the River and iambiguous contend...

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby iambiguous » Sat Aug 29, 2020 6:28 pm

Given this...

von Rivers wrote:
iambivalent, you are like a software that is skipping repeatedly. An old dusty cd skipping on the same note. Software glitching, stuck on something. But you have the tool that makes you go back and try again. That's what you're challenging everyone else to do, for no good reason. Maybe you could take your modus operandi of uncertainly---and be uncertain about yourself, and your own outlook. Not as a show for others, but silently to yourself. Then your song could ring out. (This last sentence is for dramatic effect. I edited it in there).


iambiguous wrote: Okay, how about you then:


Whenever you wish to dispense with your own Stooge persona, I am more than willing to explore your accusations here in the philosophy forum.

No huffing and puffing, no clamoring histrionics, no personal attacks.

Just you and I discussing our respective moral philosophies given a context that most of us here are likely to be familiar with.


I'll start it.


...I am hoping that Mo will in fact choose a well known context revolving around conflicting goods in which to sustain an exchange that will allow him [and others] to comment on the components of my moral philosophy, as I comment on the components of theirs.

And, in turn, allowing him to substantiate his accusations above by pointing to actual instances of my transgressions. Technical or otherwise.

But: Ever and always making reference to the set of circumstances being discussed.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37283
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Sat Aug 29, 2020 6:34 pm

challenged offer.. is challenge accepted?

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 8317
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Sun Aug 30, 2020 5:22 am

The challenge - is a category error.

Von River says something in a Rant thread about Iamb's behavior.
Iamb posts here AS IF what Von Rivers wrote would somehow be resolved, even potentially, by Von River doing what Iamb is always asking people to do-

IOW someone saying something critical of Iamb

somehow through burden of proof(??) or logical connection(?????) or social honor(?????)

entails doing what Iamb is always trying to get people to do, even if they have done it before.

Someone does X and miraculously this entails meeting his usual demand.

Hey, I don't like it when you just pile up your dishes for me to do them.
Oh, ok, well then, no personal attacks, I think if you say stuff like that it entails you give me a blow job.

And yes, I am making the pattern more extreme for educational purposes and fun.

Notice how moot his own behavior is in all this.

But it has no connnection. If you follow Iamb's behavior in threads, especially those not his own, as a habit, you'll see he acts as if there is some onus to satisfy his desires.

Separate issues.
Last edited by Karpel Tunnel on Sun Aug 30, 2020 10:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby WendyDarling » Sun Aug 30, 2020 5:46 am

Biggie, pretend to debate like you always do.
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 7651
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby iambiguous » Sun Aug 30, 2020 5:18 pm

WendyDarling wrote:Biggie, pretend to debate like you always do.


Sorry, no Kids allowed. 8)
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37283
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Sun Aug 30, 2020 5:24 pm

And will Iambiguous be honest and let Peter know 1) he considers Peter an objectivist, though one he is no doubt sympathetic to and 2) Peter is confused about Iamb's beliefs. There's a nice wager or challenge.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby iambiguous » Sun Aug 30, 2020 5:26 pm

Curly wrote:The challenge - is a category error.

Von River says something in a Rant thread about Iamb's behavior.
Iamb posts here AS IF what Von Rivers wrote would somehow be resolved, even potentially, by Von River doing what Iamb is always asking people to do-

IOW someone saying something critical of Iamb

somehow through burden of proof(??) or logical connection(?????) or social honor(?????)

entails doing what Iamb is always trying to get people to do, even if they have done it before.

Someone does X and miraculously this entails meeting his usual demand.

Hey, I don't like it when you just pile up your dishes for me to do them.
Oh, ok, well then, no personal attacks, I think if you say stuff like that it entails you give me a blow job.

And yes, I am making the pattern more extreme for educational purposes and fun.

Notice how moot his own behavior is in all this.

But it has no connnection. If you follow Iamb's behavior in threads, especially those not his own, as a habit, you'll see he acts as if there is some onus to satisfy his desires.

Separate issues.


Note to Mo:

Sure, go ahead, use the age-old "category error" excuse to avoid bringing your accusations down out of the ad hominem/psychobabble clouds. After all, any number of folks here will back you on it. And not just the objectivists and the Kids.

