Is Iambiguous...

[Peter Kropotkin]

Peter,

Just like iambiguous, you deny that through blood sweat and tears that proofs have actually been found.

Maybe you’re not smart enough to understand those proofs ... that’s fine.

Moral proofs are like math proofs... they can take thousands of years to come by. But they do occur.

Like iambiguous, you are narcissistic ... you believe that because you were wrong about one thing one time that this means that everyone was, is and will always be wrong about everything ...

I know that you, iambiguous and Karpel are ignoring me ... that’s very simple, you three can’t handle the objective facts of your hypocrisy. I had to go to the emptiness of absolute worthlessness to be who I am today. I’m not saying that you should necessarily go there because I did (that’s fucking insane), but I write for you to hear me out.

I read all of your posts with dignity, and dignity doesn’t mean that I agree with you three, it simply means that I take the time to consider them in my mind and attempt to respond to them intelligently.

Binary is a real thing. Why pay for a cup of coffee for 3 dollars when they just hand you the cup and put nothing in it?

K: I ignore you because I think you are insane.... no other reason....

Kropotkin

[Ecmandu]

Peter,

You are what you hate. Once I start revealing that, you fortify your defenses.

Do you really think that you’re not insane?

Calling me insane is everything you claim to be against, but here you are, sure as shit, doing it.

My sanity compared to you is like your sanity compared to trump.

[MagsJ]

We'll need a context of course.

[Zero_Sum]

["Joker hasn't (doesn't) change!" "He doesn't believe in anything!"]

I actually have the last five years to a great extent concerning my own philosophical thinking or perception of existence.

Specific instances, the longest time I was an anarchist but now I'm a totalitarian fascist of the ethnic or racial nationalist variety. [Pro working class and common people also.] In many ways I admire governmental monarchy or autocracy as well.

I was a nihilist for the longest time too, now I would describe myself as an objectivist but of a lesser arrogant variety in that I posit there are some things beyond human understanding that we'll never truly really know. I'm fine with that and I don't see the big deal regarding it.

I was an atheist for the longest time, now I would describe myself as a polytheistic pagan Gnostic with an affinity for mysticism, the esoteric, and the general occult. I lean kinda towards pantheism.

I'm trying to be moral or ethical these days, but I must admit my morality and ethics are probably different than most in an unconventional sense. I definitely don't view tolerance, forgiveness, or pacifism as virtues.


Things that haven't changed:

I'm still a naturalist in that for me nature dominates humanity not the other way around, I'm pro all things natural. I'm very much an environmentalist and admirer of biological nature in all its forms.

I'm still a pessimist or cynic regarding human nature.

I absolutely despise cultural Marxism in all its forms.

I absolutely detest feminism and my overall opinion of a majority of females or women is currently at an all time low.

I still hold a reverence for chaos and I believe chaos is the true universal order of all existence.

I absolutely despise modernity and modern society.

I still view a majority of human beings as being corrupt assholes where a great majority of them simply need to die in one shape or form. Sometimes the only cure to problems is a bunch of dead people.

I still absolutely despise Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, to me they're a bunch of shithole desert religions that have plagued humanity for far too long. I like to believe a world without all three is possible.

I would describe myself as a traditional conservative but this neo conservatism that exists today I find myself criticizing a lot.

I still despise both communism and crony capitalism, I'm a middle of the road kind of guy economically where I believe in a mixed economy.

My overall pessimism or cynicism of the future of humanity has not changed.

I'm still a big critic of technological progressivism and transhumanist ideology.

I would still describe myself as a lackadaisical hedonist and somewhat of a slacker. It's my own nature.

I still believe violent revolution or insurrection is the only way forward for change. I absolutely despise democracy and neo-liberalism. I view political voting to be useless where masturbation has more value.

I still despise the international oligarchy or plutocracy that now dominates our entire planet.

I still despise the United States government and I view both political parties in our nation to be one giant joke.

And yes, I still believe the world is on the verge of economic collapse [especially the United States] along with being on the verge of yet another world war. Modern civil wars being a new favorite subject of mine.

And yes, I still believe there is an international group of conspirators that want to install a one world government along with a one world currency.


Just a small illustration here of my current views for the two in this thread that say I don't have any.

"Hurr Durr, he's just a young punk kid that doesn't believe in anything."

[Zero_Sum]

Thank you Karpel Tunnel for defending me in my absence, you'll notice I don't mock or criticize him all that much even though there is a lot of things he believes in that I don't necessarily agree with. That's because he actually acts and condones himself rationally in a respectful manner or tone. I respect those that deserve it and equally disrespect those that deserve it as well.

