Skip navigation

Tag Archives: APHORISMS

Se o custo-benefício do seu bicho de estimação é favorável, ou seja se o amor que você recebe dele te é mais significativo que o cocô que você limpa, isso significa que a sua vida social é uma bosta, e que você deveria investir mais em pessoas que em animais. Logo, bichos = problema, CQD.

If your pet has a favourable cost-benefit ratio (in other words, if the love you receive from it means more to you than the shit you have to clean) then your social life is very bad, and you should thus invest more energy into people not animals. ∴ pets = problems, QED.

Gurdjieff’s has a bunch about the mysteriousness of initiation and the unbelievable hardship of “The Work”, the nigh impossibility of true understanding. Not because it is really hard. It is easy. But it’s also something you gotta do for yourself, and so, it’s something people wont do.

§ Why do people prefer an empty promise to a sincere statement?

§ Morality is not inclusive by definition! Any morality is based upon contrasting [good] and [bad] — and thus excluding [bad].

§ Every judgement is an act of exclusion.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 113 other followers