phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

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

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Sun Dec 20, 2020 1:43 am

"WHY WON'T YOU ANSWER MY TEXTS?!?"
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ᛈᛖᛉᛖᛉ
 
Posts: 8792
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby iambiguous » Sun Dec 20, 2020 2:20 am

Pedro I Rengel wrote:"WHY WON'T YOU ANSWER MY TEXTS?!?"


"WHAT MORE CAN I SAY?!?":

https://youtu.be/waf46eBajkw
https://youtu.be/5hfYJsQAhl0

Note to others:

How about this: a poll!

Which video clip is the most appropriate in exposing how deserving he is of being humiliated as the hapless mouse here?

Give this some thought, okay?
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: 39784
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Sun Dec 20, 2020 2:20 am

Hahahahahahahaha
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ᛈᛖᛉᛖᛉ
 
Posts: 8792
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby iambiguous » Sun Dec 20, 2020 2:26 am

Pedro I Rengel wrote:Hahahahahahahaha


He's right. How much actually thought is needed?

https://youtu.be/waf46eBajkw
https://youtu.be/5hfYJsQAhl0
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: 39784
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Sun Dec 20, 2020 2:27 am

weirdo
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ᛈᛖᛉᛖᛉ
 
Posts: 8792
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby iambiguous » Sun Dec 20, 2020 8:28 pm

There's no gullibility divide here - sheep graze on both sides of your fence.


phoneutria wrote:thqt's all i'm tryna say sil
you could have deleted all that
and kept that last sentenxe


On the other hand, Sil's sheep tend to do their grazing up in the clouds.

Still, the word "gullible" itself is no less derived subjectively from dasein. After all, to be gullible is defined as "easily persuaded to believe something; credulous."

But: the connotation almost always revolves around a belief that is thought to be foolish or wrong. And if we don't need an actual context there...?

What does it mean to be gullible in regard to Marxism or vaccinations or gender roles? Don't the left and the right have their own political prejudices in regard to that.

But, given my own understanding of them both, Sil and phone seem convinced they are not prejudices at all. Let alone a set of values derived more from the accumulated experiences in their lives than in anything that can be pinned down philosophically, politically or morally.

Let alone logically, epistemologically or scientifically.
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: 39784
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby iambiguous » Mon Dec 21, 2020 5:13 pm

phoneutria wrote:you probably consider me conservative
after the marxism thread
do i strike you as the kind of person
who would accept something
without questioning?


Yes, this is exactly what conservatives and liberals do. They stake out positions up and down the political spectrum and then argue over whether any one particular individual, expressing his or her opinion, is liberal or conservative.

Also, they will generally insist that if someone asks the right questions, and thinks really, really hard about the answers, they can arrive at the most rational answer. The optimal point of view. Or, for some, the only possible "right answer" that there is.

They might then argue back and forth about 1] whether someone is a liberal or a conservative in regard to any particular moral and political issue, or 2] whether the liberals or the conservatives are actually right. But what they all agree on is that there is in fact the optimal or the only right answer.

And how do they know this? Because they have already found it. And, of course, have come to embody it in the optimal or the only right behaviors.

Then I tap them both on the shoulder and suggest that, actually, there is another way to think about both the questions and the answers.

But it has troubling implications for their precious value judgments.
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: 39784
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby iambiguous » Tue Dec 22, 2020 8:18 pm

phoneutria wrote:he would say
"are you detaining me mr robot, or am i free to go"

if the robot says he is free to go
that means said robot has no probably cause
pedro would gtfo asafp of there without saying another word

if robot says that he is detaining him
pedro would then promptly provide his id
because he is a law abiding citizen and a hecking good boy
and providing the ID will resolve the mistaken identity issue
so robot will be free to return to pursuing the actual suspect

now if by any reason pedro had done a naughty thing
he would stfu
let the robot frisk him, which would result in the production of his ID
allow himself to be detained
and upon arriving at the robot station
ask for a lawyer and a phone call


Okay, so now all we need is a particular set of circumstances in which to probe the motivations and intentions of both Pedro and the robot. Pedro programed here by the manner in which subjectively his moral and political value judgments/prejudices -- and thus behaviors -- are rooted existentially in dasein and the robot programmed by those human beings with their own moral and political axes to grind.

