HOME | DD
JohnSu β Optimal Mouse
Published: 2008-02-07 20:38:51 +0000 UTC; Views: 600351; Favourites: 26622; Downloads: 13969
Redirect to original
Description
Well, seeing as this new Chinese year is my year , I suppose I should at least do something mouse related.I admit I was also tempted to have a mouse with blue teeth and a laser gun running through the background, but that would have crowded the picture.
Maybe in another dozen years.
EDIT: A number of you are attempting to correct me by saying it's the "Year of the Rat" and not the "Year of the Mouse." But technically, "ιΌ εΉ΄" ought to translate to "Year of the Rodent," as there is no distinction between rats and mice in Chinese. In this context, one can use rat and mouse interchangeably.
Made in Flash
Related content
Comments: 3094
stop sending your pornos dude, its just sick.
π: 0 β©: 0
Oh dear.
Why is this so relatable.
π: 0 β©: 0
This is very depressing, i can't see what people find funny about it. The cruel reality of world is that you will get replaced eventually in life buy somebody that is better and you will be forgotten forever. I think that mouse can just jump off the bridge to spare him some self pity and watch wold move on without him.
π: 0 β©: 5
Lol, and this is why people can't draw anything these days. People take it into a completely different meaning and act like the artist is some evil human.
π: 0 β©: 2
I never said that and i wasn't even implying that.
π: 0 β©: 1
Why the fuck are you here?
π: 0 β©: 0
You do realize that you're being a philo over a drawing that was just a pun about mouse right?
π: 0 β©: 1
I just gave my impression of the image. And yes i am aware this is just a mouse pun, but why not look into things a different way when we have a chance.
π: 0 β©: 0
Your logic fails to make sense, since A ) the mouse is getting cleaned, B ) it's all in good humor, and C ) your reasoning has two associated trains which fall short of reality. Namely, your logic is that people should kill themselves on the presumption that the next shiny object should immediately replace the original. (While often true of objects, it is clearly not so of things with sentimental value, however we are at present on the topic of things defined as "living".)
Clearly, people do kill themselves over something as unbearing of mention as losing a friend, but the larger portion of people do not. As I can only assume you are in this category of not-dead persons, I don't understand your argument from the beginning.Β
Relatedly, do you also toss people aside for being only second best? If so then I can see where your worldview arises, though I should hope that you are instead the Knight in Sour Armor trope, as I attempt to be, knowing that a perfect utopia cannot exist rationally.
The logic I try to point you towards is that this piece was only a but of fun-having, that the world is not so jade-colored as you believe, and that it is better to try to make it better than to drag others and oneself down. c:
I do hope you have a good day! Are you getting counseling for your depression?
π: 0 β©: 2
Wow thanks for writing this, you make a good point. I just feel like people trow over others when they find somebody they like more, being that a friend or a lover. I saw this image as more of a symbol then objective thing and "getting cleaned" part i imagined had a different meaning. Like they say to you you'll get better and improved, they'll still be there for you when you get "fixed". And no i keep my condition a secret for the greater good of my family, me and the others around me.
π: 0 β©: 1
You're welcome! I understand that feeling, honestly.Β
Ah, I think if they're good family, you should talk to them about getting counseling. Not necessarily having to mention depression, but a therapist is definitely helpful for a lot of people. Keeping things locked inside your brain only makes them more painful, I think. If you don't want to talk to your family about it though then you could always note me with what's bothering you! I may not be able to help much but I'll do my best. c:
π: 0 β©: 0
If "rationality" tells us that a perfect world is impossible, then what's the point of it...?
It's nothing but pessimism, and the idea that what we see in this one world in the present and the past, is all there is to reality.
You are ignoring the rest of this universe and what is beyond it, and you are ignoring the possible future.
In the end, "rationality" is worthless.
π: 0 β©: 1
The point is that "refuse to accept that the world will have both ups and downs" does not follow from "rationally, a utopia is impossible". Pessimism is a train of thought that certainly exists, but it also ignores the fact that the world is not composed primarily of monsters who would rather kill you than hold the door open. Optimism doesn't do much for me either, personally, but I don't remember the one-word bite of information that would adequately sum up my worldview.
"The idea thatΒ what we see in this one world in the present and the past, is all there is to reality" I'd need you to clarify this. I can't make out your meaning.
