iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

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

iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Thu Nov 19, 2020 8:31 pm

OK, so this thread is basically about this:

iambiguous wrote:
Pick one:

1] genes
2] memes
3] an unimaginably complex and convoluted labyrinth of both.


Here, iambiguous presents a clearly objectivist worldview, where everything is determined by his three options. When challenged on this, he answered with:

iambiguous wrote:
Pedro I Rengel wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
Pick one:

1] genes
2] memes
3] an unimaginably complex and convoluted labyrinth of both



Do you all nazis read anything other than Dawkins?

I mean for an anti-objectivist, you sure hold his writings to be some objective-ass truth.


Error! Error! Does not compute!

I'm sorry, but that was not one of the options.


I, of course, pointed out that this is a typical objectivist reaction. Namely, that the source of the objectivist ideas cannot be named because that would mean they are subjective ideas, and not objective truths. This went on, you get the gist.

And here I simply would like iam to bring his objectivist ideas down from the skyhooks of evolutionary theory academia, and down here on Earth where we can examine how they are not simply another instance of "I am right and whatever you say is wrong," and how they can help us resolve a situation of conflicting goods.

Pick a context, iam, and let's explore how your ideas about genes/memes are not simply rooted subjectively in dasein but can aply objectively to everybody, here and now.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6663
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Meno_ » Thu Nov 19, 2020 9:18 pm

Now this will be tough, just kibitzing, .....
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7595
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby iambiguous » Thu Nov 19, 2020 9:22 pm

Actually, from my point of view, the thread should be more about this:

Pedro I Rengel wrote: The context is: Dawkins wrote the book where the gene meme paradigm is postulated.


iambiguous wrote: No, that's your context. All I'm trying to do here is...to encompass individual reactions to particular contexts as the subjective, existential embodiment of dasein. Both genes and memes are intertwined in that. Instead, it comes down to emphasis. Folks like Satyr are really, really big on genes. Others, like the "blank slate" crowd, are really, really big on memes.


Pedro I Rengel wrote: You refer to them as though objective truth.


iambiguous wrote: "Them" in what context? What can be differentiated in that context as the objective truth from a subjective opinion?


Pedro I Rengel wrote: And so I asked "do you all nazis read anything other than Dawkins."


iambiguous wrote: What particular Nazis in what particular context? How might Dawkins take on genes and memes be examined there? In regard to, say, the Final Solution. The extent to which Nazis can ground it in the objective truth rather than the ideological bent of Hitler. And, then: how were Hitler's views of the Jews rooted subjectively in dasein, given the existential trajectory of his own life experiences?


Pedro I Rengel wrote: So. Where did you get the genes/memes idea?


iambiguous wrote: Truth be told, I don't remember the exact moment when it first came to my attention. But that's true for all of us. We pick up on things over the course of years over the course of countless experiences. We think things today that we have only the vaguest understanding of how we first came to think it.


Now on to his OP:

Pedro I Rengel wrote: OK, so this thread is basically about this:


iambiguous wrote:
Pick one:

1] genes
2] memes
3] an unimaginably complex and convoluted labyrinth of both.


Pedro I Rengel wrote: Here, iambiguous presents a clearly objectivist worldview, where everything is determined by his three options.


Huh? When we choose particular behaviors [assuming human autonomy] "I" first comes into the world given particular biological imperatives: race, gender, ethnicity, certain character traits, temperament etc.. And then all of the arguments that revolve around other possible congenital propensities like sexual orientation. Then the memes -- "an element of a culture or system of behavior that may be considered to be passed from one individual to another by nongenetic means, especially imitation" -- that are grounded historically, anthropologically, ethnologically, socially, politically, economically, etc., in any number of vast varied human communities. All of which evolve over time in a world bursting with contingency, chance and change.

Three options? How about hundreds and hundreds of them given the manner in which I construe human identity on this thread: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529

Pedro I Rengel wrote: When challenged on this, he answered with:


iambiguous wrote:
Pick one:

1] genes
2] memes
3] an unimaginably complex and convoluted labyrinth of both


Pedro I Rengel wrote: I, of course, pointed out that this is a typical objectivist reaction. Namely, that the source of the objectivist ideas cannot be named because that would mean they are subjective ideas, and not objective truths.


