Joker Here.

This is the place to shave off that long white beard and stop being philosophical; a forum for members to just talk like normal human beings.

Re: Joker Here.

Postby Zero_Sum » Fri Nov 15, 2019 5:57 am

iambiguous wrote:
Zero_Sum wrote: For the record Iambig, I believe the current model of society politically, socially, economically, sexually, and racially is unsustainable where it is on the verge of collapse. I of course want it to collapse because I understand nobody in positions of power currently have any political will or real solutions of reforming it better in improvement.


Again, the gist of my argument here revolves less around what you think you believe and more around how I think you have come to believe it given the assumptions I make here:

If I am always of the opinion that 1] my own values are rooted in dasein and 2] that there are no objective values "I" can reach, then every time I make one particular moral/political leap, I am admitting that I might have gone in the other direction...or that I might just as well have gone in the other direction. Then "I" begins to fracture and fragment to the point there is nothing able to actually keep it all together. At least not with respect to choosing sides morally and politically.


And from this frame of mind the conclusions I arrived at here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 1&t=194382

So...

Mostly I am interested in the extent to which the political prejudices of others are derived either from "thought out" philosophical/political/sociological/psychological/economic etc., assessments of the human condition, or are more the embodiment of the components of my own moral/political narrative: dasein/identity, conflicting goods/value judgments, political economy/power of enforcement.

Then taking intellectual contraptions of this sort out into the world of actual conflicting behaviors in actual sets of circumstances.

Though, sure, if this does not interest someone, it is their prerogative to eschew exchanges with me here and move on to others.

Zero_Sum wrote: That doesn't mean however that I resort to moral nihilism because of all that.


Okay, but I can't avoid it because "here and now" I have thought myself into believing that it is a reasonable point of view given the manner in which I have come to assess my experiences over the years. And all I can do is to explore the manner in which others have come to choose the behaviors that seem most rational to them. How are they not "fractured and fragmented" in a No God world? How do they not see "I" in the is/ought world as a profoundly problematic existential contraption ever subject to reconfiguration in a world awash in contingency, chance and change?

Zero_Sum wrote: I believe that once the dust and fire settles the collapse of our current societies we have the opportunity to build better ones from the ground up out of the old ruins. From the ashes out with the old and in with the new.


From my frame of mind, this "new" political reality is no less entangled in the assumptions I make about "I" and "we" and "them" out in a particular world, viewed from a particular point of view derived from dasein.

Zero_Sum wrote: I also believe we can create better moral and ethical social systems as well.


Cite an example of this then. What would constitute a better moral and ethical system in regard to the conflicting goods embedded in abortion or race or homosexuality or the role of government or immigration? How would your own values here not just be political prejudices derived existentially from the particular life that you lived?

In fact, I suspect that people react negatively to my arguments here precisely because it disturbs them to imagine their own particular "I" as an existential contraption. Instead, one way or another, and all along the moral and political spectrum, they need the psychological assurance that there is in fact a "real me" able to be in sync with "the right thing to do".

Zero_Sum wrote: Still nonetheless, I believe there will be a violent devastating cataclysmic event that will transpire with this current society or civilization that will naturally have to sort itself out in a purely chaotic fashion before any of that is remotely possible in implementing. Our current societies will die viciously, violently, chaotically, brutally, and within a horrendous destructive manner because those that currently control the reins of power will not give it up willing.


Maybe. But wait until you have the responsibility of, say, raising children in this world. When their lives too are at stake. Will you indoctrinate them to believe that only your own "new world" values count? Will they become chips off the old block...or else?

One of us until death do you part?


You're caught up on the internalizations of the self so much that you almost seem to postulate there is no course of action for anybody to take because everything will only result in error and therefore there are no actions that can be justifiable to do much of anything which is of course the very reason I keep reasserting my characterization of your beliefs as one of philosophical inaction. Rather than take a leap of faith irrationally or rationally dealing with endless possibilities of random chance you would rather just deliberate doing nothing at all. Unlike you I don't suffer from these mental disabilities you possess.
User avatar
Zero_Sum
Special Commisar Joker
 
Posts: 4099
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: The People's Republic of the U.S.S.A - My pronouns are 'Fuck You'-

Re: Joker Here.

