BigSkyDiamond

i listened to comedienne Zarna Garg on "Being an Indian Immigrant in America" and find her hilarious. (One of my daughters in law immigrated here from India.)

The leader Akenhaten was demonized by his own culture. After he died, the sun-disk deity Aten which the leader Akenhaten imposed and forced upon his subjects, was removed from place of prominence and the previous pantheon of deities (polytheism) was restored. Worship of the sun-disk deity Aten (the new religion which some today are now labeling"monotheism") was never widespread in Egypt nor was it long lasting. It was local and specific to the imposed rule of Akenhaten, who reigned for only 17 years. Polytheism in Egypt on the the other hand lasted 3,000 years. "Akhenaten was deeply unpopular by the end of his reign. There had been many plagues and droughts during the end of his rule, and the high priests were essentially planning a civil war or coup against the royal family. Basically, Aten worship was seen as a bad thing, and the cause of the ruin of Egypt, so Akhenaten’s works, his family’s works, and his temples were wiped from the slate of history and the old religion reinstated without much protest and with great joy. And this all happened within a span of 40 years." A successor Pharaoh changed his name from Tutankhaten ("living image of Aten") to Tutankhamen ("living image of Amun"). read more here.

all the forms filled out all the boxes packed. Time to start my new life now.

i like that

which sounds like it bypasses "conscience"

The photo image is credited to Grok. Is the text also from Grok? I actually got something out of reading the text.

I AM

The TM Siddhi program has prerequisites: the initial TM course (est. cost $500-$1,000) four additional "Advanced Techniques" courses (each costing the same as the initial course) the Siddhi program (cost upwards of $4,000) plus the cost of travel and lodging to attend the portions of the training that are in-person. So it is pricey

(a) "politely discuss our views" is at odds with (b) "looking for proper arguments" and "check fallacies" the former (a) is individual expression and clarification of views. the latter (b) is spoiling for a fight because "politely discuss our views" is an expression of individual opinion, views, beliefs based on personal values. (even the post above recognizes this is varied and personal). whereas "proper arguments" and "check fallacies" are contentious, fighting, and focused on "i'm right, you are wrong" ar·gu·ment noun 1.an exchange of diverging or opposite views, typically a heated or angry one. synonyms: quarrel, squabble, fight, clash, altercation, dispute, war of words, debate 2. reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong.

Laughter

Post above fails to differentiate between God (big G) and gods (little g). The Psalm is rebuking judges and magistrates who were important people.

2025 / Palm Island in Dubai Trip Advisor reviews, 2025 for Palm Jumeirah in Dubai: https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attraction_Review-g295424-d660445-Reviews-Palm_Jumeirah-Dubai_Emirate_of_Dubai.html

They may be referring to Psalm 82:6 (not part of the New Testament). The Hebrew for Psalms 82:6 is: (the Psalms were written in Hebrew) אֲנִי-אָמַרְתִּי, אֱלֹהִים אַתֶּם; וּבְנֵי עֶלְיוֹן כֻּלְּכֶם.‏ The word אֱלֹהִים (elohim) can mean "God". It can also mean: "judge," little g "gods," "judge," "power," or "important person. " Note that there is a difference between big "G" God and little "g" gods. Some translations of Psalms 82:6 show elohim as "godlike beings" or "angels" or "angelic creatures." The context of Psalms 82 is that it is a rebuke directed at corrupt judges and magistrates, they are important people with power. There is a section in the New Testament, where Jesus quotes that line from Psalms 82:6.

a. discuss the topic, not the individuals posting b. the behavior of trying to bully, bait, goad, badger others into response is not conducive to discussion

I learned that "shakhmaty" is the (transliteration of ) Russian word for chess.

" It changes its color depending on how it interprets the context. A chameleon changes color out of a fright response so it all depends on its emotional state,. It might be frightened by its image at first, but then later 'warm up' to it, and so change colors." "The scientists understood the riddle for the archetypal case of adaptive feedback it was. Their answers ranged over the map. See examples" and actual experiment. more at these two articles The Chameleon in a Mirrored Box Scientist responses and experiment

frozen in pigment, thawed in thoughts of wind and storm, boat seeks safe passage

a. if the "respected" man took revenge for the public insult by killing her, then he is not a "respected" man. b. he could be giving the coffin to a poor family so as to "appear charitable." It could be one of the reasons he is described as "respected" because he publicly gives charity. c. if he were to give the coffin anonymously it would be a greater act of charity because then it is not to garner public accolades.

Since he was a "respected man," the coffin may have been sent to preserve the dignity of the poor man, and provide a respectful burial. It could show he does not hold a grudge regarding the insult.

Yes. Bingo.

A quality product is not "magic." it is a quality product.

again, what comes to mind reading the above is "smoke and mirrors." as in creating an illusion, which again speaks to deception. "when you engineer your image and age you will be perceived differently by customers." yeah, you will be perceived as dishonest and lacking integrity. can you use a bigger font please? thank you. i am not going to respond any more to posts in tiny font. that is my personal choice.

OK. Just curious. Sounds like it might be part of a business plan, or perhaps school paper.

Competence and merit in the area of marketing would be transparency with regards to the product; listening to and responding to cutomer questions, concerns and complaints; robust service recovery when there is a problem with the product; standing behind the product; demonstrating that the product is something you yourself use and recommend to your own family members; a customer service department that is accessible, courteous, and respectful; integrity and honesty in business practices with both internal and external customers; and first and foremost a decent product. When you use phrases like "omitting information" and "shaping how people perceive you" it raises the glaring red flag of what are they hiding, what are they mis-representing. It does not inspire trust. Rather it has the opposite effect.

No. It is not merit and it is not competence. it is illusion, dishonesty and deception. and it is not an art either. It raises the question though regarding intent and motivation. Why are you trying to elevate it using lofty terms such as "competence" "art" and "merit" ? More apt descriptors are "used car salesman" and "snake oil merchant."