8)
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37283
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby iambiguous » Sun Aug 30, 2020 5:41 pm

Curly wrote:And will Iambiguous be honest and let Peter know 1) he considers Peter an objectivist, though one he is no doubt sympathetic to and 2) Peter is confused about Iamb's beliefs. There's a nice wager or challenge.


On any number of posts from his own thread -- 529,235 views in the philosophy forum! -- Peter and I have explored each other's differences.

But here's the thing: I have respect for his intelligence and I'd like to believe he has respect for mine. So, in turn, I would like to believe we would never allow those differences to devolve into the sort of muck that you slime me with.

Look, you have advised others here to ignore me. And, by all means, for those who despise me -- or feel threatened by me? -- I challenge you to do precisely that.

Starting now, Curly. Put me on ignore. Please. Go ahead, I dare you! 8)
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37283
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby Ecmandu » Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:27 pm

Iambiguous,

I don’t feel much threatened by you. Contradictions always raise red flags in me though.

It was you who put me on ignore. Because of my “condition”. It makes it look like you took some vague high road.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10660
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby iambiguous » Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:50 pm

Bringing this to the top for Mo...
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37283
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby iambiguous » Fri Sep 04, 2020 6:04 pm

Mo, is this going to happen or not :?: :?: :?:
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37283
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby promethean75 » Fri Sep 04, 2020 7:49 pm

This is not a matter by which monooq might take up his pen, it seems.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3307
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby iambiguous » Fri Sep 04, 2020 8:08 pm

promethean75 wrote:This is not a matter by which monooq might take up his pen, it seems.


Monooq! That was Mo back in the good old days. =D>
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37283
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby promethean75 » Fri Sep 04, 2020 8:23 pm

Yup, back when Mo was a berkeleyean idealist. We've come a long way since then, haven't we son.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3307
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby von Rivers » Sat Sep 05, 2020 4:44 am

I have a lasting fondness for Bishop Berkeley.

Anyways, iambusher, I am a bit busy these days.
And I have promises to keep.
And miles to go before I sleep.
And miles to go before I sleep.
User avatar
von Rivers
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5846
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:24 am

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby iambiguous » Sat Sep 05, 2020 6:11 pm

von Rivers wrote:I have a lasting fondness for Bishop Berkeley.

Anyways, iambusher, I am a bit busy these days.
And I have promises to keep.
And miles to go before I sleep.
And miles to go before I sleep.


A bit cryptic. Or is that the point?

And how many miles exactly? You know, if we're talking about the same thing.

Anyway, to contend or not to contend is still the question on this thread.

:?: :?: :?:
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37283
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Sun Sep 06, 2020 4:19 pm

iambiguous wrote:
Curly wrote:And will Iambiguous be honest and let Peter know 1) he considers Peter an objectivist, though one he is no doubt sympathetic to and 2) Peter is confused about Iamb's beliefs. There's a nice wager or challenge.


On any number of posts from his own thread -- 529,235 views in the philosophy forum! -- Peter and I have explored each other's differences.

But here's the thing: I have respect for his intelligence and I'd like to believe he has respect for mine. So, in turn, I would like to believe we would never allow those differences to devolve into the sort of muck that you slime me with.

Look, you have advised others here to ignore me. And, by all means, for those who despise me -- or feel threatened by me? -- I challenge you to do precisely that.

Starting now, Curly. Put me on ignore. Please. Go ahead, I dare you! 8)


K: having just discovered this later bit, I am going on the record to state, yes,
I have a great deal of respect for IAM.. and in fact, I will also state that I think
he is the only "true" philosopher on this site.. he has his questions, his problems
to solve and he is diligent in attempting to work out his philosophical problems..

there are many, many here who don't have a clue that there is even such a thing
as a philosophical problem and that problem requires some sort of solution....

what is the question that drives you? what are you seeking to answer?
do you even have enough sense to at least ask questions about
what does existence mean to you? or do you just float along with life
like 99.9% of all people......those people never ask themselves the vital
questions of existence..... "what am I do to?" "what values should I hold?"
"what should I hope for?" and what has turned into my question,
"what is the point of existence?" the why of being.... we exists,
but why? "does life have meaning?" which is another way of saying,
"do I have meaning?" .....

is my life meaning found in that old Kantian answer?
God, freedom and immortality.....

I reject god and immortality, so all is left that's left for me is freedom....