Postby iambiguous » Fri Nov 15, 2019 8:25 pm

Zero_Sum wrote:You're caught up on the internalizations of the self so much that you almost seem to postulate there is no course of action for anybody to take because everything will only result in error and therefore there are no actions that can be justifiable to do much of anything which is of course the very reason I keep reasserting my characterization of your beliefs as one of philosophical inaction. Rather than take a leap of faith irrationally or rationally dealing with endless possibilities of random chance you would rather just deliberate doing nothing at all. Unlike you I don't suffer from these mental disabilities you possess.


Intellectual contraptions don't get much more preposterous than this.

And of course it completely avoids responding to the points I raise above. Let alone in responding to them by reconfiguring this exchange into a discussion of modern fascism as it relates to a particular context involving conflicting value judgments.

Again, you are missing a golden opportunity to expose exactly what you mean when you accuse me of "internalizing the self". How exactly does one go about doing that when discussing such things race and gender and homosexuality.

And my point does not revolve around doing nothing at all. If one interacts with others in any human community, rules of behavior are required. Folks like you merely insist these rules should revolve entirely around their own understanding of the human condition. The Satyr Syndrome let's call it. The frame of mind encompassed in my speculations regarding the "psychology of objectivism" in my signature.

Sure, go back to insisting your own political prejudices are necessarily right and that if others don't share them then theirs are necessarily wrong. Back to what I construe to be the "I am not an objectivist!" objectivist.

Unless, of course, you are just playing a character here. Provoking for its own sake?
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: 39778
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Joker Here.

Postby Zero_Sum » Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:51 pm

iambiguous wrote:
Zero_Sum wrote:You're caught up on the internalizations of the self so much that you almost seem to postulate there is no course of action for anybody to take because everything will only result in error and therefore there are no actions that can be justifiable to do much of anything which is of course the very reason I keep reasserting my characterization of your beliefs as one of philosophical inaction. Rather than take a leap of faith irrationally or rationally dealing with endless possibilities of random chance you would rather just deliberate doing nothing at all. Unlike you I don't suffer from these mental disabilities you possess.


Intellectual contraptions don't get much more preposterous than this.

And of course it completely avoids responding to the points I raise above. Let alone in responding to them by reconfiguring this exchange into a discussion of modern fascism as it relates to a particular context involving conflicting value judgments.

Again, you are missing a golden opportunity to expose exactly what you mean when you accuse me of "internalizing the self". How exactly does one go about doing that when discussing such things race and gender and homosexuality.

And my point does not revolve around doing nothing at all. If one interacts with others in any human community, rules of behavior are required. Folks like you merely insist these rules should revolve entirely around their own understanding of the human condition. The Satyr Syndrome let's call it. The frame of mind encompassed in my speculations regarding the "psychology of objectivism" in my signature.

Sure, go back to insisting your own political prejudices are necessarily right and that if others don't share them then theirs are necessarily wrong. Back to what I construe to be the "I am not an objectivist!" objectivist.

Unless, of course, you are just playing a character here. Provoking for its own sake?


Iambiguous- "Water has spilled out of a cup and hit me on my hand. I wonder how this relates to dasein, is the water or cup even real? Am I even real with my sense of self? Is dasein even real? When I take a shit on a toilet, is that real? Nothing is real!"


Wow man, deep thoughts there guy. 8)
User avatar
Zero_Sum
Special Commisar Joker
 
Posts: 4099
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: The People's Republic of the U.S.S.A - My pronouns are 'Fuck You'-

Re: Joker Here.

Postby iambiguous » Mon Nov 18, 2019 10:57 pm

Zero_Sum wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
Zero_Sum wrote:You're caught up on the internalizations of the self so much that you almost seem to postulate there is no course of action for anybody to take because everything will only result in error and therefore there are no actions that can be justifiable to do much of anything which is of course the very reason I keep reasserting my characterization of your beliefs as one of philosophical inaction. Rather than take a leap of faith irrationally or rationally dealing with endless possibilities of random chance you would rather just deliberate doing nothing at all. Unlike you I don't suffer from these mental disabilities you possess.


Intellectual contraptions don't get much more preposterous than this.

And of course it completely avoids responding to the points I raise above. Let alone in responding to them by reconfiguring this exchange into a discussion of modern fascism as it relates to a particular context involving conflicting value judgments.

Again, you are missing a golden opportunity to expose exactly what you mean when you accuse me of "internalizing the self". How exactly does one go about doing that when discussing such things race and gender and homosexuality.