I like genuine authentic people and despise fakes, phonies, hypocrites, arrogants, and imbeciles. It's my underlying general rule with people for the most part.

[Zero_Sum]

"He just doesn't offer any solutions or real implemented changes for the world."

At a certain point the problems, crisis, damage, conflict, and over all ill health of the world becomes so severe that it becomes impossible to reform, neutralize, fix, turn back, or rationalize. At that point all you can hope for is the whole stinking, rotten, corrupt, and decadent infested edifice to come crashing down only to be swallowed up by the earth itself. That's basically my own mindset these days.

[Karpel Tunnel]

"He just doesn't offer any solutions or real implemented changes for the world."

At a certain point the problems, crisis, damage, conflict, and over all ill health of the world becomes so severe that it becomes impossible to reform, neutralize, fix, turn back, or rationalize. At that point all you can hope for is the whole stinking, rotten, corrupt, and decadent infested edifice to come crashing down only to be swallowed up by the earth itself. That's basically my own mindset these days.

Further it's not like you haven't described, to some degree, how you want things to be after the dust settles. I don't really want your version of society, if I have understood it correctly, but you have presented it. PK reads a little, draws conclusions without knowing much....you know kid stuff, as he would say.

[Zero_Sum]

"He just doesn't offer any solutions or real implemented changes for the world."

At a certain point the problems, crisis, damage, conflict, and over all ill health of the world becomes so severe that it becomes impossible to reform, neutralize, fix, turn back, or rationalize. At that point all you can hope for is the whole stinking, rotten, corrupt, and decadent infested edifice to come crashing down only to be swallowed up by the earth itself. That's basically my own mindset these days.

Further it's not like you haven't described, to some degree, how you want things to be after the dust settles. I don't really want your version of society, if I have understood it correctly, but you have presented it. PK reads a little, draws conclusions without knowing much....you know kid stuff, as he would say.

There's a few variables to a global economic and societal collapse scenario:

1. Your typical lawlessness Mad Max scenario where in the absence of centralized governments violent gangs and warlords fill in the void, eventually the strongest most ruthless gang or warlord kills the rest off becoming the new defacto central government in every territory.

2. Survivors of a collapsed world order go into instant civil war mode everywhere to which previous occurring political and ideological movements battle it out violently in having the political dominance to rebuild it.

3. Maybe people will work together in a large majority to rebuild what was lost without fighting each other extensively in a rational manner. [Although for me that scenario is highly unlikely with the usual persisting divisions.]

4. The global elite find a way to kill off a large segment of the population where by doing so they inherit the world entirely to themselves in rebuilding it. [Covid19 comes to mind.]


All I know is that I hate the current world and social order where I want to see it entirely destroyed. This current world makes me miserable.

[iambiguous]

["Joker hasn't (doesn't) change!" "He doesn't believe in anything!"]

Not really sure where this is coming from. It is certainly not something that I would ever say. So, I'll assume you are noting it as that which others have claimed about you.

I actually have the last five years to a great extent concerning my own philosophical thinking or perception of existence.

Specific instances, the longest time I was an anarchist but now I'm a totalitarian fascist of the ethnic or racial nationalist variety. [Pro working class and common people also.] In many ways I admire governmental monarchy or autocracy as well.

I was a nihilist for the longest time too, now I would describe myself as an objectivist but of a lesser arrogant variety in that I posit there are some things beyond human understanding that we'll never truly really know. I'm fine with that and I don't see the big deal regarding it.

I was an atheist for the longest time, now I would describe myself as a polytheistic pagan Gnostic with an affinity for mysticism, the esoteric, and the general occult. I lean kinda towards pantheism.

I'm trying to be moral or ethical these days, but I must admit my morality and ethics are probably different than most in an unconventional sense. I definitely don't view tolerance, forgiveness, or pacifism as virtues.

Okay, no "Zero_Brains" here. I'll assume that you are attempting to encompass your Self in a manner in which most would expect when going into a philosophy forum: seriously, introspectively.

Thus:

Think through what you are saying...

Like me, you have been through a number of identity changes.

Now, when this happens there are two ways to approach it:

1] there is a "real me" and there is a set of moral and political values that encompass objectively "the right thing to do". You thought it was one thing, then another, then another.