In other words, for phoneutria, the robot is either just another manifestation of Big Brother out to confiscate the freedom of Pedro the "rugged individualist" or it's not. A malignant or a benign robot.

Just as the left-wingers will have their own version here.
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: 39784
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby iambiguous » Wed Dec 23, 2020 8:57 pm

phoneutria wrote:anyway
i've always been abundantly tolerant of satyr
as a matter of fact we're homies
aren't we
dude we go way back
sciforums, wanderer
i remember

but i'm tolerant of a lot of stuff
i think no matter how stupid or offensive an idea
that it should be discussed
even if it's your retarded unscientific openly racist stuff
i mean, satyr's
what best way to show how retarded an argument is
than to discuss it
people need to fucking grow some skin


This is what I'm talking about. There are things that attract her to Satyr and there are things that do not.

But what things in regard to what sets of circumstances? And to what extent does she, like Satyr, insist that those who do not think like she does about race and gender and sexual orientation and political issues like the role of government, are, what, necessarrily wrong?

What makes an idea here "stupid" or "offensive"? How is this rooted in dasein more or less so than in philosophy?

Satyr is a full blown raging objectivist. Hell, as far as I know, he may even have a "condition".

But it would be fascinating [for me] if he would go here:

It would appear to be futile to engage him -- let alone in philosophy -- until we come closer to this part:

...someday he might finally confront [even conquer] whatever or whoever turned him into a rampaging caricature of Satyr himself. And, perhaps, be able to engage in a substantive exchange without configuring into the fulminating fool that he becomes here. And, I suspect, everywhere else.

Something has clearly pissed him off in life. Something that compels him to come into places like this and VENT!!!

It seems [to me] that he needs to make scapegoats of those he construes to be part of whatever he is outraged about. But what is it? And how did it come about?

Wouldn't that be far more fascinating to explore than the "substance" of his rants?


But I'd like to go there with phoneutria as well.

Again, the closest I come to my own rendition of it -- and it does exist -- is this:

"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
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: 39784
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby Lorikeet » Wed Dec 23, 2020 9:27 pm

iambiguous wrote:
Satyr is a full blown raging objectivist. Hell, as far as I know, he may even have a "condition".
My gawd, noooo, not a raging full blown one?
You mean a flaming objectivist?
iambiguous wrote:But I'd like to go there with phoneutria as well.
He wants a threesome.
Degenerates...sheesh....


iambiguous wrote:"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
Ha!!
There it is...projection!
This freak has been telling you who and what he is for years...few listened to him.
He can only understand another by projecting himself into his "position".
This is the extent of his "emoting".

He wants to change the world, by destroying self-confidence and trust in ones sensuality so that finally, in desperation, concessions can be made to the lowest-common-denominator.
In his impotence all he has is a caricature of himself, in the past, to hate and to attack...day after day after day...until Godot comes.
He's telling you exactly what he is!!!
Lorikeet
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2020 9:08 pm

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby obsrvr524 » Wed Dec 23, 2020 9:39 pm

Lorikeet wrote:He wants to change the world, by destroying self-confidence and trust in ones sensuality so that finally, in desperation, concessions can be made to the lowest-common-denominator.

That seems an excellent way to describe that syndrome.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1836
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby phoneutria » Wed Dec 23, 2020 10:40 pm

satyr dude
why does iam keep saying i'm of your ilk?
can you please clarify this matter for him?
User avatar
phoneutria
purveyor of enchantment, advocate of pulchritude AND venomously disarming
 
Posts: 4134
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:37 am

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby Lorikeet » Wed Dec 23, 2020 10:42 pm

phoneutria wrote:satyr dude
why does iam keep saying i'm of your ilk?
can you please clarify this matter for him?
Because he sees you paraphrasing me...
Even a moron can be correct about some things.
Lorikeet
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2020 9:08 pm

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby Lorikeet » Wed Dec 23, 2020 10:45 pm

Oooor...in his either/or mind whomever shows any confidence and certainty is, automatically, an evil objectivist...so you are of "my ilk" means you have a belief and express it with certainty.
His way of "changing the world" is to spread uncertainty, distrust in your very senses, so that you then must turn to the collective and make concessions....you know, so he is no longer impotent.

