I do neither of these but making music might fit me more

Bing or yahoo

yahoo.

- - -

do ya prefer visual art, or music?

Music definitely. Art to me is like “Oh this is pretty cool, next” while music is more like “Oh this is pretty good, Imma add this to my playlist so I can listen to them later”

Sq

sorry, was a bad fork, i meant somethin' else. in this, i'd no doubt pick music.

- - -

animation or music?

Choosing only one among these is simply impossible. Music adds value to animation and animation adds value to music. They are meant to be merged together to increase each other's value. I guess that music with no animation is definitely better than animation without music but really, it makes no sense to me to judge single component of a larger whole.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Animation vs live action?

animation. no contest.

- - -

live in a fictional world of your own, or live life as is?

I'd like a ticket to my own fantasy world and no return please

sq

living in a fictional world of your own is the easy choice here, I see no reason to prefer living life as is over it since the fictional world you create can just be the normal world with only a few minor change that keeps life similar. To me the only reason as to why you would choose living life as is is that you think that life is perfect and doesn't need change, which even I, who live a very fortunate life, can't even begin to imagine.

SQ

Not gonna lie, living in a fictional world is tempting. You get to decide everything, things works with certain rules, and life would simply be easier and arguably more exiting.
But is it the right choice though? A fictional world is called fictional for a reason. Will I be able to grow in such environment?
If the question was "visiting a fictional world for some time" then I wouldn't hesitate and accept it. But to stay and live in it, I don't know.

I do not believe this world is perfect or beautiful, easy or even remotely exiting. But then isn't escaping to a fictional and easier world where everything is given to you is completely hollow?
Fictional worlds are ideals, and they'll never be reality. Ideals are nice to look at and admire, but they're unachievable.
If I want beauty in life, I would either create them or seek them out. I don't want beauty to be everywhere where it's unappreciated and mediocre.
Beauty fades, that is why they're beautiful.
If I want life to be easy, I will have to overcome hardships to earn it. An easy life given to you won't make you appreciate life nor a better person.
And if I want life to be exiting, I can just try new things out everyday.

So tldr I'll choose to stay in my own life as is.

---------------

Same question.

A fictional world of my own. I can finally create, experience, and actually live within the world I've envisioned.

Tad Fibonacci wrote:

I do not believe this world is perfect or beautiful, easy or even remotely exiting. But then isn't escaping to a fictional and easier world where everything is given to you is completely hollow?
Fictional worlds are ideals, and they'll never be reality. Ideals are nice to look at and admire, but they're unachievable.

The problem here is that hypothetically, should you choose, they are reality. Of course realistically that won't happen, your decision here seems more or less a matter of "should you wish and fantasize over fiction, or work within reality as it is?", which isn't what was asked.

Besides, the entirety of this is from your imagination. You decide how "hollow" that reality would be.

You can still, under current circumstances and with your mindset, appreciate life and creation, even when you live in a world of your own. Being a "better person" is somewhat subjective in this situation, and to some extent, depending on the world you create, arbitrary.

Though your stance is fairly understandable, it seems like it's missing the point, considering that what you're basing that idea of beauty and ease is part of a set of ideals themselves in self-betterment, while also knowing that your reality won't have to abide by any particular ideals unless you otherwise choose so.

And if you want such a life, create it. You can do the same as you plan to here, just under different circumstances.

You can't quite beat creativity.

- - -

SQ.

I already answered the question, this is just me adding to it and answering to Achro.

I didn't missed the point, rather I did a poor job explaining myself.
A fictional world, or arguably reality if you'd choose to live in it is created by either you or someone else correct?
While I'm sure it's fun to create to your hearts desires and experience your creation first hand, would it be a healthy and beneficial world to live in?

