> enis > > Stoic Sam !zQ8ry.WSMk started this discussion > > Stopped reading there.
@previous (Big Daddy Derek™ !Uvm54ORbmo)
> enis > > Stoic Sam !zQ8ry.WSMk started this discussion > > Stopped reading there.
Anonymous D, 1 day ago[^] [v] #843,499
(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.) (Big Daddy Derek™ !Uvm54ORbmo)
> enis > > Stoic Sam !zQ8ry.WSMk started this discussion > > Stopped reading there.
@previous (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
> enis > > Stoic Sam !zQ8ry.WSMk started this discussion > > Stopped reading there.
@previous (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
> enis > > Stoic Sam !zQ8ry.WSMk started this discussion > > Stopped reading there.
(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.) (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
> enis > > Stoic Sam !zQ8ry.WSMk started this discussion > > Stopped reading there.
Anonymous C (you), 4 days ago[^] [v] #824,223
@previous (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
Anonymous C (you), 18 hours ago[^] [v] #824,046
@previous (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
@previous (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
You really prove how dumb you are every time you post that.
ReportQuoteCite
ReportQuoteCite
ReportQuoteCite
ReportQuoteCite
ReportQuoteCite
Anonymous E, 3 days ago
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 27 seconds later, 35 minutes after the original post[^][v]#845,050
> What you require to live is not just obtainable, it is within easy reach.
Said no one dying of hunger or malnutrition ever.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 41 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#845,066
To clarify: what you require to live according to nature.
Anonymous D replied with this 8 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#845,074
@previous (Stoic Sam !zQ8ry.WSMk)
Well, death is a part of nature so that kind of saves it. You still have to grapple with how living according to nature might also include dying - which seems paradoxical. Being a part of nature? Acting a part of nature? I'm not sure how to fix it.
Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo replied with this 8 years ago, 47 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#845,075
Anonymous D replied with this 8 years ago, 15 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#845,111
@previous (Stoic Sam !zQ8ry.WSMk)
Yes, but it undercuts your statement in that by dying you are no longer "living" according to nature. Also, dying is pretty much always within reach just by sitting around doing nothing. Should I interpret your statement as condoning inaction and suicide? Expanding "living" to include dying not only presents a logical problem but also has some pretty dark implications.
Stoic Sam !zQ8ry.WSMk (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#845,128
Part of living according to nature is accepting that you are a mortal being with a very short life-span, and so is everyone you know. Death is within reach no matter what you do with yourself. It could strike at any time.
Anonymous D replied with this 8 years ago, 6 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#845,131
@previous (Stoic Sam !zQ8ry.WSMk)
Sure, but that doesn't seem to resolve the problem.
(Edited 16 seconds later.)
Stoic Sam !zQ8ry.WSMk (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 8 hours later, 12 hours after the original post[^][v]#845,242