2] there is no "real me" and there is no set of moral and political values that encompass objectively "the right thing to do". Instead "I" here is embodied subjectively/existentially in dasein, in moral and political prejudices...in the arguments I make for it/this in my signature threads; and specifically in this thread: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529 .

Or, sure, any possible alternative assessment.

Also, once you change your moral and political frame of mind, you are acknowledging that you were once wrong about the is/ought world around you. And, once you acknowledge this, you are acknowledging that, sure, you might be wrong again. You are acknowledging that, yeah, given new experiences, new relationships and access to new information, knowledge and ideas, you might be prompted to change your mind again. And again.

Right?

Now, this is how "I" think about these things.

So, what I suggest is that we focus in on a particular set of circumstances in which we can examine our respective moral and political philosophies. Given all of the points we raise above.

And, most important of all, I'm less interested in what you or I believed/believe regarding all of the things you and I were/are, and more interested in how exactly you and I would go about demonstrating to others that all rational men and women are obligated to think and feel the same.

You say that "here and now" you are a "polytheistic pagan Gnostic with an affinity for mysticism, the esoteric, and the general occult. I lean kinda towards pantheism."

Okay, let's zero in on a particular context, a particular set of "conflicting goods" in which as this you now choose one set of behaviors that you would not have chosen as one of the many things you once were previously.

As this relates to my own interest in philosophy: morality here and now, immortality there and then.

And as it relates to your interests.

You can start a new thread on the board you feel it is most appropriate regarding. Or keep it all here.

But: Let's start here before moving on to all of the things that have not changed for you.

[iambiguous]

"He just doesn't offer any solutions or real implemented changes for the world."

At a certain point the problems, crisis, damage, conflict, and over all ill health of the world becomes so severe that it becomes impossible to reform, neutralize, fix, turn back, or rationalize. At that point all you can hope for is the whole stinking, rotten, corrupt, and decadent infested edifice to come crashing down only to be swallowed up by the earth itself. That's basically my own mindset these days.

Further it's not like you haven't described, to some degree, how you want things to be after the dust settles. I don't really want your version of society, if I have understood it correctly, but you have presented it. PK reads a little, draws conclusions without knowing much....you know kid stuff, as he would say.

Okay, here's the thing. Or, rather, here's my own subjective take on the thing.

Karpel Tunnel has foed me. For whatever personal reasons of his own, he has decided that I am just a troll here hell bent on derailing countless threads in order to spew philosophical garbage. Relentlessly, over and over again with the same "copy and paste" tripe.

I have in fact created a thread in which to explore this with him: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=196034

But, as I described him to PK, the "chickenshit" hides behind the foe button in order to sustain that crucial distance between his own "visceral, intuitive, deep-down-inside-me" Self and my own "fractured and fragmented" "I".

Just as [being a "stalker"] all the objectivists like phoneutria do.

Anyway, back to the "thing".

I suspect that in many important ways he does not embrace your own moral and political values. As he notes. But you seem to have contempt for me and thus on this thread that's all it takes for him to defend you. In other words, in my view, it's considerably less about you and considerably more about me.

Unless of course I'm wrong.

[Zero_Sum]

["Joker hasn't (doesn't) change!" "He doesn't believe in anything!"]

Not really sure where this is coming from. It is certainly not something that I would ever say. So, I'll assume you are noting it as that which others have claimed about you.

I actually have the last five years to a great extent concerning my own philosophical thinking or perception of existence.

Specific instances, the longest time I was an anarchist but now I'm a totalitarian fascist of the ethnic or racial nationalist variety. [Pro working class and common people also.] In many ways I admire governmental monarchy or autocracy as well.

I was a nihilist for the longest time too, now I would describe myself as an objectivist but of a lesser arrogant variety in that I posit there are some things beyond human understanding that we'll never truly really know. I'm fine with that and I don't see the big deal regarding it.

I was an atheist for the longest time, now I would describe myself as a polytheistic pagan Gnostic with an affinity for mysticism, the esoteric, and the general occult. I lean kinda towards pantheism.

I'm trying to be moral or ethical these days, but I must admit my morality and ethics are probably different than most in an unconventional sense. I definitely don't view tolerance, forgiveness, or pacifism as virtues.

Okay, no "Zero_Brains" here. I'll assume that you are attempting to encompass your Self in a manner in which most would expect when going into a philosophy forum: seriously, introspectively.

Thus:

Think through what you are saying...

Like me, you have been through a number of identity changes.