Over and over and over again, I make it clear that my own understanding of an objectivist is someone who, in regard to moral or political or esthetic value judgments, is convinced that they are in sync with the Real Me, a Core Self, a Soul. And that this Real Me is, in turn, in sync with the "right thing to do". Either through God or political ideology or deontology or one or another rendition of Nature.

Then I suggest that intellectual contraptions of this sort...

"Namely, that the source of the objectivist ideas cannot be named because that would mean they are subjective ideas, and not objective truths."

...be relocated to an actual circumstantial context where behaviors come into conflict existentially over particular conflicting goods.

Pedro I Rengel wrote: This went on, you get the gist.

And here I simply would like iam to bring his objectivist ideas down from the skyhooks of evolutionary theory academia, and down here on Earth where we can examine how they are not simply another instance of "I am right and whatever you say is wrong," and how they can help us resolve a situation of conflicting goods.

Pick a context, iam, and let's explore how your ideas about genes/memes are not simply rooted subjectively in dasein but can aply objectively to everybody, here and now.


Which is precisely what I have done on this thread: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=194382

I explored my political prejudices today revolving around abortion. I did this by noting the experiences I had over the course of my actual lived life intertwined with my experiences in exploring philosophy.

As for genes here, it is obvious that the biological evolution of life on earth has culminated so far in us. A species able to choose either to abort or not to abort. But: is there an understanding of human biology that would enable us to decide whether abortion is inherently moral or immoral? Or is that far more likely to be embodied in the manner in which I construe the "self" here as a subjective/subjunctive existential contraption rooted in dasein?
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

tiny nietzsche: what's something that isn't nothing, but still feels like nothing?
iambiguous: a post from Pedro?
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 38466
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby promethean75 » Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:22 pm

Please. No contending in this thread. Stick to the topic gentlemen.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3571
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:48 am

That's all gobledygook iam.

You assert that Dawkins' meme gene paradigm is the actual, objective truth for all of us. Now, perhaps you could enlighten us, in an issue regarding abortion, how your vision of truth can help us break the deadlock one way or another.

Right now, I am not interested in the details of your meme gene paradigm, which I construe to be just another instance of up-in-the-clouds academic gobbledygook, and would like you to explore down here on Earth how that might help us solve actual every day problems surrounding conflicting goods. How it may help Mary and Joe resolve their issues.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6663
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby iambiguous » Fri Nov 20, 2020 3:33 am

Pedro I Rengel wrote: That's all gobledygook iam.

You assert that Dawkins' meme gene paradigm is the actual, objective truth for all of us. Now, perhaps you could enlighten us, in an issue regarding abortion, how your vision of truth can help us break the deadlock one way or another.


Note where I asserted that "Dawkins' meme gene paradigm is the actual, objective truth for all of us. "

And a "vision of truth" is completely the opposite of what I contend: that in regard to my own particular "self" here and now pertaining to the morality of abortion, "I" am "fractured and fragmented".

And I explain my reasoning for that in my signature threads.

And it is folks like Satyr and the "blank slate" philosophers who insist not only that the deadlock can be broken but that this must be the case because their own frame of mind has already broken it.

Now, I'm not arguing that it can't be broken, only that given my own frame of mind "here and now" genes and memes seem embedded in the labyrinthian trajectory of our lived experiences such that we only have so much understanding and control over them.

Pedro I Rengel wrote: Right now, I am not interested in the details of your meme gene paradigm, which I construe to be just another instance of up-in-the-clouds academic gobbledygook, and would like you to explore down here on Earth how that might help us solve actual every day problems surrounding conflicting goods. How it may help Mary and Joe resolve their issues.


I have already addressed that above:

In regard to memes...

I explored my political prejudices today revolving around abortion. I did this by noting the experiences I had over the course of my actual lived life intertwined with my experiences in exploring philosophy.


