QUOTATIONS BY JJ (JUNAID JABBAR)
· I am not here to prove myself; I am here to prove my best!
· To understand the nature of everything, first try to gain some knowledge about your own nature and its effects!
· The power of the unknown can be your friend in a state of existence!
· There is no such thing as emotional value that is only your ability of understanding different people!
· I am the product of the nature and my aim should be to work for it with the perspective of logic and self-awareness!
· Try to base every monad on some solid foundations of analytically and synthetically logical spectrum within the possible worlds and total reality of your time!
· To be different and thinker means to be partially socially and emotionally isolated!
· Aye lad, the tryst and the wail are somehow convened in the manner of gaging or an excursion inasmuch just before your approach which is surely an emblem not for clacking a pagan but it is being kilted as a garrison literary for the sake of lullness.
· Am I living in a Nominal world or is this a scant paradox of this knowledge?
· Am I the product of the nature or just an illusory representation of the force called 'will'?
· Am I going to serve my imagination or the free will of mine?
· Possession of self-consciousness in the perspective of rationalism is to challenge the governed rule of state of affairs of the epoch as this could lead an individual society to the revolution of any state of mind...
· Will I ever be seen as in the fourth dimension of time's perspective or just with the sceptic’s standpoint with no general concern of the external framework within the abstraction of simple thinking but with the natural phenomenon?
· Sharing comes with the expectation and willingness but willingness has been vanished owing to stubborn capitalism's framework so, how can you even expect sharing among people of different states of mind without keeping time in an absolute place?
· Relationship, accordingly mine stance, is an illusory way of orienting beyond the stark aspect of this world's plausible notion; survival of the fittest!
· Some people have some set rules or beliefs and some people have nothing but, in the end, all those people seem to be the followers of their own abilities, needs and existence!
· Am I being successful in overcoming the bridge between the animal and the superman or am I just trying to doubt and apply the concept of 'Will to Power'?
· Should we follow the slave ethics or the noble ethics as we are in the criteria of judging everything without some foundational ground and the soul of void purposes?
· History repeats first as a tragedy, then how we are going to justify the concept of the tragic view of Dionysus as the musical will has all been vanished within this scenario?
· Everything comes up with the concept of the need, the price and the greed. Is there a constant in this statement?
· People cry, not just of pain or their innate passions but, because they feel the hope that they would be noticed and empathized somehow while remaining cynical about the experience!
· Have I started struggling to distinct between the subjective phenomenal state of my consciousness and the objective relationships of my bodily matter or still just believing the unity of the concepts?
· If we assume to deny the moral point of view & start to chase the aesthetical point of view in unleashing the relationship between the rational & the illusionary world then, how can the history (in representation of the events form) be seen as the developer of the post-modernist culture?
· Will this be considered as self-deception when I try to forget the world by flowing with the rhythm of the fantasied dreams of the artistic painting to limit myself in getting caught in experiencing another self like a poet or should I call this a step in tolerating sufferings as there is no objective truth?
· When people start believing/not believing in the inherited forms of moral codes, they most likely go into the realm of 'Nihilism' (philosophy of meaningless life). To overcome this problem, people have to create new values for themselves by adopting the noble ethics as the morality is a product of particular circumstances, & the outcome would be the human intellectual evolution, which we need the most, not the human population...
· Is the purpose of the 'will to power' to reflect a world with a perfect self having identical beings or is this related to the self-enhancement for prosperously fitting into the nature?
· What is the real purpose of life? To discover your actual potential that has the will to love the fate of the life's meaningless events and to acknowledge that there are no objective values or the facts in this only world!
· Can we identify an absolute truth by changing subjective perspectives for the sake of creating new interpretations about the pragmatic truth or challenging the foundational grounds of fictional illusions would simply do the work?
· Why do I have to see the real truth or to seek a factual knowledge? To feel good about myself or is it innate my genes? When rules themselves don’t follow those rules then why we perceive the world in terms of natural laws or the reality by rational-empiricism?
· How am I ever going to justify the reduction of all the developed sciences with the science of the human behaviour and consciousness? If the latter notion is not going to be reduced in certain verifiable fashion then, can we abstract that the creativeness in the form of literature or aesthetics is the platonic reality?
