Am I crazy... or just aware?

>>17512857
>Am I a paranoid psycho?
you just have special snowflake syndrome and want to hear that you are smart/deep/blabla.

your interpretations are possible but not certain. if you dont forget that and obsess over it then you are fine

>>17512872
Special snowflake syndrome? I'm familiar with that, but can you explain better how it relates to me? I certainly don't think I'm a special snowflake, I know there are others that are like me, probably capable of analyzing things to an even greater level of detail. I just don't know that any of them ever find happiness or a girlfriend, and that's what scares me. How am I supposed to relate to women if they don't even know that JFK was assassinated by the globalists?

Where'd you get that watch post link

>>17512909
its a basis peak

>>17512857
Why did you point out these things to him?

You're getting close to a paranoid psycho but mostly you're a retard. The problem is you aren't skeptical of your own analysis. A logical person conjectures, analyzes evidence, and then determines whether that evidence supports or conflicts with his conjecture. You are just noticing coincidental shit and making an assumption based on it. That's not analysis. You're on par with other "WAKE UP SHEEPLE" idiots on the internet.

Being skeptical is fine but you need to be critical as well.

>>17512941
OP here. I have a question for you. Is it possible to prove criminal intent beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury, to make a conviction, based SOLELY on circumstantial evidence?

>>17512895
>I certainly don't think I'm a special snowflake
yes you do or lets say you wished you were.
but you arent.
move on.

>>17512960
>Is it possible to prove criminal intent beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury, to make a conviction, based SOLELY on circumstantial evidence?


dont try to argue that route. its obvious. he is right, you arent very logical

>>17512960

I don't understand this jargon but I'll answer the best I can.

To make a conviction, prove outright, and prove beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury are all very different things.

A conviction can be made no matter what, even if it is wrong. Circumstantial evidence could 'prove to a jury beyond reasonable doubt' depending on the members of the jury. Circumstantial evidence is not proof however.

>>17513014
I'm not logical about what? I haven't even made a claim. The examples I gave did not include all details for the sake of brevity.

>>17513021
My point is, if circumstantial evidence is admissible in court, than what is wrong with trying to come up with your own conclusions by correlating it?

I understand correlation does not equal causation. One instance may not mean anything... one example may not prove anything. It may require a huge leap outside of logic, yes. But, if you have 2... or 3... or 4, 5, 6, 7 and so on, that leap becomes a hop... and then a skip. And then a step... until you realize that maybe you've never had to move at all.


If you want to argue against that, I'd say my courtroom analogy destroys that argument. However, if you want to argue against my methodology and how I've come to my specific conclusions, then sure, you may have a case... if you knew what they were, that is. Which you don't, because I haven't elaborated on everything as it would take too much time.

>>17512857

you're a typical overly-analytic teenager. you're not special or smart. get over it.

>>17513075

>get over it

How?

Do you guys not realize that is what I asked in my OP?

>>17512857
I had no idea Filter still existed. I thought they broke up after the Amalgamut.

>>17513097

The problem is not with what you think, but with what you think about your thoughts. You're a normal fucking person, if you want to shatter your paranoid delusions then shatter them instead of making rationalizations.

WHY IS NO ONE BUT ME SEEING THIS OMG I MUST BE AN X-MAN

>>17512857
Yeah fine you're "aware" but the people that are most aware fucking take in all different opinions, never just taking in one side. Also like the first comment >>17512872 you are acting like a special snowflake just by asking us. Just deal with your "awareness" you don't need advice for this, you just want attention.

>>17513116
Is exaggeration not a part of your vocabulary? Everyone does it, including me.

You're ignoring my question and trying to judge my character. I find it odd that you who is preaching about logic is using a straw-man to prove your "point". Your whole angle is based on the presumption that I don't think rationally, when that has nothing to do with my post. My post is about how to suspend the analysis of every little fucking thing, because whether or not I am right, I may sound crazy either way.

You can't seem to separate the fact that whether or not I'm right has nothing to do with anything. I may be right, I may be wrong. The issue is how do I stop trying to connect the dots every time I perceive a pattern (whether that pattern is there by coincidence or points to some meaningful conclusion is beside the point entirely)

>>17513148
>the people that are most aware fucking take in all different opinions, never just taking in one side
Which "side" am I taking? Can you tell me? And what is the opposing side that I am ignoring?
>you are acting like a special snowflake just by asking us
Well if you don't like me asking questions, why are you here?

