Exsiting

[Guide]

"This "the group" thing is a boring gimmick. Speak properly.

I see you didn't opt to inject content into the thread either..."

The group finds this group answer facile.

[Guide]

Guide wrote:
The group recommends an essentially more serious tact be taken up by the group, other than cheep and tasteless polemics. The group must confront the issues, rather than seek refuge in hopeful explanations concerning trivial personal accidental motives.

The group is finally accurately self-assessing.
The group takes note of this negative view of the group, concerning genuine philosophic investigation. This seems to stem from a dumb prefigured academic mania, profoundly adolescent and destructive of living philosophy in every respect. The group regards this as a sort of disease, that of thoughtlessness which take orders from the fraught train of the heritage. It is as though, philosophy itself had become what tit what meant to set aside. Blind and prompt obedience to old habits.

The group sees: a member of the group struggling (i.e., who should be struggling) with the temptation of fruitless polemics. The group would suggest disentangling biographical persons from investigations.

[Silhouette]

"This "the group" thing is a boring gimmick. Speak properly.

I see you didn't opt to inject content into the thread either..."

The group finds this group answer facile.

Jesus Christ dude...

I comment on how vacuous your self-congratulatory offer for a circle jerk is, and you blame me for not doing what you should have been doing?

Just how damaged are you?

[Guide]

Guide wrote:
"This "the group" thing is a boring gimmick. Speak properly.

I see you didn't opt to inject content into the thread either..."

The group finds this group answer facile.

Jesus Christ dude...

I comment on how vacuous your self-congratulatory offer for a circle jerk is, and you blame me for not doing what you should have been doing?

Just how damaged are you?

ZzzzzzZZZzz

[Pneumatic-Coma]

Art-world references (or theater, as it were) won't improve the status of the stranger enemy with respect to genuine philosophy.

Ok ? Menos/Xenos :- one who thinks for himself (menos) and one who is a member of a supposed incrowd ok(Xenos) either / or ?
But is that the solution ? I don't think so. There are much more not understood membership requirements , whom are believed to have a mutual membership. They are free, not bound.

Even if. Whatever. And besides who is the judge and jury. and who makes these pronouncements.

Besides, old world art may have something to do with it. Again what brings forth these, like it was some judgment of Paris?

But run, Melos! -to Demos.

This is the last post on making into anything this writer does, not out of concern for myself, but for whomever may read offensive comments, which has never been my intention or style.

My opinion is, that there is no end to what some writers will do to gain attention, even at the price of baiting for controversy.

Guide , if I offended You im sorry, but remember who started with offensive ad-hominem, even if, as your opinion makes it clear, it makes for "good philosophy"

(Meno_)'s isn't wrong in this evident madness ya know.

[Guide]

It's my own mistake for talking to idiots, since I am without supreme powers, without powers of more than a god, this is a mistake.

[MagsJ]

We can get over this hurdle here, guys.. think of philosophy first and foremost when posting.

[Meno_]

I commend You for Your optimism, , and I certainly share it, albeit guardedly.


However , if allowed, I thought universals have long ago cleared it up, from the point of view of optics, where visibility was not a.function of invisible parts. That is an unhealthy strategy, but again, compassion may touch the deepest as well as the purely anthropomorphic vision of a higher power, which can inhabit only a singular version.

And that is how and only way to exit for the time being, without turning to the other side.

[MagsJ]

Guide could give less.. personal answers. That's one hurdle.

[Guide]

Meno is a clueless moron who embroiders idiot dreck left over from the academic usage. "Anthropomorphic," a wholly empty piece of polemical blather.

There is only the "persons". There is nothing else. Symbols don't think. They don't interpret themselves idiotically. I'm not you nursery teacher. You don't pay me to help you and you need it. If you can't see you have been brought to believe you don't exist, and that philosophy is being passed off as "objective", as "Science", no one will come to raise you out of your dumb academic mediocrity for fifty, sixty and all the years of your life.

This forum has three strikes, the level is too low, I'm done.

[Pneumatic-Coma]

Existing outside of one's mind isn't make believe it's called imagination and you all are using up too much.

[Meno_]

For fairness sake, I must not concur with the proposition that symbols don't think.

Of course they do! Not the symbols themselves, fire is not language consistent with language itself?

That is certain, and higher the symbol the less attached it appears to be connected literally to its source.

However, the other angle is, that even of symbols can not be understood to apply to any concept and thing , it is passed on as innate or analyzed science.

It is in fact the foundation to science.
Objectivity is not proof formal or otherwise of anything else but conjecture, and it may not go beyond that at all.

I think the 3 strikes thing is faulty, form the same reason that 1 or 2 or 4 or any number is again based on conjecture of belief that more enumeration regarding passing that number will be insignificant. 3 is an ontologically and ideologically imposed limit based on very old Greek notions which again may not have any connection to reality.

In fact the group does not see this is a pity because he is arguing against his own position. The group meaning any ex culpatory entity. I guess.

[MagsJ]

This forum has three strikes, the level is too low, I'm done.

You will be missed.

[Silhouette]

This forum has three strikes, the level is too low, I'm done.

Don't let "the group" hit you on the way out.

The last thing this place needs is more pretentious narcissists anyway.

[Jakob]

Wow. That guy was like an academic Michelin doll.
Bloated as I've rarely seen.

[Pneumatic-Coma]

Not the symbols themselves, fire is not language consistent with language itself?

No concurring there? Have it not meant something else it would have just remained nothing. If something wasn't there to symbolize meaning or convey thought of some magnitude, then no constant would have existed and therefore it's logic would have been void.