The Cup That Cannot Be Filled

It seems we live in a world that needs answers to the problems it faces. Are there really answers or just our opinions? Whether it be poverty, disease, or war how do we know our answer will work for the given situation if we might not know all the factors involved? Life isn't so straight forward as to have an easy answer because if it were, more people would be happy. More people would know why they are here, there would be absolute truth instead of relative truth.

Maybe we are trying to fill a cup that cannot be filled, at least in the material world.

Maybe this world is just an image representing what is already within us. If the world is an image representing internal variables then maybe we should stop trying to change the image instead change what the image represents.

I agree with your statement whole heartily, everything is just an image we are trying to convey. We are all actors. I think once we get past a certain age in our lives, maybe 12/13, we become consumed(at least in the western world) of how we are portrayed and what we represent. We put on a mask around this time and start living a completely different life. A life that we think is who we are, the clothes, the music, the car we drive, the attitude we carry, etc.

I often marvel at how children really do live in the moment. And I wish I could identify when exactly we stop living in the present and start living for the future or living in the past, something that consumes a majority of adults. I love how children (and I suppose some adults) can live care free and not feel the pressures of judgement placed on them by other citizens.

Back to your final paragraph and question, how do you see us changing what the image represents? I think it will be very difficult to change what the image represents because until we take a step back from our virtual worlds (internet, television, music, movies, magazines, etc) we never truly acknowledge our true being, we are constantly trying to be what we see and hear.

When I mentioned changing what the images represent, I should have mentioned changing our perception. Like if someone kills a child, its not the actual image of the child being murdered and dying but the thought that derives from that image that makes it seem bad. Most people say they hate murders but what is a murder? An image we hold in our head that represents a negative feeling usually.

I'm more suggesting we look past the world and look to how we think because if we try to change the world but not how we think then it usually doesn't work out.

reply to post by Ralphy



Well, I think the image of the child being murdered is a significant thing to behold if you actually are to witness that or see a photo/video. And I would say that the thought that arrives from that image makes it seem bad yes, and therefore we know it is bad. A murder is one civilian taking an innocent civilians life. That is why we have manslaughter, 1st, 2nd, 3rd degree murder charges because a murder 1 is intentionally killing someone who is innocent. A manslaughter(murder) charge is, for example, hitting a bicyclist with your car. You did not intentionally try to murder, but you did murder none the less. Therefore you get 2 years in jail instead of 25 to life.

I dont know, I guess I'm not understanding the changing how we think. I dont know if its as simple as changing, we sort of evolve our thought process towards certain ideas as we find out more about why we do what we do.
Like, I guess a hundred years ago we thought there could never be a half black half white president, now there is. So we do change the way we think it just takes a helluva long time.

Originally posted by Ralphy
It seems we live in a world that needs answers to the problems it faces. Are there really answers or just our opinions? Whether it be poverty, disease, or war how do we know our answer will work for the given situation if we might not know all the factors involved? Life isn't so straight forward as to have an easy answer because if it were, more people would be happy. More people would know why they are here, there would be absolute truth instead of relative truth.

Maybe we are trying to fill a cup that cannot be filled, at least in the material world.

Maybe this world is just an image representing what is already within us. If the world is an image representing internal variables then maybe we should stop trying to change the image instead change what the image represents.

Until now, we created a world based on ideologies (economic doctrines, religions, political ideologies etc), based on ideas of "what should be"., but I think it is time to look at us and the world we've created with objectivity, and for that the best tool we have invented is science, the scientific method to be more accurate. We have to look at every possibility, at every parameter of the equation. And if there is one parameter that we have shamefully overlooked, it's the human being himself.

For example, some eminent men and women in the past and still today have said that man is intrinsically selfish. But is that true? The dominant economical system, namely capitalism, is based on that idea, that man is selfish by nature. But they have overlooked some parameters of the equation. They have overlooked and omitted life experience and the life environment. We have biological needs that are vital to our existence, like eating, warmth, etc.., and those are not to be mixed and considered to be the expression of selfishness. It is not selfishness if your very existence depends on whether you eat or not. Then comes the question of the environment and the problem of scarcity. By saying that man is selfish by nature, they omit the fact that a biological form of life cannot be separated from its environment, and i mean by that that you cannot define a biological organism if you don't define at the same time its environment. For example, imagine a world of total abundance of everything, would man still be selfish ? No, because there's no reason for it. If we were selfish by nature, we would stock gallons of sea water, just because it is our nature, we would stock the very air we breathe, just because we are selfish by nature. But we don't do that, and it means that our behaviour depends on the state of the environment, and depends on our needs.