And my point does not revolve around doing nothing at all. If one interacts with others in any human community, rules of behavior are required. Folks like you merely insist these rules should revolve entirely around their own understanding of the human condition. The Satyr Syndrome let's call it. The frame of mind encompassed in my speculations regarding the "psychology of objectivism" in my signature.

Sure, go back to insisting your own political prejudices are necessarily right and that if others don't share them then theirs are necessarily wrong. Back to what I construe to be the "I am not an objectivist!" objectivist.

Unless, of course, you are just playing a character here. Provoking for its own sake?


Iambiguous- "Water has spilled out of a cup and hit me on my hand. I wonder how this relates to dasein, is the water or cup even real? Am I even real with my sense of self? Is dasein even real? When I take a shit on a toilet, is that real? Nothing is real!"


Wow man, deep thoughts there guy. 8)


Note to others:

How truly pathetic is this? What do you think, have I got him on the ropes? :lol:

Besides, few things are more insufferable than an "I am not an objectivist!" objectivist trying to sound clever. :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: 39778
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Joker Here.

Postby Dan~ » Thu Jul 23, 2020 8:37 am

Hi Zero_Sum / Joker.

National socialism is about a strong government.
The national interests are put above the individual.
Capitalists would probably hate a NS, because the NS is more powerful than money.
Money is this massive fantasy of nonsense.
The NS alternative to global money is laws.
Laws can take the place of money.
Democratic capitalists try to use laws to control the economy.
Take that one step farther and the dollar looses some of its meaning.

This may not be quite true,
but as far as i know,
it is close to the truth.

Also nice to see you again.
I like http://www.accuradio.com , internet radio.
https://dannerz.itch.io/ -- a new and minimal webside now hosting my free game projects.
Image
Truth is based in sensing, in vision. And we can only see when we are alive.
User avatar
Dan~
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10485
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 8:14 am
Location: Canada Alberta

Re: Joker Here.

Postby Zero_Sum » Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:00 pm

iambiguous wrote:Note to others:

How truly pathetic is this? What do you think, have I got him on the ropes? :lol:

Besides, few things are more insufferable than an "I am not an objectivist!" objectivist trying to sound clever. :wink:


Actually I do describe myself as an objectivist these days but not in an annoying manner as some in that I understand with it there are several complex nuances or variables attached to it. It's not enough to just say reality is objective, there are several other factors that go along with it.

Got me on the ropes? That will never happen Biggie, but I give you props for your over enthusiasm nonetheless.
User avatar
Zero_Sum
Special Commisar Joker
 
Posts: 4099
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: The People's Republic of the U.S.S.A - My pronouns are 'Fuck You'-

Re: Joker Here.

Postby Zero_Sum » Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:06 pm

Dan~ wrote:Hi Zero_Sum / Joker.

National socialism is about a strong government.
The national interests are put above the individual.
Capitalists would probably hate a NS, because the NS is more powerful than money.
Money is this massive fantasy of nonsense.
The NS alternative to global money is laws.
Laws can take the place of money.
Democratic capitalists try to use laws to control the economy.
Take that one step farther and the dollar looses some of its meaning.

This may not be quite true,
but as far as i know,
it is close to the truth.

Also nice to see you again.


For me national socialism is the best kind of government that exists, it is for me ideal. Unfortunately these days a majority of the population prefers global communism which is depressing, yet here we are.
User avatar
Zero_Sum
Special Commisar Joker
 
Posts: 4099
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: The People's Republic of the U.S.S.A - My pronouns are 'Fuck You'-

Re: Joker Here.

Postby Dan~ » Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:34 pm

Zero_Sum wrote:For me national socialism is the best kind of government that exists, it is for me ideal. Unfortunately these days a majority of the population prefers global communism which is depressing, yet here we are.


What makes national socialism great?
Can you describe the main points that you favor?
I like http://www.accuradio.com , internet radio.
https://dannerz.itch.io/ -- a new and minimal webside now hosting my free game projects.
Image
Truth is based in sensing, in vision. And we can only see when we are alive.
User avatar
Dan~
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10485
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 8:14 am
Location: Canada Alberta

Re: Joker Here.

Postby iambiguous » Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:47 pm

Zero_Sum wrote:
Actually I do describe myself as an objectivist these days but not in an annoying manner as some in that I understand with it there are several complex nuances or variables attached to it. It's not enough to just say reality is objective, there are several other factors that go along with it.