He want you to be humble. Christian.
Lorikeet
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2020 9:08 pm

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby iambiguous » Wed Dec 23, 2020 11:04 pm

Lorikeet wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
Satyr is a full blown raging objectivist. Hell, as far as I know, he may even have a "condition".
My gawd, noooo, not a raging full blown one?
You mean a flaming objectivist?


What, are you gay too?!!! :o

iambiguous wrote: "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


Lorikeet wrote:Ha!!
There it is...projection!
This freak has been telling you who and what he is for years...few listened to him.
He can only understand another by projecting himself into his "position".
This is the extent of his "emoting".


We'll need a context of course.

Let him choose it. In fact, I dare him too.

An attempt to examine a set of circumstances in which we explore each other's moral and political philosophies given our respective understanding of Fowles's quote.

Lorikeet wrote: He wants to change the world, by destroying self-confidence and trust in ones sensuality so that finally, in desperation, concessions can be made to the lowest-common-denominator.


No, I have come to conclude [though no less subjectively] that there are the moral objectivists [more or less pinheads] who feel nothing but contempt for those who do not accept what they insist the world must change into. Why? In order that rationality and virtue prevails. And then the moral nihilists for whom everything basically revolves around "show me the money". And then the pursuit of this by any means necessary. Generally from the perspective of might makes right. Or from the perspective of the sociopaths.

Now, this is rejected by pinhead objectivists like Satyr because they have thought themselves into thinking that Nietzsche's Ubermen are more in order here as the embodiment instead of right makes might. The "philosophical" masters and the "simpleton" slaves.

On this thread, I'm just curious as to where phoneutria fits in here, given her reaction to the points I raise in my signature threads.
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: 39784
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby Lorikeet » Wed Dec 23, 2020 11:13 pm

iambiguous wrote:What, are you gay too?!!! :o
I wouldn't stay "gay" but content....

iambiguous wrote:We'll need a context of course.

Let him choose it. In fact, I dare him too.
Ok, the simpletons wife gets pregnant by an albino hermaphrodite...and he finds out when the child is born.
discuss...

iambiguous wrote:No, I have come to conclude [though no less subjectively] that there are the moral objectivists [more or less pinheads] who feel nothing but contempt for those who do not accept what they insist the world must change into. Why? In order that rationality and virtue prevails. And then the moral nihilists for whom everything basically revolves around "show me the money". And then the pursuit of this by any means necessary. Generally from the perspective of might makes right. Or from the perspective of the sociopaths.
I'm a "moral objectivist"
I don't believe morality is universal...nor is it god sent.
You poor bastard....you are going in circles.

iambiguous wrote:Now, this is rejected by pinhead objectivists like Satyr because they have thought themselves into thinking that Nietzsche's Ubermen are more in order here as the embodiment instead of right makes might. The "philosophical" masters and the "simpleton" slaves.
I said that?
Wow...strawman for the Don Quixote of degeneracy...

Here's a clue:
Right makes might....

iambiguous wrote:On this thread, I'm just curious as to where phoneutria fits in here, given her reaction to the points I raise in my signature threads.
He just cannot get phnoey - a.k.a. Spiderwoman, out of his mind.
Dreams of fighting the evil horned devil with his trusted companion - two superheroes defending the wretched and the impoverished....from evil Captain Objectivist, and his Ayun Rand minions.

What a clown...
Lorikeet
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2020 9:08 pm

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby Lorikeet » Wed Dec 23, 2020 11:17 pm

let's bring it down to earth...
Your mother....went out fucking men she picked up in seedy bars...
Looking for Mr right now!!!
One day the rubber broke and she was in a state...should she ab ort the coming imabiguuos, denying us yeas of insanity, or should she keep it, and save mankind from objectivism?

