Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

The origins of the imperative, "know thyself", are lost in the sands of time, but the age-old examination of human consciousness continues here.

Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby iambiguous » Mon Dec 21, 2020 7:39 pm

There are few here at ILP who can match urwrongx1000 when it comes to showing utter contempt for those who refuse to think exactly as he does.

So, let me ask him this:

"In regard to a really important political issue, have you ever been wrong about something?
Note some important issues where you had to admit that you were wrong and then changed your mind."


I ask this because, as a particularly fierce objectivist, I'm curious as to how his mind has evolved over the years in regard to moral and political value judgments.

In other words, I have found that most objectivists like urwrongx1000 will never admit to being wrong about something really important. Why? Because once they admit that they were wrong about one important thing they are admitting that they might be wrong about other important things as well.

And, above all else, they have to convince themselves that even if they do have new experiences and new relationships and access to new information, knowledge and ideas, what they think now will never change. It can't change because objectively it is true.

Thus, from my frame on mind, minds like his revolve far less around what they believe is true morally and politically and far more around having the psychologically comforting and consoling conviction of being "one of us". Those who get it right.

A set of assumptions I explored on this thread: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 5&t=185296
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: 41681
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Ecmandu » Mon Dec 21, 2020 8:56 pm

Iambiguous,

I have refuted you so many times on this board that it’s actually absurd that you continue to post the same tripe day after day.

How did I refute you?

1.) just because someone gets a mathematical proof wrong, does not make every mathematical proof invalid. Moral solutions are like mathematical solutions, they come slowly, but when they are found, they are irrefutable.

2.) all of your problems are a subset of my problem. My problem as articulated is that consent violation is the only problem in existence. Why is your problem a subset of my problem? Because conflicting goods and a fragmented sense of self violate your consent.

Iambiguous, I’m the super-set and you’re the subset
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11974
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby iambiguous » Mon Dec 21, 2020 9:34 pm

Anyone else? :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
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 41681
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Mr Reasonable » Tue Dec 22, 2020 4:09 am

just popping in to make it known that ecmandus post above violates my consent
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.
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 29559
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Tue Dec 22, 2020 4:13 am

My side isn't the one censoring people, blacklisted, unpersoning, doxxing, etc.

My side *IS* the one that invites argument, conversation, disagreement, discussion, and debate.


Keep that in mind, objectively.
Urwrongx1000
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5308
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Tue Dec 22, 2020 4:35 am

iambiguous wrote:There are few here at ILP who can match urwrongx1000 when it comes to showing utter contempt for those who refuse to think exactly as he does.

So, let me ask him this:

"In regard to a really important political issue, have you ever been wrong about something?
Note some important issues where you had to admit that you were wrong and then changed your mind."


I ask this because, as a particularly fierce objectivist, I'm curious as to how his mind has evolved over the years in regard to moral and political value judgments.

In other words, I have found that most objectivists like urwrongx1000 will never admit to being wrong about something really important. Why? Because once they admit that they were wrong about one important thing they are admitting that they might be wrong about other important things as well.

And, above all else, they have to convince themselves that even if they do have new experiences and new relationships and access to new information, knowledge and ideas, what they think now will never change. It can't change because objectively it is true.

Thus, from my frame on mind, minds like his revolve far less around what they believe is true morally and politically and far more around having the psychologically comforting and consoling conviction of being "one of us". Those who get it right.

A set of assumptions I explored on this thread: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 5&t=185296


K: to be honest IAM, I think you are being way to generous in thinking that UR will even
be able to engage with you in this fashion....he is young and naive and frankly, not
very smart..... what you are asking for is some sort of objectivity which is clearly
way, WAY beyond anything UR is capable of......