Art can be boiled down to imitations of reality, but would it have any meaning if it's a separate reality of its own?
I would argue that because they're not real, art is beautiful.
A fictional world is only interesting when it is fictional.
Think of a fictional world that you know, and imagine you existing in it, and the world would exist regardless of your existence, it doesn't care about you.
Suddenly said fictional world is no longer that interesting.
Even if by design that world is created to cater to your own needs, what do you do once you've ran out of ideas? Out of things to do? Places to explore?
Create more of them?
How long are you going to keep it up? What if you'd grow tired of it all?
Who else is there to experience your creation? To validate what you do?
Who are you doing all of this for? If it's yourself then is it really beneficial to your self improvement? If said world were to be resetted, will you sit through creating everything that you've created again without doing anything different?

Limiting yourself to your own world means you'll have no contradicting ideas, you can't experience other people's creations, you cannot imitate anything since there's nothing to imitate.
Fiction is beautiful because there's a reality.
If fiction is reality, it won't be beautiful anymore. It will become the norm, become mediocre.

Tad Fibonacci wrote:

A fictional world, or arguably reality if you'd choose to live in it is created by either you or someone else correct?
While I'm sure it's fun to create to your hearts desires and experience your creation first hand, would it be a healthy and beneficial world to live in?

Art can be boiled down to imitations of reality, but would it have any meaning if it's a separate reality of its own?
I would argue that because they're not real, art is beautiful.
A fictional world is only interesting when it is fictional.
Think of a fictional world that you know, and imagine you existing in it, and the world would exist regardless of your existence, it doesn't care about you.
Suddenly said fictional world is no longer that interesting.

Provided that such a fictional world would be as trivial and simplistic as that. You're about as limited as your imagination, if you can create something by matter of simply envisioning it, you can alter even this, to be similar to life as it is, but improve on sections of it to make it more enjoyable while not quite a catering service. It's somewhat like Minecraft's Creative mode, but real-world-esque AI and people with depth, should you imagine such.

A universe that exists and does its own thing regardless of what i do and have the ability to do, is actually pretty interesting to me.

I mean, I'm looking at the differences here, comparisons, all that:

1) If I've got a universe that gives no shits unless I choose to alter it somehow by conception, that's fucking great. Aside from my ability to alter things, it's not all that different than reality as it currently is. How is that any less interesting than life already is?

2) What's "real" to you? Is it beautiful because the world that a piece of art depicts is fictional? Why would it be any less beautiful if it were real, whether as an alternative to or in correspondence to reality as it is? It only makes for more interactive potential and something else to explore. You can interpret a fictional reality to essentially be a modified copy of our own. I see quite a lot of potential in that, and find such a concept to be beautiful.

- - -

Tad Fibonacci wrote:

Even if by design that world is created to cater to your own needs, what do you do once you've ran out of ideas? Out of things to do? Places to explore?
Create more of them?
How long are you going to keep it up? What if you'd grow tired of it all?
Who else is there to experience your creation? To validate what you do?
Who are you doing all of this for? If it's yourself then is it really beneficial to your self improvement? If said world were to be reset, will you sit through creating everything that you've created again without doing anything different?

1) The comparison's what is important. Though you can get bored of creating so much, by then, you'd have experienced exponentially, and theoretically, infinitely more than you would've otherwise seen in reality as it is.

2) The people in such a creation can interpret that creation however I choose for them to. Ideally, I'd like to have them be just like us, interpreting and meandering through life. If you seek validation, eh, go for it, but I'd prefer to just create my damn world and live in it, enjoy it.

3) Again, self-improvement is subjective and arbitrary here, as it hardly matters aside from what's self-imposed and how you interpret others' reactions to you within your work. But, feel free to mess around and create a world in which you can work towards these things-- make a world that you think may provide you the experiences you need to come to satisfying conclusions and to see yourself grow to the ideal that you propose for yourself to become.

4) I'd gladly start over. Though, this is more or less a hypothetical case of create-what-you-want-when-you-want. It can be the same world, something different, or just whatever the hell you'd like. If your imagination can conceive of something new, go for it.

- - -

Tad Fibonacci wrote:

Limiting yourself to your own world means you'll have no contradicting ideas, you can't experience other people's creations, you cannot imitate anything since there's nothing to imitate.
Fiction is beautiful because there's a reality.
If fiction is reality, it won't be beautiful anymore. It will become the norm, become mediocre.

