between "having in mind" and "going through mind"?
f) can one define meaning without suggesting "definitions" to another?
g) can you describe the meaning of sound; out of which you shape the words to describe meaning?
h) what's the meaning of nothing?
i) can one negate perceivable input? How?
j) does it matter to reason (yes vs no) about breathing or will one be forced to adapt no matter the chosen/agreed upon meaning?
k) is there any suggested meaning that others aren't reasoning over...if not...isn't it MEAN that all MEANing results in conflict?
l) what if ones disagreement implies ones want of agreement from others, hence MEAN, adjective - "wanting dignity of mind; low minded; base; destitute of honor; spiritless"?
m) if yes means yes, then why the choice of "no"?
n) does putting a point behind your sentences stop others from continuing?
Let's see how "questionable" you are...
No means no. Stop spamming my threads.