· If growth, struggle, ambitions & experiences, without any deliberation of some conscience, give humans the sense of the meaning of life accordingly Goethe’s Faust then, I believe that the proposition of Mephistopheles that the God’s creation was a bad job and the humans have got the curse of reason can be justified in a stark manner…
· When you walk on the savanna, encompassing some saturated hues of flowers getting in your way as an aesthetic way of propitiating your desire of contending, the tiny creatures beneath your peripatetic phenomenon get quashed because they have to so, that you must pass for the sake of achieving your path that is your primal step of having an existential experience and what if you get distracted by considering the mirage of their gay existence?
· How to judge what is right & what is wrong for me? Is there a standard to compare with? I have no written tablet to follow but, if I did who would tell me how to read it? Anyhow, describing the life can be done in this way: finding the way alone & perhaps, that's why we have no tablet yet...
· Sating one’s desires surrogate the young blood with the hollowness deep inside the self and when one starts to cure this particular mire with the virtuous meanings of the life’s perspectives, one becomes vulnerable to the shame of pessimistic will and this will not only lead to self-loathing but, also to lose the lucid nature of other people; a sense of dying slowly…
· Creeds & other convictions are the product of human reasoning & have plausibly given the society & its individuals the obligatory meaning & now our thinking has been underpinned by some analytical disciplines as well as by a posteriori knowledge, which has eventually oriented us into the concept of individualism, freedom & the Greek heroic world... Is this a hedonistic approach or the meanings are based on subjectivism? Why there seems to be a conflict between thinking & believing?
· Will I get acquitted when I impute my ‘self’ with the effect of the conscience related action/behaviour? Is this how the ‘free will’ militates the concept of freedom or should I reduce the term ‘self’ into some naturalistic/empirical notions?
· Darkness is not a state of beatitude with no blasé light of reason instead it is a scenario in which most people possess different didactic messages but, with no reflection of an objective reality.
· Remaining in a mystery is not to create or scurry into a state finding everything filled with doubts and uncertainties rather it is an experience of sensing into something hollow in meaning. ‘Negative capability’ can act as an emotional intelligence, creating exquisite deepness in one’s creativity that is not underpinned epistemologically as well as rationally.
· Admiring someone is a feeling and a representation of one’s objective partiality but, in the process, we juxtapose the admired one in a position resembling an idea refuting with our perspectives of aesthetics; leading us to believe in nihilism.
· Change should not be occurred in the course of the history but, in embracing certain authorities because chaos exists. Empowering one ‘self’ with an attitude of creating new values and impelling individual ‘will’ can bring about a change in a real sense that will supervene.
· To accept the world and to absorb everything natural affiliated with it and the people eventuates the result in an open context without falling into a trap of categories.
· What if someone will ask me a rather naive question that what society am I from? I would answer as an epigram that I am from a society where the only objectivity is the ‘slave morality’ and where one finds it facile to just take responsibility of what one has done by remaining in the same milieu and feels a kind of a shame, which is not predicated on some strong and even personal moral foundations.
· If other possible worlds are inconspicuous to have a liaison with our world causally except the universal quality then, how the presumption of the existence of some creatures or particular objects in those worlds affects our minds as a whole to envision fictional opus by supposing that we are practicing free will?
· Is it ironic to have a moment when one had wielded over circumstances of a particular situation or the deportment of a boor and pauper person to let it, what one has been devising for a time, become imminent but, in the end, one just receded by justifying the previous scenario as unjustified for the upshot even though the scenario could be justified in so many reliable ways along with the auspiciousness favouring one’s cynical intentions or is it just the beginning of an ethical understanding?
· Would I be able to discriminate amid past, present and future sans employing the human competence of consciousness to avow the idea of myself being cognizant of the change that will constitute the framework for the impression of time or is there a ‘real time’ even without the attribute of ‘change’?
· Does the idea of change apply on the objects or on the events in the nature?
· The only real esoteric advantage of having different relationships is the calibre of talking to and understanding other people in a way that intensifies with different levels within.
· I guess that I am a microscopic expression of macrocosmic self…
· Would I be able to comprehend the question of the origins of the approach of seeking knowledge without believing in the conviction that there is some cosmic soul within the universe that gives reality to each and every thing?
· Is the applied concept of mortality the only disparity between humanity and divinity given the scenario of a cosmic force majeure?