Now, when this happens there are two ways to approach it:

1] there is a "real me" and there is a set of moral and political values that encompass objectively "the right thing to do". You thought it was one thing, then another, then another.

2] there is no "real me" and there is no set of moral and political values that encompass objectively "the right thing to do". Instead "I" here is embodied subjectively/existentially in dasein, in moral and political prejudices...in the arguments I make for it/this in my signature threads; and specifically in this thread: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529 .

Or, sure, any possible alternative assessment.

Also, once you change your moral and political frame of mind, you are acknowledging that you were once wrong about the is/ought world around you. And, once you acknowledge this, you are acknowledging that, sure, you might be wrong again. You are acknowledging that, yeah, given new experiences, new relationships and access to new information, knowledge and ideas, you might be prompted to change your mind again. And again.

Right?

Now, this is how "I" think about these things.

So, what I suggest is that we focus in on a particular set of circumstances in which we can examine our respective moral and political philosophies. Given all of the points we raise above.

And, most important of all, I'm less interested in what you or I believed/believe regarding all of the things you and I were/are, and more interested in how exactly you and I would go about demonstrating to others that all rational men and women are obligated to think and feel the same.

You say that "here and now" you are a "polytheistic pagan Gnostic with an affinity for mysticism, the esoteric, and the general occult. I lean kinda towards pantheism."

Okay, let's zero in on a particular context, a particular set of "conflicting goods" in which as this you now choose one set of behaviors that you would not have chosen as one of the many things you once were previously.

As this relates to my own interest in philosophy: morality here and now, immortality there and then.

And as it relates to your interests.

You can start a new thread on the board you feel it is most appropriate regarding. Or keep it all here.

But: Let's start here before moving on to all of the things that have not changed for you.

Like anything else in this world Biggie we are the sum of our own life experiences and it is through those life experiences that we develop our set of beliefs, values, or perceptions. Was I wrong on many issues that caused me to change my beliefs? Yes, but it was I that came to the conclusion that I was wrong and nobody else. Self introspection works wonders.

Nobody is 100% right on everything all the time, but you then take that as meaning there is no right or wrong altogether.

[And yet posit ironically that the neo-liberal position on everything is right all the time. ]

You're too hooked on what is right or wrong, I no longer have this problem anymore because by doing so you really miss out on the substances of life everywhere else and in between. It's like stumbling in the dark with a small flashlight, a complete waste of time and unproductive if you were to ask me.

[iambiguous]

Like anything else in this world Biggie we are the sum of our own life experiences and it is through those life experiences that we develop our set of beliefs, values, or perceptions. Was I wrong on many issues that caused me to change my beliefs? Yes, but it was I that came to the conclusion that I was wrong and nobody else. Self introspection works wonders.

Nobody is 100% right on everything all the time, but you then take that as meaning there is no right or wrong altogether.

[And yet posit ironically that the neo-liberal position on everything is right all the time. ]

That's it? All the points I raised above and all the possible avenues in which to explore them...and this is all you're got to say?

After all, anyone can say that about their life.

Anyone can claim to "introspectively" have become all of those things you and I once were and believe we are now.

But there's still this part:

1] there is a "real me" and there is a set of moral and political values that encompass objectively "the right thing to do". You thought it was one thing, then another, then another.

2] there is no "real me" and there is no set of moral and political values that encompass objectively "the right thing to do". Instead "I" here is embodied subjectively/existentially in dasein, in moral and political prejudices...in the arguments I make for it/this in my signature threads; and specifically in this thread: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529 .

And this part:

Also, once you change your moral and political frame of mind, you are acknowledging that you were once wrong about the is/ought world around you. And, once you acknowledge this, you are acknowledging that, sure, you might be wrong again. You are acknowledging that, yeah, given new experiences, new relationships and access to new information, knowledge and ideas, you might be prompted to change your mind again. And again.

And this part:

So, what I suggest is that we focus in on a particular set of circumstances in which we can examine our respective moral and political philosophies. Given all of the points we raise above.

And, most important of all, I'm less interested in what you or I believed/believe regarding all of the things you and I were/are, and more interested in how exactly you and I would go about demonstrating to others that all rational men and women are obligated to think and feel the same.

And especially this part:

You say that "here and now" you are a "polytheistic pagan Gnostic with an affinity for mysticism, the esoteric, and the general occult. I lean kinda towards pantheism."

Okay, let's zero in on a particular context, a particular set of "conflicting goods" in which as this you now choose one set of behaviors that you would not have chosen as one of the many things you once were previously.