In the end all I have, all I have is questions.... what is the point of existence,
mine, yours, ours........

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 8317
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby phyllo » Sun Sep 06, 2020 4:34 pm

K: having just discovered this later bit, I am going on the record to state, yes,
I have a great deal of respect for IAM.. and in fact, I will also state that I think
he is the only "true" philosopher on this site.. he has his questions, his problems
to solve and he is diligent in attempting to work out his philosophical problems..

there are many, many here who don't have a clue that there is even such a thing
as a philosophical problem and that problem requires some sort of solution....

what is the question that drives you? what are you seeking to answer?
do you even have enough sense to at least ask questions about
what does existence mean to you? or do you just float along with life
like 99.9% of all people......those people never ask themselves the vital
questions of existence..... "what am I do to?" "what values should I hold?"
"what should I hope for?" and what has turned into my question,
"what is the point of existence?" the why of being.... we exists,
but why? "does life have meaning?" which is another way of saying,
"do I have meaning?" .....

is my life meaning found in that old Kantian answer?
God, freedom and immortality.....

I reject god and immortality, so all is left that's left for me is freedom....

In the end all I have, all I have is questions.... what is the point of existence,
mine, yours, ours........
A person who has no need to ask those questions may be wiser than any philosopher.
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 12022
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Sun Sep 06, 2020 4:46 pm

Peter Kropotkin wrote:K: having just discovered this later bit, I am going on the record to state, yes,
I have a great deal of respect for IAM.. and in fact, I will also state that I think
he is the only "true" philosopher on this site..
Kropotkin

I agree. He is a "true" philosopher.
Interestingly, I have seen Iamb also not understand what putting something in quotes means. Or perhaps there's more performance art in PK than I realize. Either way he put extra effort in to carefully not write that Iambiguous is a true philosopher.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby Meno_ » Sun Sep 06, 2020 4:57 pm

Fact: Everyone is a "true" philosopher in his own way. Philosophy is indefinable.

"I think therefore I philosophe. "

One of those loaded nuanced ideas.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7115
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Sun Sep 06, 2020 4:59 pm

Karpel Tunnel wrote:
Peter Kropotkin wrote:K: having just discovered this later bit, I am going on the record to state, yes,
I have a great deal of respect for IAM.. and in fact, I will also state that I think
he is the only "true" philosopher on this site..
Kropotkin

I agree. He is a "true" philosopher.
Interestingly, I have seen Iamb also not understand what putting something in quotes means. Or perhaps there's more performance art in PK than I realize. Either way he put extra effort in to carefully not write that Iambiguous is a true philosopher.



K: ok, I think IAM is the only TRUE PHILOSOPHER on this website... there does that
help you...

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 8317
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Sun Sep 06, 2020 5:00 pm

iambiguous wrote:
Curly wrote:And will Iambiguous be honest and let Peter know 1) he considers Peter an objectivist, though one he is no doubt sympathetic to and 2) Peter is confused about Iamb's beliefs. There's a nice wager or challenge.


On any number of posts from his own thread -- 529,235 views in the philosophy forum! -- Peter and I have explored each other's differences.
But he didn't seem to understand them. Not at all.

And since his defense of Iamb was based on the content of his posts and not his behavior, he like Iamb was not responding to posts made or the issues. Like Iamb he assumes that it is not possible to consider someone's behavior unless you disagree with their beliefs.

if I was to point out the main difference between Iam and myself,
is that we use different language to say roughly the same thing.....
He seems not to have noticed that given that he is an objectivist, Iamb considers him to be part of the problem in the world. The great bulk of Iamb's posts are about objectivism and trying to get people to demonstrate the rationality of their morality/value positions. The greatest difference is obviously that unlike Iamb, PK is not a nihilist and is an objectivist.

Further since PK does not think he himself is a "true" philosopher, there is not real reason to think he would recognize one.

I pointed out in my original response to PK other problems with saying that he and Iamb merely have different language for the same beliefs. IN fact some of his ideas that he is writing as if they are the same as Iambs are clearly not. See the Golden Age thread for that.

But here's the thing: I have respect for his intelligence and I'd like to believe he has respect for mine. So, in turn, I would like to believe we would never allow those differences to devolve into the sort of muck that you slime me with.
And as I pointed out to Iamb, PK and Iamb share political values and in general Iamb's behavior, what I have a problem with, are less likely to happen in the political threads but much more likely to happen in the philosophy and religion threads. So, he is partly blessed, but also partly inclined to ignore the negative behavior of members of his own team. Members of the other team often do the same thing. Iamb tends to use kid gloves when dealing with objectivists he shares values with.