I'm not ignoring theΒ rest of the universe, nor the possible future, by living as a human in the present. If it's only by doing so that you can convince yourself to clutch time with everything you still have, then I won't be the one to judge. Frankly I much rather living when I know I make no difference to the rest of the world; I know that the universe would not give a rat's ass, if you'll pardon theΒ expression, about me or what I do. I love the knowledge that what matters for life on earth is not the rest of the universe, it's the little things that people do every day in one's life.Β
"Rationality" is not worthless, since it is recognition of one large-scale thing is impossible for one person to do; however, making small changes in other persons' lives is possible, and to preserve some level of classically-defined "good," one must be the one to extend such a kindness outward.
I believe I had several questions otherwise that weren't answered, if you'd care to respond to those as well. I hope I'm not being a pain, though I suppose not responding is an equally reasonable thing to do with people you come to dislike, such as what I imagine I have become to you, haha.
π: 0 β©: 1
I just don't agree with the words "knowing that a perfect utopia cannot exist rationally", both because you are claiming to know something that cannot be known, and because you are only basing that on the history and the current state of this world.
Just because a perfect world is not possible here and now doesn't mean it isn't possible somewhere else (beyond this world and further) and in the future.
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm also basing it on human psychology, but yes, I recognize "knowing" to be a silly phrase. Would "having a high probability" suit it better? I use them as one and the same, but I realize that I've gotten berated for similar claims.
People have tried social constructions which should have lead to utopias, but they tend towards falling apart or being replaced with things that are closer to what we naturally tend towards in massive societies. If you mean to say that aliens might have developed an utopic society, or that some time in the distant future humans might, then I don't understand the argument, as it doesn't directly pertain to either of us. But yes, I recognize the point. Thank you for clarifying!
π: 0 β©: 1
I only responded to the part about the assumption that a perfect world is impossible, and the false claim of knowledge.
It is very unlikely that this world would see a perfect society though, because of human psychology, and the existence of mortality.
Mortality and instincts related to it, is the real cause of most of the terrible things people do...
π: 0 β©: 1
Instincts and mortality are also the reason that mothers can perform superhuman feats to save their young, and why people will leap into water that could be dangerous to their own health to save others. Instincts arenβt all bad, nor is mortality. Mortality means we have to pass the world to the next generation, which is a lesson the current young generations have taken to heart, and instinct only means the things we do when the forebrain canβt react fast enough.
π: 0 β©: 1
There has to be something wrong with someone if they think that any aspect of mortality can be a good thing.
It is nothing but a terrible thing.
Although it is true that it is good to leave the world in one piece for the future generations, that cannot be any kind of a priority.
The people who are currently alive are more important than the potential people in the future, because they do not even exist yet.
π: 0 β©: 1
Why so? Do you prefer a world where no one can die? That's only going to lead to more suffering, considering that the rich get richer while the poor get worse off, and no amount of immortality will change that. Mortality is not only natural and necessary, but motive to be a better person while still alive. Explain your reasoning.
Your initial argument was that somewhen in the future or somewhere in the universe a utopia might exist; now you argue that the future is not a priority? Perhaps therein lies your disenchantment with the world, that you think that the future is useless to consider.
I present the logical conclusion I see from your argument, namely that previous to the now, when we were nonexistent future probabilities, we should by your reasoning be unimportant. By that, we can say that all persons, past to future, are equally unimportant. So either treating the world as nothing because we are all nothing to the world is what you mean to say, or we should treat the world well, as we the nothings living on it will be here for a while longer.Β
Are you arguing the ethics of abortion to save the would-be mother? I'm confused.
π: 0 β©: 1
I am not just talking about biological immortality applied directly to this world.
The world itself would have to be built for immortals.Β A world without decay, and a world that keeps expanding.
It would also be a world where no one has any power over anyone else.
Wouldn't you consider that a perfect world.
I am saying that the people who are currently alive are more important than the generations that do not exist in any form yet.
They are just potential life forms that will not exist if humanity as a whole stops breeding.
So why prioritize them over people currently existing. What's even the point of keeping the cycle going...?
As living individuals, we are more important than people who may never exist.
π: 0 β©: 1
No. A world like that would be imperfect for a human mind. Human minds thrive in change, in ups and downs and exploration. You describe a static and bland idea, one without conflict or trials. That sounds like the most clear hell I can think of, something without change or dynamics or age or any of the things that make humanity a thing worth exploring.
As for that, again I say that by that metric, all generations past have been less important than that which came before it, though clearly we don't regard that as the case. Consider, if you will, that what you are suggesting is a breeding program of sorts, albeit one which demands celibacy or infanticide or abortions to be the dominant method of dealing with new humans. Never once has a breeding program been something that people have adopted and found sustainable, as can be seen from history, and hough you denounce the use of history as a metric, it is a much more useful tool than "what if"s or "could have been"s.