As this relates to my own interest in philosophy: morality here and now, immortality there and then.

And as it relates to your interests.

Or, sure, we can both just go back into Stooge mode.

[Zero_Sum]

No, you over complicate simple basic human manners or dispositions that need not be very complicated at all. That's why so called nihilists are by and large very much ignored by a large majority of the population because people are too busy living to actually even care. You're a knit picker always making a mountain out of a mole hill and people watching you ask why you even bother to begin with. But, it is your time to waste after all and knowing you you'll continue to do so anyways.

[Urwrongx1000]

Whatever he is, he didn't last long when I spelled out Objectivism to him in plain terms that even he could try to engage in philosophically.

Therefore he is a GROOTinist.

[Zero_Sum]

Whatever he is, he didn't last long when I spelled out Objectivism to him in plain terms that even he could try to engage in philosophically.

Therefore he is a GROOTinist.

He's a neo-liberal pretend nihilist, we really need to start using this label for now on addressing him.

Also, for Peter we'll start calling him a Marxist in disguise of an American democrat. I think these are important labels for the forum board now. Feel free to share them with everybody.

[Peter Kropotkin]

Urwrongx1000: Whatever he is, he didn't last long when I spelled out Objectivism to him in plain terms that even he could try to engage in philosophically.

Therefore he is a GROOTinist.[/quote]

Z: He's a neo-liberal pretend nihilist, we really need to start using this label for now on addressing him.
Also, for Peter we'll start calling him a Marxist in disguise of an American democrat. I think these are important labels for the forum board now. Feel free to share them with everybody.

K: two things, first, calling me a marxist would be wrong, I'm not, but on the bright
side, you would at least be consistent...ly wrong

but the more interesting thing is this need for labels.. the need
for labels is the need to absolve one of thinking... for example,
by calling someone a Marxist, it means you don't have to think about
their position, just call them a Marxist and you have ended thinking
about who they are and what idea's they have... it is an easy tactic
to dismiss someone, oh, he is a Marxist, or democrat or Liberal...

your actual engagement is with the label instead of that person's
actual thought..by calling me a Marxist, and I'm not, but then
you can A. dismiss any thought as to my real position and it is
B. a very easy way to avoid thinking about someone..
I don't have to think about you because you have been labeled,
a Marxist or liberal or whatever... we can end any real discussion about
idea's or positions or facts, because you have been labeled...

I don't need to think about you... you have been labeled..

the need to label someone says far more about you then it does about me
and it doesn't say anything good about you....

Kropotkin

[Ecmandu]

Yeah, Peter, you’re just wrong.

This new non-binary craze about sexually being labeless is absurd.

There only 3 sexes (male, female, hermaphrodite)

From those 3 sexes, there are only 12 genders.

One possible gender is falling in love with and having sex with a fucking paper bag!!! Trust me, they’ve ALL been found!!

This shit is all binary whether you like it or not.

You may not be a Marxist. Make that argument. Under no circumstances though, don’t try to tell humans that you have no label.

You may have invented something new called ‘peterism’. Make your argument.

[iambiguous]

No, you over complicate simple basic human manners or dispositions that need not be very complicated at all. That's why so called nihilists are by and large very much ignored by a large majority of the population because people are too busy living to actually even care. You're a knit picker always making a mountain out of a mole hill and people watching you ask why you even bother to begin with. But, it is your time to waste after all and knowing you you'll continue to do so anyways.

Note to others:

Did you really expect anything different?

I give him a chance to examine and to explore his own sense of self in far greater depth than this pinhead Zero_Brains caricature he plays here will ever go. And, apparently, will ever allow himself to go. And he backs down.

Why? Well, he, as with so many other of the fulminating fanatics here, has too much invested in being this "mile wide and an inch deep" cartoon character...mostly out on the extreme right end of the political spectrum.

Just from the perspective of intelligent discussion and debate, they make a mockery of why this philosophy community was created in the first place.

But, hey, that's just their "thing", right?

[iambiguous]

Whatever he is, he didn't last long when I spelled out Objectivism to him in plain terms that even he could try to engage in philosophically.

Therefore he is a GROOTinist.

I invite members to go here: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 5&t=196492

You tell me how long I lasted against him in regard to objectivism.

Again, with minds this shallow, it's all just entertainment for me.

Again, if I do so so myself.

[Pedro I Rengel]

edir - Wrong thread. - edit

Kropotkin when is Costco gonna offer a new line of boots?