The world we create is the reflection of ourselves, of our beliefs, of what we know and what we think we know, and then the world we create shapes new generations of men and women who will in their turn again shape the world, etc..

Some have said that man always seeks to dominate others, that domination is in our nature. But is that true? I think it's not true. What is true is that we are driven by an instinct of survival, and even sometimes, we can surpass that instinct (suicide ...). The instinct of survival and domination are not to be mixed and mistaken one for the other. Domination is only a means, between other means, to achieve survival and to satisfy the instinct of survival. Another means is cooperation with others, to create a bond of trust; another means could be just annihilating others, to feel secure and satisfy the survival instinct, etc..

You see, man is the subject that has been overlooked the most, yet it is the most important one. The problem is that we still today quote what some people have said two or three thousand years ago, we still build our societies upon old knowledge. Having, as a species, the possibility to accumulate knowledge through thousands of years is a great capacity, but can also be a great handicap if we are not careful, because we transmit everything and anything (who said religion? I heard you !). What we have to seek as a species is fast adaptation to new and verified knowledge. What we do currently is an excess of adaptation, we are scared of change. Here again, having the capacity to adapt is a great one, but it also can be a great handicap, because like a scared animal, we are paralysed, we think its better not to move. It's called "bias of statu quo".

"There are no facts, only interpretations." — Friedrich Nietzsche.

Our inability to fill the cup stems from errors in our perception, not the nature of cup in its raw form (if we assume it even exists).

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
"There are no facts, only interpretations." — Friedrich Nietzsche.

I agree with that, everything is interpretation, but there are different levels of accuracy. We can agree that saying "the earth is flat" is less accurate than saying "the earth is round". Saying "the earth has been created 4000 years ago by a magical being" is less accurate than saying "the earth is around 4.5 billions years old and has been formed out of a solar nebula". Saying "a human being is selfish by nature" and saying "a human being can be selfish under specific conditions" are two different things that can lead to very different developments. In the end, what counts, is adaptation to reality, to what is really happening, that's what our interpretations are useful for. And the best tool we have invented to produce accurate interpretations, models and representations is science.

reply to post by gosseyn


from my perspective, science died from objective superiority proven of subjective one free wills in concept and in fact of now

one could be god or any miserable resistent will or any true resistent fact individuality, still all scientists are surprised by now and news givers seem all being lost in telling anything, science is dead, so objective existence concept was killed it cant b true ever

then subjective existence concept still offer possible future to be constant, which cant but be then individuals existence realities subjectivity
noone want that of course that is why everyone was beting first on objective existence constancy, more gains and business profits

but from my guess, subjective existence offer will die too on its time

only truth is positive superiority concept no way to use it as knowledge for wills

and from my guess this would happen everyone would subjectively exist mayb even matters will have conscious moves, then absolute nothing will appear as the object ground existence which would kill everyone
and things will start there from true zero

Originally posted by Ralphy
It seems we live in a world that needs answers to the problems it faces. Are there really answers or just our opinions? Whether it be poverty, disease, or war how do we know our answer will work for the given situation if we might not know all the factors involved? Life isn't so straight forward as to have an easy answer because if it were, more people would be happy. More people would know why they are here, there would be absolute truth instead of relative truth.

Maybe we are trying to fill a cup that cannot be filled, at least in the material world.

Maybe this world is just an image representing what is already within us. If the world is an image representing internal variables then maybe we should stop trying to change the image instead change what the image represents.

My cup sits at the bottom of the ocean
It is never half empty or half full
But can it be full since its filled with the ocean or is it empty since the ocean surrounds it
but the cup can never fill the ocean
it's all perspective

There are no truths only half truths

--"There are no facts, only interpretations"-- Nietzsche

And i say this if politicians actually solved problems they'd be out of a job and collecting unemployment

reply to post by IblisLucifer


i like ur image of cup, it is first image that mean depth credible, while there too what mean be true so actually cant mean any
but the credit goes to what you sound caring for objective intelligence which is normal zero logically that has nothing to do with depth
there is no depth all is out, actually the more deep in ur sense of perceiving it the more it is out objectively

reply to post by absolutely


Thank you depth is a funny thing go to deep and you lose the surface and are lost to the deep or just the same you never break the surface and face the depth becoming void by leaving one empty and equally lost.