I truly do not know how you people put up with this shit...i would have chained him in the dungeon.
What does he contribute...seriously? Other than being for Brian a trusted friend and inspiration?
Lorikeet
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2020 9:08 pm

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby iambiguous » Wed Dec 23, 2020 11:17 pm

phoneutria wrote:satyr dude
why does iam keep saying i'm of your ilk?
can you please clarify this matter for him?


Where did I say this?

Satyr is a pinhead objectivist who, by and large, lives up in the clouds of numbingly ponderous [almost unintelligible] intellectual contraptions. And, from my point of view, every time he tries to skim the surface of reality "down here" I make a fool out of him.

If I do say so myself.

I don't see you as among this "ilk" at all.

But how far removed are you from it?

You won't go there. You claim my mind is "broken" and that I haven't met your "conditions" for establishing an exchange.

Whatever that means.

Now, over at KT, Satyr first dealt with my arguments not by "foeing" me but by tossing me into the dungeon.

There he would exchange posts with me. But over time the embarrassment I caused him led to his withdrawing altogether from confronting my arguments.

And, to the extent he engages with me here, the embarrassment will continue.

Or the moderators will have mercy on him and kick him out again. :wink:
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: 39784
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby Lorikeet » Wed Dec 23, 2020 11:19 pm

As is evident, this specimen can cause much embarrassment.

At the end notice the hope...."kick him out"...Ha!!!
Projections.
Lorikeet
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2020 9:08 pm

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby phoneutria » Wed Dec 23, 2020 11:59 pm

Lorikeet wrote:
phoneutria wrote:satyr dude
why does iam keep saying i'm of your ilk?
can you please clarify this matter for him?
Because he sees you paraphrasing me...
Even a moron can be correct about some things.


except i don't paraphrase you
nothing you say is original
we all read the same books here
User avatar
phoneutria
purveyor of enchantment, advocate of pulchritude AND venomously disarming
 
Posts: 4134
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:37 am

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby phoneutria » Thu Dec 24, 2020 12:05 am

Lorikeet wrote:I truly do not know how you people put up with this shit...i would have chained him in the dungeon


i don't, i put him on ignore
User avatar
phoneutria
purveyor of enchantment, advocate of pulchritude AND venomously disarming
 
Posts: 4134
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:37 am

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby Lorikeet » Thu Dec 24, 2020 12:09 am

phoneutria wrote:
Lorikeet wrote:
phoneutria wrote:satyr dude
why does iam keep saying i'm of your ilk?
can you please clarify this matter for him?
Because he sees you paraphrasing me...
Even a moron can be correct about some things.


except i don't paraphrase you
nothing you say is original
we all read the same books here
Nothing?

Ha!!
No matter.

What books would those be?

Nietzsche ...Schopenhauer...Spengler...
As far as I know nobody traced nihilism to the emergence of self-cosnciuosness, nor made the gene/meme connection ...but never mind.
Doesn't matter.

i know you need this independence myth to feel bad ass.
Lorikeet
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2020 9:08 pm

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby phoneutria » Thu Dec 24, 2020 12:18 am

As far as I know nobody traced nihilism to the emergence of self-cosnciuosness


so if i quoted someone to that effect
would that hurt your feelings?
don't worry, i won't
i'm an idiot
don't even know what books are for
User avatar
phoneutria
purveyor of enchantment, advocate of pulchritude AND venomously disarming
 
Posts: 4134
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:37 am

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby Lorikeet » Thu Dec 24, 2020 12:23 am

I was only interested on our common reading lists.
That's all....defensiveness is not useful.

Never mind....hurt my feelings...see if I care. so there...
Lorikeet
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2020 9:08 pm

Re: phoneutria and iambiguous don't contend

Postby iambiguous » Thu Dec 24, 2020 12:40 am

Lorikeet wrote:As is evident, this specimen can cause much embarrassment.

At the end notice the hope...."kick him out"...Ha!!!
Projections.


On the contrary, I made it quite clear that I want you around. Making fools of the particularly fanatic objectivists is now one of my most cherished forms of entertainment. Just ask Pedro.
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: 39784
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users