I'm really far less interested in what you believe or claim to know about yourself as an objectivist.

What I would prefer instead is that you describe the behaviors you'd choose in regard to your interactions with others in which moral and political value judgments come into conflict. How would you go about demonstrating that your own values and behaviors are those that all rational and virtuous men and women are obligated to emulate?

In other words, back to the bottom line [mine]: How are you able to avoid feeling "fractured and fragmented" in the manner in which my own moral philosophy is rooted in this:

If I am always of the opinion that 1] my own values are rooted in dasein and 2] that there are no objective values "I" can reach, then every time I make one particular moral/political leap, I am admitting that I might have gone in the other direction...or that I might just as well have gone in the other direction. Then "I" begins to fracture and fragment to the point there is nothing able to actually keep it all together. At least not with respect to choosing sides morally and politically.


Rooted in turn in the arguments I make in my signature threads.

Now: How deep are you willing to go in exploring this with me?

Zero_Sum wrote:Got me on the ropes? That will never happen Biggie, but I give you props for your over enthusiasm nonetheless.


See, this is the big difference between us. I would not say "never happen" in regard to your own point of view. Why? Because, given human autonomy, how on earth could I possibly know what new experiences, new relationships and access to new information, knowledge and ideas might unfold in the future to change my mind?

You can say "never happen" because you are just one more fierce objectivist in regard to "I" in the is/ought world.

Well, sure, you did come to different conclusions about the world around us before but...but this time -- this time -- you really, really, really are in sync with the Real Me in sync with The Right Thing to Believe, to Know, to Describe.

Right?

I'm trying to save you from yourSelf. Only, admittedly, the cure -- "I" -- night be described as worse than the disease.
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: 39778
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Joker Here.

Postby WendyDarling » Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:01 pm

Biggie, your philosophical mark is objectively...most annoying. Proud?

Hey Joker, glad you’re back!
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #2/2

"facts change all the time and not only that, they don't mean anything...."-Peter Kropotkin :evilfun:
"I can hope they have some degree of self-awareness but the facts suggest that
they don't..... "- Peter Kropotkin
. :evilfun:
"you don't know the value of facts and you don't know the value of the ‘TRUTH”... " -Peter Kropotkin :lol:
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 8311
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Joker Here.

Postby iambiguous » Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:04 pm

WendyDarling wrote:Biggie, your philosophical mark is objectively...most annoying. Proud?

Hey Joker, glad you’re back!


I thought you were Joker. Or at least lovebirds.

After all, for all practical purposes, you might as well be. :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: 39778
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Joker Here.

Postby Zero_Sum » Sun Nov 22, 2020 10:03 am

iambiguous wrote:
WendyDarling wrote:Biggie, your philosophical mark is objectively...most annoying. Proud?

Hey Joker, glad you’re back!


I thought you were Joker. Or at least lovebirds.

After all, for all practical purposes, you might as well be. :lol:


For the last time, me and Wendy are not the same person, she is a republican along with being a Trump supporter. I'm not a Trump supporter and politically definitely not a republican either. We were dating for awhile but now we're just good friends where we parted ways mutually. This is getting old Biggie.
User avatar
Zero_Sum
Special Commisar Joker
 
Posts: 4099
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: The People's Republic of the U.S.S.A - My pronouns are 'Fuck You'-

Re: Joker Here.

Postby Zero_Sum » Sun Nov 22, 2020 10:06 am

WendyDarling wrote:Biggie, your philosophical mark is objectively...most annoying. Proud?

Hey Joker, glad you’re back!


We'll see how long I stay this time around, I don't know really.
User avatar
Zero_Sum
Special Commisar Joker
 
Posts: 4099
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: The People's Republic of the U.S.S.A - My pronouns are 'Fuck You'-

Re: Joker Here.

Postby Zero_Sum » Sun Nov 22, 2020 10:11 am

iambiguous wrote:
Zero_Sum wrote:
Actually I do describe myself as an objectivist these days but not in an annoying manner as some in that I understand with it there are several complex nuances or variables attached to it. It's not enough to just say reality is objective, there are several other factors that go along with it.


I'm really far less interested in what you believe or claim to know about yourself as an objectivist.