One is a great number it will never equal Zero
but it has 2 forms +1 and -1 outside of both ones is infinity between them is 0 and also infinity e.i. 0.9876...+ or -
(plus or minus is simply all in ones perspective of another one)
2 the same one different

Here is a fun math question- pi is the diameter of a circle wrapped around its circumference

draw a circle then draw the same circle on both sides of the first one then draw a big one around all 3
now the outer circle and the inner center circle are the same
the circles on both sides of the center are plus or minus 1 circle from the center
Take the diameter of the outer big circle which is the length of the 3 circles across it and wrap that around the center inner circle and see what you get

This is the triangulation of pi since you are using three points to fix one location and since all circle are circles this answer is repeating infinitely and not randomly like the simple diameter of a single circle does which is just as important to understanding because you need both ways to make things rational and logical plus reasonably illogical and/or irrational

Which is fundamental to All since you cant have existence without nonexistence that would unreasonable

reply to post by IblisLucifer


my perception of how existence work is totally different, it has no cercles nor triangle, the central point is truth positive superiority confirmed by 4 different free poles, which is existence objective point

superiority imply inferiority but both do not exist, so ur reasoning is a lie

north pole free is superiority south is inferiority free
est and ouest is positive for ouest and negative for est, both too do not exist by their fact

only positive superiority exist and negative inferiority is evil opposition to true existence right

the true object central point is the point that the fourth poles freedom confirm its positive superiority to them separately

which bring the right concept of object superiority always positively in truth absolute terms

at some points absolute inferiority freedom is positive fact out of inferiority
at some points absolute superiority freedom is negative fact out of superiority
at some points absolute positive freedom is inferior fact out of positivity
and at some points absolute negative freedom is superior fact out of negativity

where those different four free points meet as one is true object existence right

i didnt invent that, this is how it works mister and what u see anywhere and anything

absolute positive superiority is constant freedom fact reason so truth conception

absolute superior positivity is free constant reality reason so true existence constancy right

by definition what is free of absolute superiority cannot be positive, otherwise it would b through superiority
it is wether inferior or negative of absolute superiority

by definition what is free of absolute positivity cannot b superior, otherwise it would b through positivity
it is wether negative or inferior of absolute positivity since stranger then to else values

when freedom sense is a move that at the same time is positive and superior, it is then to truth object conception absolute fact never to itself will nor relative fact

this is already more then known as it is the exclusive knowledge base of truth hidden for true existence rights abuse

preaching that nonexistence is a reason for existence is proving being evil negative inferiority living will
through obvious lies

existence has an absolute value in truth that could be superior to truth as it is seen from its geniune resistence without means, that truth surely is confirming

to not respect what obviously exist constant is to disrespect truth superiority, so proving ur belonging to inferiority realm

and to mean positively what is never existing is proving your belonging to negativity at the same time

which explain the character of liar that exclusively mean to profit from knowledge for existence abuse as if free objective conscious life is a right for anyone

it isnt

www.businessballs.com...

Some glass quotes from this site.

The optimist says the glass is half full.
The pessimist says the glass is half empty.
The project manager says the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
The realist says the glass contains half the required amount of liquid for it to overflow.
And the cynic... wonders who drank the other half.
The school teacher says it's not about whether the glass is half empty or half full, it's whether there is something in the glass at all.
Anyway... Attitude is not about whether the glass is half full or half empty, it's about who is paying for the next round.
The professional trainer does not care if the glass is half full or half empty, he just knows that starting the discussion will give him ten minutes to figure out why his powerpoint presentation is not working.
The ground-down mother of a persistently demanding five-year-old says sweetheart it's whatever you want it to be, just please let mummy have five minutes peace and quiet.
The consultant says let's examine the question, prepare a strategy for an answer, and all for a daily rate of...
The inquisitive troublemaker wants to know what's in the glass anyhow... and wants the rest of it.
The homebuilder sees the dirty glass, washes and dries it, then puts it away in a custom oak and etched glass cabinet that he built himself using only hand tools.
The worrier frets that the remaining half will evaporate by next morning.
The fanatic thinks the glass is completely full, even though it isn't.
The entrepreneur sees the glass as undervalued by half its potential.
The computer specialist says that next year the glass capacity will double, be half the price, but cost you 50% more for me to give you the answer.
The first engineer says the glass is over-designed for the quantity of water.
The second engineer says (when the half is tainted) he's glad he put the other half in a redundant glass. (Based on a Dilbert cartoon by Scott Adams)
The computer programmer says the glass is full-empty.
The Buddhist says don't worry, remember the glass is already broken.
The logician says that where the glass is in process of being filled then it is half full; where it is in the process of being emptied then it is half empty; and where its status in terms of being filled or emptied is unknown then the glass is one in which a boundary between liquid and gas lies exactly midway between the inside bottom and the upper rim, assuming that the glass has parallel sides and rests on a level surface, and where it does not then the liquid/gas boundary lies exactly midway between the upper and lower equal halves of the available total volume of said glass.
The scientist says a guess based on a visual cue is inaccurate, so mark the glass at the bottom of the meniscus of the content, pour the content into a bigger glass; fill the empty glass with fresh content up to the mark; add the original content back in; if the combined content overflows the lip, the glass was more than half full; if it doesn't reach the top, the glass was more than half empty; if it neither overflows nor fails to reach the top then it was either half-full or half-empty. Now what was the question again?
The Dutchman would suggest to both pay for the glass and share the content. Then tells you he will have the bottom half.
The personal coach knows that the glass goes from full to empty depending on the circumstances, and reminds the drinker that he can always fill the glass when he wishes.
The grammarian says that while the terms half-full and half-empty are colloquially acceptable the glass can technically be neither since both full and empty are absolute states and therefore are incapable of being halved or modified in any way.
The auditor first checks whether the empty half is material and then designs the audit procedures to obtain sufficient evidence to conclude that the glass is indeed empty.
The waiter will hurry to replace the glass with a full one. For him there are no doubts: the glass was empty when he took it away; it is full in the bill that he brings you.
The magician will show you the glass with the full half at the top.
The physician says that the glass is not empty at all - it is half-filled with water and half-filled with air - hence, fully filled on the whole!
The musician says he/she is unimpressed with the promoter of the concert for not providing more alcohol.
The ineffective organization would discuss the question during the board of directors meeting, convene a committee to research the problem, and assign tasks for a root cause analysis, usually without a complete explanation of the problem to those assigned the tasks. The directors would consider the problem to be above the pay grade of those assigned root cause analysis tasks.