1) That's actually a fair point, to some extent. If you're perceiving this as a matter of micro-/macro-managing the consciousness of an individual, then you'd be right, but if you were to conceive of a carbon-copy human from your own original reality, you would still have people with varied ideas, just as ideas reside in you or anyone else in this reality as it is. You can, then, imitate the ideas you hear from others.

2) Actually, how'd that work if there was, in this new reality, more fiction? Again, considering that people here would be of similar capacity in intelligence in the sense that we are already, we'd have these people create their own realities through their art and music, and various forms of entertainment and introspection. For as long as you have a new dream, you have something beautiful. And through all this, still, by comparison, even considering the most dreadful of realizations in the wake of the lack of new dreams, you'd have experienced so, so much more. You can then choose to simply no longer exist, and create a reality where someone else has the chance to work through their own imagination, and so much more.

- - -

Achromatism wrote:

live in a fictional world of your own, or live life as is?

So basically you just want to live in the real world with cheat codes. Or rather, you can modify it.

Achromalia wrote:

live in a fictional world of your own, or live life as is?

You seem to think of living in a fictional world of your own as a world where you act as god and don't need to suffer from any hardship, but that is entirely up to you. Even if you posess godly power that can change all of reality, you can still choose not to use them, you could even remove your own power to be absolutely sure you don't use them.

That is what I mean't when I said

samX500 wrote:

since the fictional world you create can just be the normal world with only a few minor change that keeps life similar

. If you want to keep living the same life, you could first use your power to remove the senseless horror that this world has to offer. Horror that are just raw pain and do not offer any room to grow. There are horror in this world that do not let you grow. You could just remove those horror and then keep living life as is.

Achromalia wrote:

live in a fictional world of your own, or live life as is?

Looks like our little argument ended up killing this thread so I am gonna get to another question.

Fun light-hearted story or Heavy psychological/philosophical story?

I'm kind of lenient towards both, since fun, light hearted stories are what make me happy. But then again, heavy philosophical stories are the ones that get me thinking about stuff that's more important than just a high school rock party. Though I personally believe that a fun story can have philosophical elements from time to time, and vice versa. It's good to have a balance of both worlds in a story, since over-saturation on one aspect can get boring quickly.

So if I had to pick one, I'd probably go with heavy psychological/philosophical. It's good to think about what could happen in a situation, even if it could never happen in real life.

- - - - -

Erasable pen or pencil?

Erasable pen. I way prefer the texture of the pen to pencil

Paper cut or toe jam

toe jam. happens a lot anyways.

paper cuts aren't as frequent, and they're pretty damn annoying for hours on end.

- - -

SQ.

Definitely toe jam. Paper cut are much more long lasting and the feel of cut is much worse than that of collision.

Stay in your comfortable zone where you are confident in your success and never have to work too hard or try out whole new things in confusion and having to work extremely hard to understand this new world that's just opened up to you.

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH wrote:

Erasable pen. I way prefer the texture of the pen to pencil

Paper cut or toe jam

Achromalia wrote:

toe jam. happens a lot anyways.

paper cuts aren't as frequent, and they're pretty damn annoying for hours on end.

- - -

SQ.

samX500 wrote:

Definitely toe jam. Paper cut are much more long lasting and the feel of cut is much worse than that of collision.

The toejam craze begins.

OT: I'd prefer to stay in my comfort zone. I don't want to learn new things that can get progressively harder, and if I'm already proficient at things that I can do comfortably, then why would I sabotage that skill and whatnot?

Going to Mars or the deepest depths of the ocean?

If we forget the difficulties of getting there and the risk of being in such environment I'd say Mars. It would definitely feel sureal to be on a planet yet not feeling like we we're on earth. I am also not too interested in the depth of the earth tbh.

High instrument or low instrument?

high/low as in... pitch?

i kinda prefer lower stuff.