Prioritize the ones we allow to live (since it really is allowing them, is it not?) since they are the ones with a longer potential life. Your argument to me still sounds like all persons are equally unimportant, so I don't see what makes the future-present ones any less important than the at-present ones.Β
Though if this is how you rationalize a disdain for children, I can perhaps see where you come from, I don't think that is the case. You were still at one point nothing but the separate zygotes in two other humans, and by your own metric, therefore, you were and are not important at all. Nor is anyone, nor will be anyone.
π: 0 β©: 1
Did you miss the "expanding world" part...?
Just think of all the way in which something can expand, without taking any lives or destroying anything, and it will apply to that world.
None of these delusions has anything to do with anything I said.
You just took some keywords, completely out of context.
It's really a simple concept...
I would rather that the currently living humans keep existing, than for the species itself to keep expanding in this cycle of life and death...
That is all...
π: 0 β©: 1
You say expanding as though that solves the problem, while then saying that expanding as we do at present is the wrong way to go. Insulting my argument by calling it a delusion does not help your argument, it rather weakens it by indicating that you feel safer to just throw the idea of delusionality at me rather than argue with clarity what I have posited.
Expanding worlds would not solve the problem. Expand out to infinity with infinite time, you still see boredom and disappointment romping about in the minds and thoughts of people as they exist at present; with infinite space there's still a limit to how much one can do before becoming sick of a lack of challenge to inventiveness. If your ideal is to save all those people presently alive, what makes them more worthwhile than future generations, what makes them more worthwhile than previous ones?
You ignore that I say this again and again; humans don't matter. The point isn't whether or not there is some objective point to anything- there is none. The point is that it only can matter where one assigns meaning. You say that future generations don't matter, but clearly that is not so to people who have or plan to have offspring. You treat the past generations as though they do not matter, but without them we would not exist.
Is there a reason for the use of ellipsis? They don't appear necessary and serve only as emotional pandering, to which I feel no response.
But, if that is, as you say, all there is to it, then I wish you best of luck in your future days! Ciao!
π: 0 β©: 1
The difference is that this world is a corpse, and with mortality, we are expanding it by adding our corpses to it.
Meanwhile the world I am talking about is expanded based on what we want to accomplish and experience.
I only called the story you made up about what I had said, that didn't have anything to do with what I actually said, a delusion, because that is one of the definitions of a delusion.
Immortality and infinite time and space is not a problem in any way. Your lack of imagination is the problem.
Why do I need to be immortal and have an endless amount of time...? Because I can imagine an endless amount of things to do.
I have thousands of projects in mind, and all of them would spawn more projects. There is no end to it.
In time, you would change your mind, if you only experienced it for yourself.
I never said that past and future generations do not matter.
I was just trying to explain the obvious fact that this cycle of life and death is terrible. Mortality is terrible.
I don't want anyone to suffer and die.
I want the future to be bright for all individuals, and that just can't happen as long as mortality is a thing.
Why is that so difficult to understand...? Taking away death and suffering (in the way I have described) cannot be considered anything other than a good thing.
You are taking everything too literally and getting stuck on stupid little details like my habit of adding too many dots too often.
π: 0 β©: 0
Since I'm depressed I usually see things like that as well but if the mouse is getting their ball cleaned it means they're still being used. Otherwise why even bother to keep 'em?
π: 0 β©: 0
Reading this made me depressed m8
π: 0 β©: 1
Sorry for that, i'm just have a long term depression for 3 years now and i tend to see things like that.
π: 0 β©: 1
No neeed to be sorry...
(was just lightly jokin...)
π: 0 β©: 1
Ok, but it's good to have different opinions on things, i bet you usually just get the same comments all the time and it get's boring to even read them.
π: 0 β©: 1
I don't get many. comments ;_;
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh, but your art is amazing, i'm surprised you don't get flooded with notifications.
π: 0 β©: 1
Youβre makin me blush :>
π: 0 β©: 0
What was the link supposed to be?Β
I ended up clicking on it on my phoneΒ
π: 0 β©: 1
It goes to either Roblox or a random scam site. I don't know why it chose Roblox of all things, but--
π: 0 β©: 1
It took me to a website named track somethingΒ
well it took me to random websites at once but ehΒ
π: 0 β©: 1
Guess they're just trying to make moneyΒ Β―\_(γ)_/Β―
π: 0 β©: 1
Well I'm broke so they ain't getting shit but flies
π: 0 β©: 1
the only thing i have is pts---
π: 0 β©: 1
Omg! That is terrible! lol! xD
π: 0 β©: 0
<= Prev | | Next =>