Identification of a consensus doesn't mean a regulation should be made in respond

Negotiation is the most important thing in social life.

As long as there is another person in this world, agreement would always be a relevant target to achieve.

There is a cost to negotiation, especially in time and concentration span, but I'll get back to that issue later.

The idea of right exist because of the existence of another negotiable beings. We can empathize that all of us want everything that we want and need to belong to us. And because of that it's only normal that we are friends that share the same idea of freedom. Unfortunately our friendship still hasn't produced the adequate technology to make us unobtrusive to one another (in our true form). So we create artificial rights, basically limitation to the true right of owning everything that we want and need. For example, property rights, human rights, the right to bring matters into court, etc.

The rule of thumb is, people wanted to increase the level of availability of mutual solutions, so that it became increasingly easier and easier for people to have their freedom and to acquire what currently are and inevitably are going to be their needs and wants.

Naturally the law is the negotiation technology to accommodate all the people in the world. It's not perfect, but it's the best we got. And it's so good that even the internet could only add on into it instead of replacing it. This is due to the nature of limited resources, concentration and time allocation, which are required to complete negotiations. The law is like an organism that has been living for more than 4000 years, keep on improving, keep on evolving, keep on auditing itself.

Now, the fact that to make something canon within the rule of law, you need to negotiate with 7 billion people if not more, I personally feel that it is disrespectful for people who felt that because some acts are hurting some people's feelings, then they would have the adequate legitimation to enforce some rules upon other people. I feel that they decided that it's fine to not consider my interests to be valid, based on some non utility or uncarefully considered reasons.

For example, regulation against people screaming and shouting in the office was worth it because, people in the office would be able to help a lot more people and satisfy their needs because of it. But regulating against people crossing the street when they saw some group of people coming, because it would hurt their feelings, is just unnecessary. Wouldn't it serve the purpose better if we just suggest people to train self control and strength of mind to manage own emotions, instead of spending other people's tax money (investments), time and concentration to deal with problems that are not going to help them in their lives?

I think people need to be reminded that controlling own's emotions are highly virtuous and worth investing. People who are good with it are attractive and precious to negotiate with, I would also find it sensible that they would have easier time reaching happiness and serenity, success in life.

The main reason I write this, is so that people would always aim for self control instead of controlling other people. Control over other people is obtrusive and should only be exercised unwillingly for the sake of the level of availability of mutual solutions because there were no better options figured out

Prediction on University Marking v.03

In the future maybe universities will improve their marking system,
This is my attempt to hit the target,

1. Examination tests will give minus marks to bad answers, zero marks for no answers, and positive marks for correct answers. For stating facts from memory, as long as they were correct they would likely be appreciated, but greater marks would be acquired through good quality insights based on the accurate facts.

2. There would be various passing thresholds for each individual problems, but maximum marks would be infinite. Those that managed to pass the passing marks would be measured for the first tier pass. What I meant by the first tier is at about equal to A marks or High Distinction marks now. But there would be those who would surpass even those marks in relation to the problem.
For those that managed such achievement, they would be marked for excellence by the grader. And then their answer would be passed on to a lead professor or researcher of the university to receive an additional grading.

3. Practical grading is the additional grading made by the researcher or the lead professor. If the professor was unimpressed with the answer there would be zero additional marks, but if they found the answer to be practical, meaning it provides new insight or progress on how to solve certain problems, then they would receive a positive mark on that.
The practical marks would count as an addition to the overall test marks. Plus they would be given money, or even an intellectual property right because of the practical contribution.

The student might score some negative marks while also acquired a positive practical grading. In this case, even though he/she didn't pass the subject, his/her endeavor would most likely be appreciated by him/herself and the university.

After the results were announced, students who were unsatisfied with their grades or even curious about something could pay extra to a discussion with their grader. Students that managed to score an excellent mark in relation to a problem would be given a free discussion session. 

The Logos, The Inspiration

Why Jesus is the Logos, and not the Letter?