What I would prefer instead is that you describe the behaviors you'd choose in regard to your interactions with others in which moral and political value judgments come into conflict. How would you go about demonstrating that your own values and behaviors are those that all rational and virtuous men and women are obligated to emulate?

In other words, back to the bottom line [mine]: How are you able to avoid feeling "fractured and fragmented" in the manner in which my own moral philosophy is rooted in this:

If I am always of the opinion that 1] my own values are rooted in dasein and 2] that there are no objective values "I" can reach, then every time I make one particular moral/political leap, I am admitting that I might have gone in the other direction...or that I might just as well have gone in the other direction. Then "I" begins to fracture and fragment to the point there is nothing able to actually keep it all together. At least not with respect to choosing sides morally and politically.


Rooted in turn in the arguments I make in my signature threads.

Now: How deep are you willing to go in exploring this with me?

Zero_Sum wrote:Got me on the ropes? That will never happen Biggie, but I give you props for your over enthusiasm nonetheless.


See, this is the big difference between us. I would not say "never happen" in regard to your own point of view. Why? Because, given human autonomy, how on earth could I possibly know what new experiences, new relationships and access to new information, knowledge and ideas might unfold in the future to change my mind?

You can say "never happen" because you are just one more fierce objectivist in regard to "I" in the is/ought world.

Well, sure, you did come to different conclusions about the world around us before but...but this time -- this time -- you really, really, really are in sync with the Real Me in sync with The Right Thing to Believe, to Know, to Describe.

Right?

I'm trying to save you from yourSelf. Only, admittedly, the cure -- "I" -- night be described as worse than the disease.


For somebody who says they believe in nothing and that all of human experience is subjective it truly is amazing how you pass judgement on others almost within an objective framework of mind, it's almost like your entire belief system is very inconsistent.

You of course are asking for validation of other people's beliefs, values, or thought processes acting as if there is a sort of formula of pure reason by doing so which is very interesting because in a way by doing so you contradict your entire point to begin with which betrays you. Of course by now one would think you would come to understand that human nature is imperfect and therefore any inclinations of human reason, logic, or rationale would also be imperfect which is why it is all rooted in conflict to begin with.

Conflict itself is the very nature of human existence because it is imperfect.

I say it will never happen because of the self confidence in myself that I possess. :wink:

Save me from myself? It's almost like you're thinking like an objectivist there, the very thing you're supposedly constantly critiquing. Make up your mind already Biggie, you can't have both.
User avatar
Zero_Sum
Special Commisar Joker
 
Posts: 4099
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: The People's Republic of the U.S.S.A - My pronouns are 'Fuck You'-

Re: Joker Here.

Postby promethean75 » Sun Nov 22, 2020 12:17 pm

I'd just like to say that Z Sum's recent posts are uncharacteristically lucid and unusually well written. He continues to neglect proper punctuation of course, but his stream of thought and his argumentative form is a little more substantive than what we'd expect. I think the joker's on the come up.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4038
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: Joker Here.

Postby iambiguous » Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:17 pm

Zero_Sum wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
WendyDarling wrote:Biggie, your philosophical mark is objectively...most annoying. Proud?

Hey Joker, glad you’re back!


I thought you were Joker. Or at least lovebirds.

After all, for all practical purposes, you might as well be. :lol:


For the last time, me and Wendy are not the same person, she is a republican along with being a Trump supporter. I'm not a Trump supporter and politically definitely not a republican either. We were dating for awhile but now we're just good friends where we parted ways mutually. This is getting old Biggie.


On the other hand, what's getting old for some of us is you and the rest of the Kids popping up in ILP, dumping dozens of two or three line "posts" in dozens of different threads that reconfigure ILP into just another social media wasteland.

In other words, in regard to the points I raised with you above...

Here, for example...

iambiguous wrote:
Zero_Sum wrote:
Actually I do describe myself as an objectivist these days but not in an annoying manner as some in that I understand with it there are several complex nuances or variables attached to it. It's not enough to just say reality is objective, there are several other factors that go along with it.


I'm really far less interested in what you believe or claim to know about yourself as an objectivist.

What I would prefer instead is that you describe the behaviors you'd choose in regard to your interactions with others in which moral and political value judgments come into conflict. How would you go about demonstrating that your own values and behaviors are those that all rational and virtuous men and women are obligated to emulate?