In other words:

1] I was raised in the belly of the working class beast. My family/community were very conservative. Abortion was a sin.
2] I was drafted into the Army and while on my "tour of duty" in Vietnam I happened upon politically radical folks who reconfigured my thinking about abortion. And God and lots of other things.
3] after I left the Army, I enrolled in college and became further involved in left wing politics. It was all the rage back then. I became a feminist. I married a feminist. I wholeheartedly embraced a woman's right to choose.
4] then came the calamity with Mary and John. I loved them both but their engagement was foundering on the rocks that was Mary's choice to abort their unborn baby.
5] back and forth we all went. I supported Mary but I could understand the points that John was making. I could understand the arguments being made on both sides. John was right from his side and Mary was right from hers.
6] I read William Barrett's Irrational Man and came upon his conjectures regarding "rival goods".
7] Then, over time, I abandoned an objectivist frame of mind that revolved around Marxism/feminism. Instead, I became more and more embedded in existentialism. And then as more years passed I became an advocate for moral nihilism.


Memes are everywhere on that thread: from my childhood, the Army, Vietnam, college, political commitments, particular experiences in particular contexts...philosophers I've read.

Where is the equivalent from you.

And then...

As for genes here, it is obvious that the biological evolution of life on earth has culminated so far in us. A species able to choose either to abort or not to abort. But: is there an understanding of human biology that would enable us to decide whether abortion is inherently moral or immoral? Or is that far more likely to be embodied in the manner in which I construe the "self" here as a subjective/subjunctive existential contraption rooted in dasein?


And my whole point is not only was I unable to resolve the conflicting goods embedded in John and Mary's calamity, the calamity itself was part of the epiphany [along with Barrett and Novak] that led to my abandonment of objectivism itself.

As for calling my arguments "gobbledygook", rather than actually addressing them, I can't help but wonder how long it will be before you are back to "You dirty Communist!"

Is this going to be a substantive exchange 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

tiny nietzsche: what's something that isn't nothing, but still feels like nothing?
iambiguous: a post from Pedro?
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 38466
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Mr Reasonable » Fri Nov 20, 2020 3:40 am

pedro i cant believe you fell for this old iambig trick
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 26757
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby iambiguous » Fri Nov 20, 2020 3:43 am

Mr Reasonable wrote:pedro i cant believe you fell for this old iambig trick


Okay, you respond to the points I raised.

Here for example: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 2&t=179879
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

tiny nietzsche: what's something that isn't nothing, but still feels like nothing?
iambiguous: a post from Pedro?
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 38466
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Fri Nov 20, 2020 3:48 am

iambiguous wrote:Note where I asserted that "Dawkins' meme gene paradigm is the actual, objective truth for all of us. "


iambiguous wrote:
Pick one:

1] genes
2] memes
3] an unimaginably complex and convoluted labyrinth of both.



iambiguous wrote:Huh? When we choose particular behaviors [assuming human autonomy] "I" first comes into the world given particular biological imperatives: race, gender, ethnicity, certain character traits, temperament etc.. And then all of the arguments that revolve around other possible congenital propensities like sexual orientation. Then the memes -- "an element of a culture or system of behavior that may be considered to be passed from one individual to another by nongenetic means, especially imitation" -- that are grounded historically, anthropologically, ethnologically, socially, politically, economically, etc., in any number of vast varied human communities. All of which evolve over time in a world bursting with contingency, chance and change.


?
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6663
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Mr Reasonable » Fri Nov 20, 2020 3:54 am

hes a bot bruh
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 26757
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Fri Nov 20, 2020 3:55 am

Maybe so.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6663
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Mr Reasonable » Fri Nov 20, 2020 3:57 am

pretty sure of it he always defaults to the whole bHut hOw cAN nEtHiNg be oBJecTive??
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 26757
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Fri Nov 20, 2020 3:59 am

Maybe I found the ghost in the machine.

Where the anti-objectivist bot is objectivist.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6663
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby iambiguous » Fri Nov 20, 2020 5:02 am

iambiguous wrote: Note where I asserted that "Dawkins' meme gene paradigm is the actual, objective truth for all of us. "


Pedro I Rengel wrote:Pick one:

1] genes
2] memes
3] an unimaginably complex and convoluted labyrinth of both.


My point here was that some will insist it is genes, some will insist it is memes, while I see it as the third option.