Look, you have advised others here to ignore me. And, by all means, for those who despise me -- or feel threatened by me? -- I challenge you to do precisely that.
As Iamb surely must have noticed, despite my advice, people showed no interest in ignoring him. Oh, well. One must sometimes point out a good solution even if one thinks it is unlikely to be taken up.

So, it's back to pointing out his disruption of threads and faux responses.

K:
is my life meaning found in that old Kantian answer?
God, freedom and immortality.....

I reject god and immortality, so all is left that's left for me is freedom....

In the end all I have, all I have is questions.... what is the point of existence,
mine, yours, ours........

Kropotkin
Poor PK, he doesn't notice that he is giving answers, including objectivist answers around moral issues, with great regularity.
Last edited by Karpel Tunnel on Sun Sep 06, 2020 5:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Sun Sep 06, 2020 5:06 pm

phyllo wrote:
K: having just discovered this later bit, I am going on the record to state, yes,
I have a great deal of respect for IAM.. and in fact, I will also state that I think
he is the only "true" philosopher on this site.. he has his questions, his problems
to solve and he is diligent in attempting to work out his philosophical problems..

there are many, many here who don't have a clue that there is even such a thing
as a philosophical problem and that problem requires some sort of solution....

what is the question that drives you? what are you seeking to answer?
do you even have enough sense to at least ask questions about
what does existence mean to you? or do you just float along with life
like 99.9% of all people......those people never ask themselves the vital
questions of existence..... "what am I do to?" "what values should I hold?"
"what should I hope for?" and what has turned into my question,
"what is the point of existence?" the why of being.... we exists,
but why? "does life have meaning?" which is another way of saying,
"do I have meaning?" .....

is my life meaning found in that old Kantian answer?
God, freedom and immortality.....

I reject god and immortality, so all is left that's left for me is freedom....

In the end all I have, all I have is questions.... what is the point of existence,
mine, yours, ours........
A person who has no need to ask those questions may be wiser than any philosopher.



K: I disagree with this statement, "a person who has no need to ask those questions
may be wiser than any philosophy"

a person who lacks the wisdom to ask questions means they aren't curious at all...
and one of the traits of every great human beings has been curiosity....

show me someone who isn't curious and that person is dumber then a rock....
intelligence is tied up in how curious a person is....

someone who has absolutely no curiosity is IQ45... and he is dumber then a rock...

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 8317
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Sun Sep 06, 2020 5:15 pm

Peter Kropotkin wrote:
Karpel Tunnel wrote:
Peter Kropotkin wrote:K: having just discovered this later bit, I am going on the record to state, yes,
I have a great deal of respect for IAM.. and in fact, I will also state that I think
he is the only "true" philosopher on this site..
Kropotkin

I agree. He is a "true" philosopher.
Interestingly, I have seen Iamb also not understand what putting something in quotes means. Or perhaps there's more performance art in PK than I realize. Either way he put extra effort in to carefully not write that Iambiguous is a true philosopher.



K: ok, I think IAM is the only TRUE PHILOSOPHER on this website... there does that
help you...

Kropotkin
Help me. I didn't need any help on that one. I am not sure why we should think you could recognize a TRUE PHILOSOPHER since you seem not to consider yourself one.

And I notice how you focus on what was merely a jab and not, for example, on the substantive portions of the post. Whatever.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: the River and iambiguous contend...

Postby phyllo » Sun Sep 06, 2020 5:45 pm

K: I disagree with this statement, "a person who has no need to ask those questions
may be wiser than any philosophy"

a person who lacks the wisdom to ask questions means they aren't curious at all...
and one of the traits of every great human beings has been curiosity....

show me someone who isn't curious and that person is dumber then a rock....
intelligence is tied up in how curious a person is....

someone who has absolutely no curiosity is IQ45... and he is dumber then a rock...
What does curiosity have to do with it?

Those questions show a disconnection between the person asking and life, the universe and everything.

If you are connected, then the questions don't even arise.

You wouldn't look for 'meaning' if you had it already.
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 12022
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am

Next

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users