And more strangely:

The dog just wonders: can he eat the glass or will you throw it so he can bring it back... The cat wonders why the glass is only half full (or empty)... is it a trick... poison perhaps...
The eternally optimistic eccentric would say, the glass is consistently overflowing (or is that the neurotic?...)
The person who is no longer trapped in The Matrix (whatever one might call him/her) says: "There is no glass..."

More generationally:

The adolescent student says the glass is just another dirty trick played by the teacher to prove that students are dumb.

More scientifically:

The research scientist says that following initial observation and testing a working hypothesis for further research is: "The glass is both half full and half empty," and that these findings warrant further investigation with a more representative sample of glasses and contents, which may or may not be liquid.
The algebraic simultaneous equation theorist says that if the glass is equally half full and half empty, then half full = half empty; therefore ½ x F = ½ x E; therefore (by multiplying both sides of the equation by 2) we show that F = E; i.e. Full equals Empty!
The efficiency analyst says the glass is operating substantially below optimization level, being consistently exactly 50% under-utilized during the period of assessment, corresponding to an over-resourcing in meeting demand equating to precisely 200% of requisite capacity in volume terms, not accounting for seasonal trends and shrinkage, and that if the situation continues there is in theory opportunity for savings or expansion.

The 'perfect' 1950s housewife would not leave the glass sitting there long enough for anyone to consider the question, but would scoop it up, wash it up, dry it to a gleaming shine and put it back in the glass cabinet in a jiffy. No half-full or half-empty in her world... just a full glass or an untidy one.
The obsessive compulsive postpones the question until the level is checked, and checked again, and again, and again...
The phobic says yuck, someone drank out of it and left their germs on the glass.

The psychiatrist would ask you, "Is the half-empty/half-full glass really that important? I mean... really? Think about it. If fact, let's not. Let's set that particular issue aside for a few moments and talk about what's really bothering you.."
The sales person will convince you that even though the glass is half full/empty you are getting more than your money's worth compared to buying a full glass. The full glass is less expensive because of the economies of producing a common standard version in big quantities, whereas the more expensive half full/empty glass represents much better value because it is more exclusive and better quality, and very hard to come by and greatly sought after.
The customer service agent will agree with you that the glass is half full/empty, and they will do anything in their power to fill the glass up at no extra cost. However, after a full investigation you will be informed that you mistakenly received a half full/empty glass since you only paid for a quarter. You therefore received a half full/empty glass at the price of a quarter-full/three-quarters empty glass. You should consider yourself very lucky, and that any further complaints might result in your having to return the half full/empty glass at your own cost, with no guarantee of any refund.
The co-dependent hurries to fill your glass, but not so completely that you would spill it and get upset. Because when you get upset...
The (suggestions welcome for this one) says that's not my glass, mine was bigger.
The radical thankful child of Jesus says, "THE CUP RUNNETH OVER.."
The Taoist sees that the glass is both half empty and half full, that neither half could exist without the other, requiring a point of balance in order to maintain equilibrium in the universe, and therefore, are merely two mirror images of the same realistic concept, so in the purity of absolute truth the glass is neither half full or half empty, the glass simply IS...
The optimist says: "The glass is half-full." The pessimist says: "The glass is half-empty". And while they are arguing, the pragmatist takes the glass and drinks it.