Which I then elaborated on:


iambiguous wrote:Huh? When we choose particular behaviors [assuming human autonomy] "I" first comes into the world given particular biological imperatives: race, gender, ethnicity, certain character traits, temperament etc.. And then all of the arguments that revolve around other possible congenital propensities like sexual orientation. Then the memes -- "an element of a culture or system of behavior that may be considered to be passed from one individual to another by nongenetic means, especially imitation" -- that are grounded historically, anthropologically, ethnologically, socially, politically, economically, etc., in any number of vast varied human communities. All of which evolve over time in a world bursting with contingency, chance and change.


I should have known you had no intention of pursuing a serious exchange.

But, given your rejoinder to my query about women and chess, I had to at least give you the benefit of the doubt.
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

tiny nietzsche: what's something that isn't nothing, but still feels like nothing?
iambiguous: a post from Pedro?
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 38466
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Mr Reasonable » Fri Nov 20, 2020 5:05 am

Pedro I Rengel wrote:Maybe I found the ghost in the machine.

Where the anti-objectivist bot is objectivist.



he fundamentally misunderstands the distinction and he has explained a million times just what his mistake is but he insists that its not a mistake and he just keeps on with it going in a loop forever confused
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 26757
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby iambiguous » Fri Nov 20, 2020 5:05 am

Now the thread will continue with Shit Smears....

I'm sitting on my couch, watching a video of the alabama/lsu game while smoking a bong and waiting for chinese food to be delivered. I was thinking of getting someone over here to clean the place. This is usually what I'm doing, I've seen this game about 130-140 times now. Or I'm in the bathroom someplace, bored and using my phone to post on message boards while I poop.

...and Pedro in "yak yak yak" mode.

Their own rendition of serious philosohy. :lol:
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

tiny nietzsche: what's something that isn't nothing, but still feels like nothing?
iambiguous: a post from Pedro?
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 38466
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Fri Nov 20, 2020 5:07 am

iambiguous wrote:My point here was that some will insist it is genes, some will insist it is memes, while I see it as the third option.



But you insist, you, imabiguous, insist that it is either genes, memes, or a combination of the two, a paradigm introduced by Dawkins. And you state this is true objectively for everyone.

Am I wrong?
Last edited by Pedro I Rengel on Fri Nov 20, 2020 5:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6663
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Mr Reasonable » Fri Nov 20, 2020 5:08 am

iambig you are stupid man you arent capable of philosophy or yak yaking youre a bot and youre socially awkward part of your prog is to say anyone who wont do your whole confused circle jerk with you isnt serious lets be real in no phl dept in the world would you not get laughed at
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 26757
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Mr Reasonable » Fri Nov 20, 2020 5:12 am

iambig i want you to know that as soon as i figure out how to rhyme your name with some bodily fluid or exrement im gonna do it and its gonna hurt your feelings so bad and im just gonna keep on doing it forever im gonna start reading books about how to be a rapper so i can learn how to rhyme things better so you should watch out
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 26757
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Fri Nov 20, 2020 5:13 am

Mr Reasonable wrote:iambig i want you to know that as soon as i figure out how to rhyme your name with some bodily fluid or exrement im gonna do it and its gonna hurt your feelings so bad and im just gonna keep on doing it forever im gonna start reading books about how to be a rapper so i can learn how to rhyme things better so you should watch out


You don't need a book.

Just pull the commie worm out of your asshole and the rhymes will flow by themselves.

Jokes aside I am sure of it.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6663
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Mr Reasonable » Fri Nov 20, 2020 5:14 am

im trying so hard
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 26757
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby iambiguous » Fri Nov 20, 2020 5:17 am

Oh, yeah, and then they both become Stooges!

So, now it's my five Stooges!!

I'm out of here. :lol:
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

tiny nietzsche: what's something that isn't nothing, but still feels like nothing?
iambiguous: a post from Pedro?
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 38466
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Mr Reasonable » Fri Nov 20, 2020 5:28 am

good
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 26757
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Fri Nov 20, 2020 5:29 am

iambiguous wrote:Oh, yeah, and then they both become Stooges!

So, now it's my five Stooges!!

I'm out of here. :lol:


Coward.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6663
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: iambiguous and Pedro I Rengel don't contend

Postby Mr Reasonable » Fri Nov 20, 2020 5:32 am

and a bot
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 26757
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Next

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Jigomiahage