Levels

laidbackfella wrote:

LeDbYFIRE wrote:

Well first I don't think any person can determine their own level. How many people would even put themselves at the true level? So many people disreguard their flaws and just don't see themselves as other people do. With that being said if we really can't determine our own level then can we really determine anyone elses? What standard do we base it on and how do we measure it? We all are human. We all bleed and cry and we all make mistakes and come up short. In my opinion we all are pressin forward in life or just stagnant. This subject seems so simple but its really as broad as ever. I don't see how we can have a specific "level" as people. I understand it as far as one factor goes. Like maybe academically or athletically, but not as a overall person.

You are doin way too much philosophizing. Sit back and think about ten random folks you know. And assess whether they are on your level or not. If they all are, select yes. If just one isn't, select no. It's really not that difficult a concept.

LeDbYFIRE wrote:

I never been able to get up on this level thing. I think you need a third option tho cause I wouldn't lean to either. I might seem to be taking it to deep but I thought about this alot before in alot of different areas. Right now I just want to know what you referrin to by level? Of what?

laidbackfella wrote:

MeganJerai wrote:

I couldn't vote because the answer is both. Cause people could be on my level in one way and not in other ways.

So then wouldn't the answer simply be no as they are not on your level in certain respects?

MeganJerai wrote:

laidbackfella wrote:

MeganJerai wrote:

I couldn't vote because the answer is both. Cause people could be on my level in one way and not in other ways.

So then wouldn't the answer simply be no as they are not on your level in certain respects?