I freely admit that when I was young and I thought I knew everything and no one,
no one could possibly know more then I know..... I couldn't have spotted the truth
if it came up to me and bit me on the ass... I was as clueless as UR is now.....

to be honest, not only don't I think he is smart enough, more importantly I don't
think he is BRAVE enough to conduct an honest evaluation of his beliefs....

that kind of courage is rare... as for me, I was brave enough to engage in such
an evaluation of values.....

it is said of Zen, "before one studies Zen, mountains are mountains and waters are waters:
after a first glimpse into the truth of Zen, mountains are no longer mountains and waters
are no longer waters: after enlightenment, mountains are once again mountains
and waters once again waters"

before my reevaluation, mountains were mountains and waters were waters
and during my reevaluation, nothing was strong or fixed, not even mountains
or waters...

and after my reevaluation, mountains once again became mountains
and waters became waters"

it wasn't a short journey, it lasted years and once it started, I did regret
my journey, but once it starts, there is no coming back and I was forced
to complete my journey....I had the courage of a fool thinking that I wasn't going
too be impacted by this reevaluation because I already knew it all anyway......

UR and others like him on ILP haven't the courage to engage in a sort
of reevaluation of values required to become an adult or even wise....

I have no illusions as to the failures of UR and others like him because at
one time, that was me..... but I had something that they lack... courage...
I am not afraid of anything.... and I have the scars to prove it.....physically,
emotionally, and psychologically......

I am a damaged human being....I have no illusions to anything else...
but that is the wisdom of old age.... we no longer need the lies that
keep the young intact... I can be honest with myself when before,
I wasn't able to be honest with myself.... ...

I have failed and I will fail in the future.. but I am secure enough as a
human being to handle any kind of failure.... because I know that failure
isn't the end, it is the start.... and from failure comes the knowledge,
the true knowledge of who you are and what is possible....

to be honest, I am a far bigger fan of failure then I am of success..
for one can learn something from failure that one cannot learn from
success......

the path of becoming human, truly human is the path of failing....

you must fail before you can become who you are and you must fail
before you can overcome... to know thyself and the other
Socratic maxim, the unexamined life isn't worth living...
are both maxims that not only encourage failure but demand
failure....

UR and others like are afraid of failure and until you come to embrace failure..
you cannot succeed......

and that is why I have little faith in UR and others like him on this site....
they fear failure and thus they cannot ever, ever learn to succeed....

Kropotkin
PK IS EVIL.....
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9688
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Tue Dec 22, 2020 4:41 am

Iam, it is nice to know that UR completely missed the point...
but as I said, he isn't smart enough to see the point.....
or has courage enough to engage with what you brought up....

let him be... he can never change or become anything other then what he
already is....he is a lost cause... he cannot be saved nor redeemed... he has no
more value then dirt on Mars has....

Kropotkin
PK IS EVIL.....
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 9688
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Ecmandu » Tue Dec 22, 2020 6:26 am

Mr Reasonable wrote:just popping in to make it known that ecmandus post above violates my consent


There’s always one exception to the law of consent violation... you always have the right to speak against abuse. You are an abuser. You are like a rapist saying, “it violates my consent that I was tried and found guilty for being a rapist.”

You think you are so smart and clever mr. r; you are neither of those things.

Am I upset by you? Not really. But you are a troll, not a philosopher.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11974
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Mr Reasonable » Tue Dec 22, 2020 7:03 am

u gaslighting me now 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.
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 29559
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Tue Dec 22, 2020 9:26 am

lamb is obsessed with Objectivity because it is what he lacks the most.

After being dominated by KTS and Satyr, he cannot shake it from his pierced mind: Objectivity. Isn't it so powerful? Why is one thinker so tuned-into it, while others are not? Why is lamb so subjective that he wishes he had the authority of Objectivism. As-if you knew even the basics and basis of the difference? There are many reasons why some thinkers (like me) are more objective than you will ever be.

Why I am an "Objectivist"? You can call it luck. Good genes, perhaps.


Why do some people have authority and others not? Why are some people trustworthy and others not? Why can you confide in this person, but not that one?

Rhetorical questions, of course, I know you are desperate for the answers, lamb.
Urwrongx1000
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5308
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby iambiguous » Tue Dec 22, 2020 6:29 pm

Urwrongx1000 wrote:My side isn't the one censoring people, blacklisted, unpersoning, doxxing, etc.