· Can we justify the objectivity as well as the eternity of truth in accordance with the Protagoras’s claim - “Man is the measure of all things” - in mind?
· Can the soul perceive through the bodily apparatus the relational abstract idea of the number on which all the reality of material is constructed?
· Is everything reducible to atomic level of matter?
· Do we have a control over the scenario of comprehending the reality of the ‘will’ or the world of noumena even if we are unable to perceive it directly?
· How can I bear the consequences of living a life once I had denied my ‘Will’ and I am left with the world of phenomena or the ideas, as a result, that is the creation of the mind?
· We desire first and then, use our capability of reasoning that will produce justifications in favour, and not in negation, of the desire?
· If, according to Aristotle, the law is reason then, how can it understand the unconscious social ‘Will’ which is behind that reason?
· Should we, by any standard, permit ourselves to engage in the activity of criticism by using the ad hominem fallacy (attacking people emotionally)?
· Has the way one comport oneself a connexion deeply substantiated in the motivations of maximizing happiness/pleasure or wielding power on others?
· One is expected to accept certain norms of morality because if one doesn’t then, one would be left in isolation from the people and the society in general. Could it be said that there is a relationship between isolation and reasoning?
· My acceptable comportment, as apparent to others, is because of my angst-ridden psychoanalytical state.
· The good tragedy can be made possible to be seen when there is a conflict as well as integration of the two dialectical forces; the rational (Apollonian) force and the orgiastic irrational (Dionysian) force.
· Should we accept the tragedies and the sufferings that come into life as natural or should we blindly believe in providing rational explanations that only some people suffer because of their own flaws?
· Are we ‘special’ when it comes to rationalise naturalistically about the life and death cycle of rational and irrational creatures/things?
· Is the desire to continue life not mine but, of the life/nature itself to continue the species?
· Looking upon an object in an aesthetic sense does imply of having no desire(s) of whatsoever kind being involved.
· Can’t we have the right goals with the right ways to achieve them without using reason only?
· Was consciousness originated in the cycle of human evolution after unconscious to serve the purpose of ‘communication’?
· Is the search of ‘truth’ actually to seek power in one’s life on others?
· Can I simply experience a moment or make a claim or even have a belief about something without having the necessity of perspective in the first place?
· To search the truth, one must hold together different perspectives of understanding different phenomena and appearances differently with the consideration of the notion of ‘value’ and ‘naturalism’.
· Should we adopt the negative laissez-faire sense of freedom or the positive manner of freedom which is in limits?
· Freedom within limits: we are free in a sense of becoming who we actually are rather than becoming whatever we want.
· Should we choose or create? Are we free in choosing or creating?
· Are we the agents of our own actions or thoughts? Sometimes actions are derived from our instinctual drives and not from our rational capabilities. Thoughts also pop up in our minds at some points and randomly suggesting that thoughts can come that are not dependent on our thinking process.
· Is compassion the realization of the dark side of life or is it a way of adding more suffering to the world?
· The right thing to do is what one wants to do…
· Can we show pity to and for others when we all the victims or is it the way of showing contempt for someone and to put them as inferior?
· The highest form of love is the love of friendship that is romantic in a sense that it involves mutual inspiration and emotional desires and not mutual advantage, enjoyment or sex.
· Survival of the fittest or the best?
· Should we love the history and live in it and become self-denigrated?
· Should we devote our lives to the achievement of pleasure only – in which we expect to find something that will give meaning to our lives – or simply loving life as it is will direct us into finding some meaning in it?
· I have rejected customs, communities, ideals, creeds, knowledge but, I am saying ‘Yes’ to life. Am I a nihilist and a cynic?
· We see the world in terms of values and not in terms of facts..
· Values are neither subjective nor objective, do you agree?
· We have values that have played an important role in our living and flourishing in the past and are currently doing the same for the future…
· Morality of virtue and personal excellence…
· Sporadically, when one does something tremendous within oneself, one's resentment emotion reacts in a manner as to pursue revenge and justice with oneself to denigrate what has been considered well - an example of bad conscience.
· Sometimes we get cynical about the outside world to feel good about ourselves. Is this the strategy of resentment?
· Justice should not be taken in an absolute sense, where it works on some universal set of principles but, acknowledges the differences and exceptions within the community.
|Comments on this page:|
Add comment to this page: