I've always liked to divide things into good and bad things, but the funny thing is, where does the criterion for this distinction come from?

Obviously, the distortions that come from my mind distinguish between good and bad in my limited knowledge and knowledge. And then instead of thinking about the absurdity of the distinction itself, we keep following it.

In order to achieve the good in the distinction, we should use the distortion in our minds to think again, and still weigh in the limited cognition and knowledge, and think about how to achieve the good of the distinction.

It's all.

The word good and bad should not exist at all, it is completely misleading. However, no one has ever told me that there is no good or bad. On the contrary, school parents constantly emphasize that something is good and something is bad.

The strange thing is that there are so many students in the school, at least half of them will argue, "Why do you think good is good" and so on. Then, after graduation, it was as if the problem had evaporated.

I was overwhelmed by my own fear, and I couldn't see the at all. "Everybody's like that," the spell is still there, as if you're rolling in a drum washing machine.

What the hell is all this?

When I grew up, I thought that children knew a fart, but what did I know? It's just that my mind is so distorted, that I'm firmly bound by fear and then laughs at those who aren't bound by fear, that's all.

I would say that those actions that are not bound by fear are impulsive. And those people are irresponsible, haven't thought about the consequences and so on.

To pursue one's dreams is to be brave? In this way, wouldn't people who give up their dreams be braver? I dare to give up my dreams, do you dare?

This is simply, whether it is a dream or a reality, it is. Anything that is weighed according to the twists in the mind is a joke.

I don't know what will happen, it's not bad at the moment, that's enough.

As for the future, where? Can I really influence the future?

This question has been explored countless times, but I always subconsciously thought that there must be a future. This illusion is based on the reality of the past, I think the past is real, I think the memories in my head are real, so I think the future is also very real.

At some point before I thought about this moment, and then I was really here at this moment, and I thought that some moment before it was real. So, naturally, I think about the future.

The feeling is too real to be refuted. However, this in itself is a product of emotion, and I can't produce any evidence other than that it feels real.

The so-called evidence of the past is only a visual element that is perceived at the moment. For example, photos, videos, other people's words, etc. Taken together, these seem to be a natural proof of the existence of the past.

But can this really be proven? Or am my past proofs limited to a "very plausible explanation"?

What can be proven?

Yuan Changwen wanted to laugh a little, he thought it was true, whether it was an unfathomable thing like time, or a simple person, there was no way to prove it. It's all the product of emotion, and it's through emotion that these beliefs are firmly tied together.

It's very honest to ask yourself, why do you think all this is true?

In other words, after all, he is just an emotional monster who does things by feeling.

Have those who clamored for rational reason and logical analysis ever considered the so-called rationality itself? How to prove that objective things really exist, instead of being affirmed by feelings alone, can we do it? How can we prove that the laws themselves are really natural laws and not set by others?

Yuan Changwen wanted to get angry, but the cold lake seemed to have been calming him. Is a tantrum a bad thing? Hell, how does this judgment get into my head?

People who lose their temper regret it, and people who are impulsive regret it, so losing their temper or being impulsive is a bad thing? Wouldn't a cautious person regret it? People who think twice never regret it?

I regret it because I can only regret it, because it is the result of my head. I don't regret it, it's just because I can't regret it, and I don't have a response in my head.

Yuan Changwen suddenly felt that there was nothing to continue arguing about. There is no causal relationship, no linear passage of time, all are just pictorial elements that are perceived at the moment.

What are the compositions of the characters discussed? What are the fundamentals of human nature?

Did I really weigh it up with a twist in my head? The question is like, did the apple really fall to the ground and cause it to break?

Can't be sure. Causality just seems to be what it is.

I don't know anything, whether I'm based on fear, whether I'm moving forward, I don't know. Since the content of fear has nothing to do with fear, then words and actions are also just presented in this way.

It looks like I'm thinking, or, it looks like I'm not thinking, and the essence is the same. It's just the presentation of the picture elements, and it doesn't make sense to entangle the content of the picture elements.

Perhaps, discussing the elements of the picture can be very erudite, you can write a book, you can be a teacher, you can talk endlessly. However, none of this is true.

It's like using in-game explanations to explain the phenomena in the game, which sounds reasonable, but in fact, does the phenomenon in the game really have anything to do with those explanations? Did the peasants really build the houses?

In any case, it is a presentation of the elements of the picture, and it is useless to explain it, and it is only speculation.

I was afraid of leaving my current job, so I didn't choose to pursue my dream. But is it really because of this that I didn't pursue my dreams? Or do the elements of the picture directly present "I didn't pursue my dreams", directly present "I am afraid of leaving a stable job"?

The killing itself became a joke because there was no causal relationship at all, and the idea of falsehood as truth was in itself. Is it really because of the falsehood of emotional grasping? Or is it that the elements of the picture directly present "the character of Yuan Changwen believes in some falsehood"?

Right, there's nothing to believe. Then it is not worth believing that it is false, or believing that "this is how I believe in falsehood".

And the weird thing is that I always believe in something.

That's right, the characters are always fake, and no matter how you kill them, it's fake.

Only the truth, the infinity, the black reality, is nothing. There is no role, no thinking, let alone believing. It's a simple existence, and the black truth has always been there.

It is completely inconsistent with the evolution of the universe, and there is no planet, any Big Bang or anything like that.

Yuan Changwen is collapsing, and the anger and madness that have been maintaining the killing are no longer there. It seems that there is really no need for me to continue to live, the presentation of the elements of the picture? Yuan Changwen suddenly wanted to slap himself, what a garbage word.