My side *IS* the one that invites argument, conversation, disagreement, discussion, and debate.


Keep that in mind, objectively.


Okay, but there's still this part:

"In regard to a really important political issue, have you ever been wrong about something?
Note some important issues where you had to admit that you were wrong and then changed your mind."


I ask this because, as a particularly fierce objectivist, I'm curious as to how [your] mind has evolved over the years in regard to moral and political value judgments.

In other words, I have found that most objectivists like [you] will never admit to being wrong about something really important. Why? Because once they admit that they were wrong about one important thing they are admitting that they might be wrong about other important things as well.

And, above all else, they have to convince themselves that even if they do have new experiences and new relationships and access to new information, knowledge and ideas, what they think now will never change. It can't change because objectively it is true.


That is what I created the thread to explore with you.

And to all others of your ilk reacted to by all those of my ilk.
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: 41681
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Tue Dec 22, 2020 7:17 pm

First lesson of politics:

Never admit you're wrong.

So, no, I have never been wrong, politically.
Urwrongx1000
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5308
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby iambiguous » Tue Dec 22, 2020 7:36 pm

Urwrongx1000 wrote:First lesson of politics:

Never admit you're wrong.

So, no, I have never been wrong, politically.


Well, that's dodging the question, isn't it?

Basically, in a cynical Machiavellian mode, you admit that, while you may well have been wrong politically, you would never actually admit it.

Now it's only a matter of sustaining this knee-jerk authoritarian mentality all the way to the grave. Though I suspect that if anyone can accomplish this, it's you.

Still, if a new experience, relationship or idea actually does sink down into that thick skull of yours and you acquire the intellectual honesty and integrity to admit it resulted in you changing your mind about anything really important to you please come back on board and note this for us.

Also, if you might be willing, would you provide me with a chronology of important events in your life that led you to being an authoritarian right-winger. Along with your experiences with philosophy.

Along the lines of what I attempted here:
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=194382
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: 41681
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby iambiguous » Tue Dec 22, 2020 8:05 pm

Just came across this from urwrong:



I'm curious as to why he posted it. What is noted here is precisely the arguments of those like me who see "democracy" in America as predicated on this: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... s#p2187045

This perspective is closer to Bernie Sanders than to Joe Biden, Barack Obama and/or Bill/Hillary Clinton. A lot closer

Does he share her point of view?

Are there parts of his own thinking that overlap with mine? Though I can only endorse her own frame of mind as I do my own: as an existential contraption rooted subjectively in dasein becoming embodied in political prejudices.

On the other hand, this is also what some working class folks in Trumpworld thought Trump himself was in the White House for: to drain this "special interest" D.C. "swamp" that intertwines Wall Street, K Street and Capital Hill.

As though super crony capitalist Donald Trump would ever actually go there!

Only most of them were white so there was also blatant racism involved in their "conviction" to vote Trump back in.
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: 41681
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Silhouette » Wed Dec 23, 2020 12:02 am

Urwrongx1000 wrote:First lesson of politics:

Never admit you're wrong.

So, no, I have never been wrong, politically.

Oooooooooooh. I knew that'd be the rationalisation :D

Urwrongx1000 wrote:Politics and Science do not mix.

This quote may now fully crystallise.

So we can expect no more of this:
Urwrongx1000 wrote:If you side with "Science", Cause, then you must submit to my side of the argument, now.

So we have the overtly anti-science politician.

How has this been working for you, in your estimation?

Urwrongx1000 wrote:My side *IS* the one that invites argument, conversation, disagreement, discussion, and debate.

If "politics and science do not mix", as in your own words, what value does all this "argument, conversation, disagreement, discussion, and debate" have without objective adherence to evidence-based reason?

Urwrongx1000 wrote:Realistically,

There will be no bridge. You already burned it and we will not rebuild. You have your truth; we have Our Truth.

Some conversation, discussion and debate that'll be.