>>17513202
Lol, its not that I don't like you asking questions I was just saying in general you were asking for attention by posting. You're taking your side, you're only seeing one side. For example, you may think that house is only made for that reason, but you don't know that.

>>17513183

you're fucking dumb, and shut the fuck up. stop trying to rationalize your dumb neuroses. no one cares.

>>17512857
>Am I a paranoid psycho?
no.

>Am I crazy... or just aware?
you are neither.

>>17513221
What does whether or not I'm right have to do with the fact that I could look crazy to other people just for asking the questions? (what this thread is about)

>>17513228
Everyone can see clear as day that you ordered the code red. I rest my case.

>>17513257

>I rest my case.


You have no case, you are a troglodyte. Just kidding, you're just a normal neurotic teenager. Stop taking yourself so seriously.

>>17513261
>not catching the "A Few Good Men" reference
>calling me the teenager

>>17513257
You don't look crazy for asking the questions, but it could get annoying to people. Some people just don't want to hear your theories all the time especially if they enjoy what you're talking about. Now if they stat talking about whats weird about the show, you could bring something up. Really, if you want to talk about your theories either wait for them to say something or go on threads that talk specifically about that show or company. If you dont want to be annoying.

>>17512857
bro/broette you sound exactly like me
except that some of my friends don't take too kindly to the way I point out this stuff

I remember when I explained how powerpuff girls is far right propaganda to my crush, she was somewhat amused

>>17513266

Referencing movies doesn't make you cool or smart, it just makes you look dumb when the references don't make sense.

(btw, the subtext here is that you can't handle the truth. now THAT is a dank reference)

>>17513289
THIS
I hate people who think their comment is relevant automatically because it's a quote or a reference. It just proves they can't think for themselves and need to rely on something others already accepted as valid.
Like how average normal people use memes now to get instant guaranteed lols.

>>17513278
So... basically... shut up? Don't say anything (to them)?

I've tried this. But when people are showing me something. When they are enthusiastic about something, and I don't reciprocate that enthusiasm they think I am cold or unhappy or depressed.

Case in point: my brother. He shows me stuff, bands, shows, misc media etc. I have two options with him:

Be honest and tell him I don't like it... which will then beg the question of "why not...?"

Or

Lie and be enthusiastic with him.


In his case, I have HAD to do the latter, because, out of all the people I know, he is the most sensitive when I try to explain myself. My entire family feels this from him. We all know, and when I'm with them it is something we all acknowledge before we go to his place. Even his wife knows it.

Sadly, he doesn't even know me anymore. He just knows that we don't relate. We don't talk. Whenever we do, I get the impression he thinks I'm withdrawn and depressed, when in actuality, I just can't really talk with him about anything with any degree of honesty lest he be offended or get upset.

I find that to be a pretty shitty solution, but he is an extreme case.

>>17512941

This.

>>17513303
Yeah he is kind of extreme, sorry to hear that. But yeah basically don't say anything unless you know they wouldn't be uncomfortable hearing what you have to say. I mean thats what you do in social situations.

>>17513070

>what is wrong with trying to come up with your own conclusions by correlating it

Because correlating evidence is not proof. Not only that, but it can be heavily misrepresented if you're biased.

Argument by analogy is really weak, but since you want to argue that way I'll play. Let me propose to you another analogy of proving the statement "2^(p-1) where p is a prime is always prime". I could argue that if p is 3,5, or 7 the result is a prime. This correlation supports the statement and according to your ideology, since it could stand in court, nothing is wrong with that. The issue is that "evidence" doesn't prove the statement and is the statement is false.

Noticing correlations then proposing an idea and coming to a conclusion are different. The more critical you are of your own version and others versions of "proof" the closer you get to a real understanding. Just assuming you are right because you noticed a pattern is naive.

File: 1468038528566.gif (971KB, 500x300px) Image search: [Google]

971KB, 500x300px

>>17512857
Buying cancer. Kek.

>>17512857
You're just jumping to conclusions

Stop overthinking, some things are incomprehensible even if it passes through your head.

>>17512857
My son, you've finally grown.
>>>/pol/

>>17512857

You are indeed dreaming. We just want you to wake up Martin...Remember your real name Martin! WAKE UP PLS! I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG I CAN KEEP THE MALE NURSES AWAY FROM YOUR BODY AS I NEED TO GO BACK TO WORK!