- - -

SQ.

lower stuff
i already know how to play viola so why change to violin and have to learn how to read treble cle-- oh wait
i have to play treble anyway


yeah lower is gooder

sq

I quite like high pitch stuff so high instrument it is

slow or fast song

I absolutely love both slower and faster song but the song I love the most are the one that gets my feelings up and most often those are slow song.

SQ

This is evil.
I love both.
Arghhhh... This might be cheating but I'll go with both, I can't choose between the two.


Same question.

or songs

water or h2o

I choose you, dihydrogen monoxide

7/4 or 5/4 beat

I guess 5/4 beat? I have never payed attention to time signature in song. I know what they mean but I don't know how they change the song.

A fully fledged game for a pricey amount of money or a free game with content stuck behind a pay wall.

That's a no brainer, of course I'd want a full game.


Same question.

I would obviously take the full game as well, I really dislike spending little 2$ on content even if it's not much.

Bitter orange juice or sweetened orange juice.

sweetened one

left brain or right brain

ehh, well shit.

that's fairly tough to answer.

so, i'm somewhat uncertain of the validity of the left/right brain concept, but speaking hypothetically, in terms of what the listed "left" or "right-brain" traits are:

left - uses logic-dominant processes to assess things (often by inductive/deductive reasoning, to the extent of obsessively aiming to value every factor accurately), have analytical tendencies, while being detail-oriented.

right - uses a creative means to assess things (often through visual/oral/sonic metaphors, or analogies, for example), have imaginative tendencies, while oriented towards picturing an entire perspective.

- - -

i'd say i maintain a hybrid of traits from both "brains".

i would describe myself as someone who:

uses logic-dominant processes to assess things,

has a tendency towards analysis,

as well as a focus on details,

but does so with an ultimate goal of understanding the full scope of things.

- - -

ultimately, i might be "left-dominant", so we'll go with that, i suppose.

For me I would say I am left-dominant when working and making decision for myself but am right dominant when enjoying art.

When I analyse something, I am very picky about details, I just can't ignore a detail when I find one and I have an extremely hard time putting two things in the same packet because I always find one important enough difference to set apart any two things. I also use logical reasoning for any work that I do.

On the other end, when I am enoying art and deciding wether it's good or bad, I firstly take into account how that art made me feel and sometimes if the art is memorable enough I will analyse it to find why it made me feel that way and this process usually change my perspective on the art I have enjoyed.

SQ

ye, idk how to explain myself but test said I'm right dominant

sq

I don't like the right and left brain stuff, but I guess I'll say left.

Stay friends with your crush, or risk your friendship and take the next step?

dunno if i have a crush, really.

but currently, i know someone i've liked being around a lot, and can imagine something working out.

so, i'd take the next step, i suppose. it's unlikely that the attempt would ruin a friendship, as we get along fairly well naturally, so it'd be a win-win.

- - -

would you date Ensign (contemplative bone man), or Eugene (cute bird boi)?

I don't think I have seen Eugene so I suppose my only choice is Ensign.

__________________________________________

Live a life of luxury where you do not need to work on improving yourself and can just do whatever you want whenever you want to or a medicore life that shackles you with responsabilities that you need to take care of to live?

a life of "luxury".

so, here's the thing. you don't necessarily need to work on improving yourself in either situation. even if i don't need to because i can supposedly do whatever i want, i can work on improving myself as a person anyways.

with that considered, all of this is an entire win.

the parameters of a luxurious life are a bit ambiguous, though. does this mean i have a shit ton of money? do i live on a mediocre salary but happen to be insanely materially privileged?

i'd prefer to live relatively modestly anyways, i really don't like big houses. mansions are insane to me, it's a huge space to maintain and i don't need it.

so, i have the freedom to use my resources for more practical things and can donate a ton, and i can pursue my passions of being an animator and musician without stressing over money >:D

- - -

Achromalia wrote:

would you date Ensign (contemplative bone man), or Eugene (cute bird boi)?

I prefer Ensign.

A world without any technology or a dystopia where everything is made by technology and human life no longer matters.