Is the rule of politics "don't alienate everyone except a minority of extremists who support your brand of extremism" too far down to bother reading far enough to get to?
Even your idol professed publically on many occasions to being more of a democrat than a republican. But you must marginalise your own politics so much from your "enemy" that you could not possibly hope to persuade even the middle-ground floating voters, never mind gain anything close to majority political approval?
Something tells me you didn't read past "never admit you're wrong".
User avatar
Silhouette
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4552
Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 1:27 am
Location: Existence

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Wed Dec 23, 2020 5:19 am

Silhouette wrote:So we have the overtly anti-science politician.

How has this been working for you, in your estimation?

It's working fine. As-if any of my scientific arguments have been even remotely refuted right now?
Urwrongx1000
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5308
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Wed Dec 23, 2020 5:22 am

iambiguous wrote:Also, if you might be willing, would you provide me with a chronology of important events in your life that led you to being an authoritarian right-winger. Along with your experiences with philosophy.

When the Liberal-Left-Communists started Censoring, DOXing, Unpersoning, MSM Blackout, then I went hard-right.

I will always oppose those who violate the First Amendment and Free Speech, especially all those consuming and supporting MSM.
Urwrongx1000
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5308
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Silhouette » Wed Dec 23, 2020 5:50 am

Urwrongx1000 wrote:It's working fine. As-if any of my scientific arguments have been even remotely refuted right now?

:lol: I'm glad you feel this way.

You go girl!

I'd ask "what scientific arguments?" But "Science doesn't mix with politics", in your words, so obviously you were joking. Humour is so hot right now in politics.
User avatar
Silhouette
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4552
Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 1:27 am
Location: Existence

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Mr Reasonable » Wed Dec 23, 2020 7:20 am

i think by "refuted" he means he admitted he was wrong so i mean there's that
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.
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 29559
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Wed Dec 23, 2020 11:01 am

It's not my fault that you don't know the difference between regular arguments and those including science/math.

Go ahead and laugh at yourselves, that's fine.
Urwrongx1000
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5308
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Silhouette » Wed Dec 23, 2020 7:15 pm

User avatar
Silhouette
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4552
Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 1:27 am
Location: Existence

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby promethean75 » Wed Dec 23, 2020 9:36 pm

I think urwrong would make an excellent news anchor on fox.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4748
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Wed Dec 23, 2020 11:45 pm

Silhouette wrote:
Urwrongx1000 wrote:My side isn't the one censoring people, blacklisted, unpersoning...

Urwrongx1000 wrote:Go away, Commie shill


Ah yes, so somebody uses Ad Hominids, and you defend them and strangely ignore their logical fallacies. Instead you join in their attacks.

You're a moron too, Silhouette, get in line.
Urwrongx1000
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5308
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby promethean75 » Wed Dec 23, 2020 11:54 pm

uuuuh huh huh huh.... uuh huh huh. hey beavis, he said 'ad hominid'. uuuuuuuuh huh huh huh
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4748
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: Urwrongx1000 and the objectivist mind

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Thu Dec 24, 2020 4:01 am

Peter Kropotkin wrote:Iam, it is nice to know that UR completely missed the point...
but as I said, he isn't smart enough to see the point.....
or has courage enough to engage with what you brought up....

let him be... he can never change or become anything other then what he
already is....he is a lost cause... he cannot be saved nor redeemed... he has no
more value then dirt on Mars has....

Kropotkin
Can someone, whose posts PK actually considers might have value, point out to PK the ironies involved in him describing UR (as distinct from others) as having no moral value and as someone who cannot be saved or redeemed in a thread calling UW out for being an objectivist? Or in telling Iamb that UW will never change (irony present, given Iamb's position on dasein, changes in philosophical position given experience, etc.)

The complete NOT understanding Iamb's positions is hilarious, but he doesn't seem likely to me to be open to listening to any political opponent or critic on the issue.

Or we can allow this to pass unnoticed and just maintain team loyalties over elephants in the room. UW and allies insult PK. PK and Iamb insult UW. Maintain team loyalty at all costs. Never mention anything that might (seem to) jeapordize my team winning.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3625
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Next

Return to Psychology and Mind



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users