Words are made from letters and relationships (between letters).

The Logos is about objects and the relationships between them.

As Jesus is humble and lovely, truthful and illuminating. As a Christian I aspire to set Love, Truth, Respect, Wisdom and Intelligence to be prioritized in reality.

There are so many things to be prioritized at once, but realistically they are one in the Logos, and they could be prioritized altogether.

Judgement, Evil, Clothing, Sex, Property v.07

People have these two circuits in their brain, a classification of good and bad. And this governs the decision making of human beings.

I define Evil as eternally bad. Somewhere along the line of evolution, humans started to be able to define eternity, and the relationship between eternity and the bad is evil.

Evil is potentially devastating to a person. If you categorize yourself as evil you'd have 3 options:
1. Stop yourself
2. Stop the world
3. Stop the evil within yourself

Of course, the right answer is number 3, but the implementation is not always obvious. The harder it is to figure it out, the more tempting the alternatives would be. And as soon as you choose the alternatives, you are in the state of depression. That's how I define it.

This inherent circuit extends to the realm of our subconscious, our conscious isn't always able to cooperate with the subconscious. They could cooperate, but sometimes it requires more resources, including time. In order to choose number 3, you need to focus, and you need to stay away from things that would make it harder to do so.

But life is not always that simple. The existence of other people may make things more difficult for choosing number 3. If you have had sex with the other person, the risk is magnified, because he/she would have a strong influence over your subconscious. Not mentioning he/she could suggest to your subconscious that you are evil, in more ways than one. It's hard enough to solve one depression, now you risk to face many at once.

This is one fictional scenario of Adam and Eve in the event after they ate the fruit of Good and Evil:

After they ate the fruit they realized that they are in trouble.

Adam was displeased with Eve, and also Eve with herself. The fact that Adam displeased with her made things worse. Eve tried to collect herself in order to create an administration that could prevent her from ever commit such a thing ever again. But when she saw that Adam's genitals reacted positively about her, she kind of felt good about it, suddenly the guilt doesn't always mean disagreement.

And so they ended up having sex.

Adam and Eve then realized that this distracted both of them from creating the necessary administration to purge evil from their life. The sex made the subconscious less motivated to focus on creating the discipline, because the "good" feeling that came from sexual activities, implied that rewards can be available through backdooring the conscious. In other words, there is this option, appeared at the back of their minds, of reducing the consequences of irresponsibility through seduction.

They both realized then that sex could be used to control their partner from giving negative feedbacks. One of the main reason why is that the partner has the power to influence the subconscious to classify the self as inadequate, and evil, each and every time their partner wanted to exercise quality control over them. And the influence would be greater the more they learned about each other's subconscious through sex. So in other words, sex exposes them to deeper depression.

They concluded that just focusing to better themselves was inadequate, they should also focus on how to secure themselves from the pathological sexual partner, in order to be successful in life.
Now they've classified "Blackmailing in order to avoid responsibility" as evil. This may be the first time they ever realized the meaning of "Evil" in reality.

Eventually, they decided to cover their genitals. God saw it, and as much as God rejects the act of lawlessness against Him, God endorsed the solution that came after it. The idea of clothing, secrecy, privacy, and property are evidently useful in the fight against evil.

However, with the knowledge to face evil the responsibility became even greater. The more solution you came up with, the more "sin" you're liable to fall into.

And so until the potential for evil was absolutely nullified, we need focus and/or accuracy as there are more ways to mess up rather than to solve.

Personally, I state that the permanent nullification of the potential for evil could be achieved. And that notion came from hope that resides in my faith. My faith in the truth and the inclination to keep on inclining forever. The Son, made known to me through Jesus Christ, as Jesus Christ.

Proposal untuk Bahasa Indonesia

Karena orang suka tertukar antara miliar dan million bahasa Inggris, kita bilang saja miliar itu kilojuta... hehehehe :) kira kira gimana, ok?