reply to post by absolutely


In that case then the cup is absolutely superior to being filled then to being half filled. All depending if the one is trying to fill the cup while upside down or right side up, but never left side right as it would be inclined to the truth that its never filled, if looked from all vantage and perspectives. You can clearly see that the cup is never filled.

from my perspective, science died from objective superiority proven of subjective one free wills in concept and in fact of now one could be god or any miserable resistent will or any true resistent fact individuality, still all scientists are surprised by now and news givers seem all being lost in telling anything, science is dead, so objective existence concept was killed it cant b true ever

The king is dead, long live the king....Oh were have I hear this tale before. It's eternally reoccurring, there are no absolutes but for the fact that there are no absolutes.

Originally posted by galadofwarthethird
In that case then the cup is absolutely superior to being filled then to being half filled. All depending if the one is trying to fill the cup while upside down or right side up, but never left side right as it would be inclined to the truth that its never filled, if looked from all vantage and perspectives. You can clearly see that the cup is never filled.

this is nonsense, the more it is superior the more it is real, u clearly show how u enjoy inventing that u can be beyond truth, existence is all to truth mister which obviously is fully filled of all clarity constancy eternity

keep assuming that truth is random equation meaning stupidly infinity that anyone is superior to as able to b intelligent present as urself, it is surely what truth want u to believe in justifying ur end

It's easy to get caught up on these type questions when one is in despair or questioning certain circumstances of life, which are usually temporary.

In reality, (of which, yes, there is one), there are people working hard every day to try and find solutions to problems........looking for cures for diseases, working on solving and preventing social problems such as poverty, drug addiction, child abuse, domestic violence. They ARE there, and they ARE trying. If you live in small world, you don't see it, but I promise you it is taking place. People who TRY are there.

We face many, many issues as a world population, and this is nothing new, we always have, and for every problem that is solved, new ones will take their place. We are and will always be a work in progress, it's why we're here.

reply to post by absolutely


That is half sense, plainly your cup is half filled imans, maybe you should empty it up, then fill it back up to full, then drink half and say that you misplaced the whole by the positively superiority of being thirsty.

Show me one superior thing and I will show you how it is anything but that, as of yet I have not met or seen anything that can not be ended, or something that did not end. The only question really is what happens when an unmovable object when it meets and unstoppable force, clearly there are fireworks somewhere in that equation. And just as clearly your confused, maybe even disfused but definitely you are unsane if you think a cup cant be filled while upside down.

reply to post by absolutely

The one side is a only a + to itself and will see the otherside as always a negative thing no matter how positive it is or is not.

Until One can gain true objectivity understanding the knowledge of truth will allude them

The universe runs on some simple principals

7 Laws to the Universe
&)Law of Gender
“Gender is in everything; everything has its Masculine and Feminine Principles; Gender manifests on all planes.”

^)Law of Cause and Effect
“Every Cause has its Effect; every Effect has its Cause; everything happens according to Law; Chance is but a name for Law not recognized; there are many planes of causation, but nothing escapes the Law.”

%)Law of Rhythm
“Everything flows, out and in; everything has its tides; all things rise and fall; the pendulum-swing manifests in everything; the measure of the swing to the right is the measure of the swing to the left; rhythm compensates.”

$)Law of Polarity
“Everything is Dual; everything has poles; everything has its pair of opposites; like and unlike are the same; opposites are identical in nature, but different in degree; extremes meet; all truths are but half-truths; all paradoxes may be reconciled.”

#)Law of Vibration
“Nothing rests; everything moves; everything vibrates.”

@)Law of Correspondence
“As above, so below; as below, so above.”

!)Law of Mentalism
“THE ALL is MIND; The Universe is Mental.”

But to have existence one must have nonexistence too otherwise it wouldn't work
But don't you dare tell the nonexistent that they don't exist even though they don't think you exist too

God is all and everything things that exist and things that don't exist
Remember nothing is everything, But Everything is not nothing. its all perspective of a mind gone schizo

reply to post by Ralphy

how do we know our answer will work for the given situation if we might not know all the factors involved?

The answer is Love my friend... i can't explain it any other way...

And the reason we are here... is to learn...