"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.
Moderator: Only_Humean
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.
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.
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?
Meno_ wrote:Guide wrote: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"
Guide wrote:This forum has three strikes, the level is too low, I'm done.
Guide wrote:This forum has three strikes, the level is too low, I'm done.
Meno_ wrote:Not the symbols themselves, fire is not language consistent with language itself?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users