I am content: Iamb cannot follow a simple request, but uses it to try to transform the thread off topic so it is one of his threads. The phenomenon of Iamb remains consistant even if a new angle is taken.
Some of the incredible strangeness in the thread so far:
Peter: there is no more information I could possibly get about Iamb’s being fractured and fragmented. I cannot know what it is like more than the sentence I quoted in the OP. It is like Peter’s being hearing impaired. That is also something I cannot learn anything more about.
I could not learn, for example,
if there is a tinnitus-type factor involved in his hearing impairment or not.
If this impairment remains consistent throughout the day or changes and how.
If it affects the higher or lower frequencies more
If it is degenerative and what portions of sound degenerate over time?
If background noise is a large or small factor and if this affects how he meets with and communicates with other people.
If he experiences simply a lack of ability to hear or if there are competitive noises – perhaps created neurologically.
If he has always had this impairment. If he has not always had it then he may be able to give descriptions of what changed when his hearing became impaired. If it was congenital, then perhaps he was told what differences there are between his hearing and non-impaired hearing. IOW the types of things a doctor might tell a parent about what their child with the impairment may have trouble with and what they might expect to experience.
But no, I already know all I could possibly know about his hearing impairment and any further discussion is utterly useless because I will never know what it is like for him, from the inside of the experience.
But that’s merely strangeness number 2.
Let’s look at it in context, however.
Iambigious is always asking why Phyllo or why we are not as fragmented and fractured as him? Well, Peter should long ago have told Imabiguous that he can never know this.
WHERE has Peter been all these years?
Why is Peter defending Iamb from precisely the kinds of questions and critique Iamb aims at other people? Why did he never leap to our defense when Iamb tells people, including us, but further including large numbers of participants here, their explanations are in the clouds or like ‘serious philosophers’ (a pejorative term for him), or mere contraptions? IOW how did he Rip Van Winkle his way in here and never managed to notice that I am only asking Iamb to do what he has asked and criticized his explanation using Iamb’s criteria.
And why hasn’t he told Iamb already in this thread that he can never know why our experiences are different? No, it is only we or perhaps just me who need this lecture, sort of along the lines of ‘what it is like to be a bat’
Iamb has been accusing people for a decade of not explaining their personal experiences to his liking AND
Adding to this then accusing them of comforting themselves with this ‘up in the clouds’ type description and other imind reading assertions.
Peter somehow missed all this.
And Prometheus just tags in because he is on Iamb’s team. He has the same beliefs or thinks he does.
Iamb himself responds to the request by saying that the best thing to do here is for OTHER people to present their moral beliefs on an issue.
IOW like a virus he tries to get the thread to reproduce his threads. Other people talking about their beliefs
Has nothing at all to do with my questions.
Iamb does not have the integrity to just say, no I don’t want to answer. And he doesn’t have the integrity to answer precisely the type of questions he asks others, often labeling their self-descriptions in insulting ways at the same time.
Of course this is briefly frustrating, but then…it really demonstrates that Iamb’s narcissism and solipsism is as functionally impervious as any I have ever encountered. I may have let some discussion partners down over the years, but I can head into the winter years of life content that I did not let him down. I approached with a wide range of attitudes and angles and if there was a chance for him to notice anything at all about himself, I may have missed it, but not for wont of trying.
The irony - a word he was more interested in before - is that it would actually help him to clarify in concrete terms what he means with that sentence…
Why?
Because he claims to want to know why other people are not so fragmented and fractured. Well, to answer that, the more clarity we have about his meaning of those terms, the better off we all would be.
If he is interested in what he claims to be interested in.
If he is.
If.
Perhaps it is a symptom of his being fractured and fragmented. Some of his fragmented are not interested in learning anything at all and they sabotage his conscious intent.
Poor thing.