Good post. You're all a bunch of weirdos in my book 
I am concurrent.
Sure I guess you can say that. But what I really care about is why you do or don't care about certain topics.
The real problem I have is that you often say you don't care about this or that but you never actually give any reasons. This gives the impression that you resort to the "I don't care" argument simply because someone contradicts your opinion with factual evidence.
-420
I honestly don't know why you'd care why I care or not.
Is this is really a problem for you? I typically take the internet with a grain of salt and am admittedly not serious about more than half of the things I say both in real life and on the internet. I don't recall using "I don't care" specifically as an argument in an argument. However, I do recall saying that "I don't care" about the arguments themselves and about topics with which an argument is about, because I really don't. I will debate, argue, discuss, whatever, I don't have to care about it to do so, and quite frankly, I don't. This discussion, for instance, I don't give a damn about it at all. I simply enjoy the discussion, that doesn't mean I care about it.
I often won't care about an argument when I'm in it, and I often won't care about a topic when I am discussing it, but when it comes to anyone contradicting the opinion I post with a differing opinion and/or factual evidence, I don't care because of both reasons listed previously, but also because it is often not *my* opinion I posted.
Now you're probably wondering "What the hell are you talking about?"
Many times when I add opinions to subjects, I am not adding *my* opinions, I am adding various viewpoints or a single viewpoint I am looking at the subject from. Sometimes, I am expressing differing viewpoints in a single post. More often then not, I don't really care about a subject to really form my own opinion on it, instead, I often express different viewpoints I can see it being looked at. This even applies to things I *do* have an opinion on, I form various opinions that all differ, and the one I prefer is the one I say is mine. However, you could say they were all mine. My problem with "facts" is that they only exist in our minds. Once again, you think me illogical. I agree, that is definitely illogical.
Perhaps that is our difference, 420. You are logical. I am both logical and illogical, and therefore contradict myself. This isn't the first time this has come up, other people on other forums have a problem with my way of thinking as well, as they can't understand why a person would express viewpoints that they thought of, but do not believe themselves. Why? What is the point? Well, why not? Why express an opinion that you *do* believe in? To get others to think the same way? In hopes that they will take it into consideration and revise their own? That final question is why. It brings more to the table. Are two opinions better than one? Are two minds better than one? Two opinions can lead to a better understanding than one. Definitely. So, if one mind makes two opinions and the other mind comes up with two, does four not lead to a better understanding than two?
Is 2 added to 2 not 22? I believe it is. It is not 22 apples. It is the image of a 2 added to the image of a 2.
Here is the better example, explaining it has never worked before, I shall try something different.
Here is the number one.
1Here is the number one.
1Here is the two images added together.
11Again...
11Whichever way you want to look at it. It's perception. I never said two added to two was twenty-two. I said it was twotwo.
I don't need every line to be straight. I don't need every sock to match. I do not need everything to make sense and fall perfectly into place. Not everything. I need some things to make sense, I need logic, for without it I would not function. I like to consider myself "split in two." Not as in two personalities or anything like that, but rather as two different ways of thinking united only by the same mind, the same consciousness. One cannot exist without the other, for to do so would render me handicapped, incapable, insane. I say that I believe in everything and nothing at the same time even though I don't. I say this because, while I would like to fully believe, it is a complete contradiction, a paradox, an oxymoron, a conundrum, and I could not possibly do so as a sane person. I must therefore think logically as well to function and to remain sane, and to do so requires accepting "facts" (not believing them) that the wood of my desk is solid, that it is hard. I do not believe this to be true or false. Or both or neither. But even trying to think of everything, let alone nothing, let alone at the same time, would render me insane. The wood of my desk, yes it is solid, I accept that as a fact. That is what my touch tells me. That is what my body tells me. But my mind also accepts that it may not be as simple as that.
I do not post every viewpoint I come up with, there are too many. I do not always disagree with a viewpoint I express, but whether I agree with it or not is not relevant to me. I cannot tell you with absolute certainty that my wooden desk is solid. If I want to appear to you as sane, I will tell you it is, I will go with the logical side and make a statement of fact.
I truly believe that I do not think the same as others, 420, and I would be willing to say it's that simple, even if it's not. If you believe that I think just like everyone else, then that is your opinion, and perhaps you are right. If I ever accept that opinion, then instead of believing I think differently, I will come to wonder why nobody accepts this way of thinking when they think this way too. This is the reasoning for my liking of discordian philosophy and string theory. Every post I make is affected by what I have said here, and things I have not said here, for it is long enough already, and the resulting post is not always logical by someone elses standards, unless I choose for it to be before I post. However, logic itself is self-defined, as are all definitions, opinions, and facts.
You may take everything I say here in a completely different way than I meant it, and I expect that for at least some of it. In the end, if you do not understand, if this topic lives or dies, I still do not care. You ask why? For the reasons I listed, but I have also explained many of these things numerous times in the past, and, they are very difficult things to explain. I may not be doing so correctly, I may not be doing it justice, I don't know. Though because I have done so, and the end result didn't matter, I do not care, I do not believe it will matter. Do you? Yes, I would like to hear your opinion, yes, I am excited that you may add to, change, or understand my way of thinking, no, I do not think that will happen, and no, I do not really care either way. Just because I don't care now, doesn't mean something can't happen that will make me care later.
Agh, I always have trouble explaining this. I likely did so badly. I apologize for that.
Edit: Increased size of numbers, to help my shitty demonstration.