In other words, back to the bottom line [mine]: How are you able to avoid feeling "fractured and fragmented" in the manner in which my own moral philosophy is rooted in this:

If I am always of the opinion that 1] my own values are rooted in dasein and 2] that there are no objective values "I" can reach, then every time I make one particular moral/political leap, I am admitting that I might have gone in the other direction...or that I might just as well have gone in the other direction. Then "I" begins to fracture and fragment to the point there is nothing able to actually keep it all together. At least not with respect to choosing sides morally and politically.


Rooted in turn in the arguments I make in my signature threads.

Now: How deep are you willing to go in exploring this with me?

Zero_Sum wrote:Got me on the ropes? That will never happen Biggie, but I give you props for your over enthusiasm nonetheless.


See, this is the big difference between us. I would not say "never happen" in regard to your own point of view. Why? Because, given human autonomy, how on earth could I possibly know what new experiences, new relationships and access to new information, knowledge and ideas might unfold in the future to change my mind?

You can say "never happen" because you are just one more fierce objectivist in regard to "I" in the is/ought world.

Well, sure, you did come to different conclusions about the world around us before but...but this time -- this time -- you really, really, really are in sync with the Real Me in sync with The Right Thing to Believe, to Know, to Describe.

Right?

I'm trying to save you from yourSelf. Only, admittedly, the cure -- "I" -- night be described as worse than the disease.


...we get nothing substantive from you at all.

The same basically for those like Pedro and Mr. Reasonable. For every post from them that one might expect to find in a philosophy venue, there are many, many, many more that that qualify as little more than "chit-chat".

Look, I see the writing on the wall. ILP is nothing at all like it was when I first became a member. No real moderation at all and even on the philosophy board we get crap like this: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... &start=300

Fortunately, when you're waiting for godot everything is able to be intertwined in and reduced down to the waiting itself.
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: 39778
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Joker Here.

Postby iambiguous » Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:24 pm

Zero_Sum wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
Zero_Sum wrote:
Actually I do describe myself as an objectivist these days but not in an annoying manner as some in that I understand with it there are several complex nuances or variables attached to it. It's not enough to just say reality is objective, there are several other factors that go along with it.


I'm really far less interested in what you believe or claim to know about yourself as an objectivist.

What I would prefer instead is that you describe the behaviors you'd choose in regard to your interactions with others in which moral and political value judgments come into conflict. How would you go about demonstrating that your own values and behaviors are those that all rational and virtuous men and women are obligated to emulate?

In other words, back to the bottom line [mine]: How are you able to avoid feeling "fractured and fragmented" in the manner in which my own moral philosophy is rooted in this:

If I am always of the opinion that 1] my own values are rooted in dasein and 2] that there are no objective values "I" can reach, then every time I make one particular moral/political leap, I am admitting that I might have gone in the other direction...or that I might just as well have gone in the other direction. Then "I" begins to fracture and fragment to the point there is nothing able to actually keep it all together. At least not with respect to choosing sides morally and politically.


Rooted in turn in the arguments I make in my signature threads.

Now: How deep are you willing to go in exploring this with me?

Zero_Sum wrote:Got me on the ropes? That will never happen Biggie, but I give you props for your over enthusiasm nonetheless.


See, this is the big difference between us. I would not say "never happen" in regard to your own point of view. Why? Because, given human autonomy, how on earth could I possibly know what new experiences, new relationships and access to new information, knowledge and ideas might unfold in the future to change my mind?

You can say "never happen" because you are just one more fierce objectivist in regard to "I" in the is/ought world.

Well, sure, you did come to different conclusions about the world around us before but...but this time -- this time -- you really, really, really are in sync with the Real Me in sync with The Right Thing to Believe, to Know, to Describe.

Right?

I'm trying to save you from yourSelf. Only, admittedly, the cure -- "I" -- night be described as worse than the disease.


For somebody who says they believe in nothing and that all of human experience is subjective it truly is amazing how you pass judgement on others almost within an objective framework of mind, it's almost like your entire belief system is very inconsistent.

You of course are asking for validation of other people's beliefs, values, or thought processes acting as if there is a sort of formula of pure reason by doing so which is very interesting because in a way by doing so you contradict your entire point to begin with which betrays you. Of course by now one would think you would come to understand that human nature is imperfect and therefore any inclinations of human reason, logic, or rationale would also be imperfect which is why it is all rooted in conflict to begin with.

Conflict itself is the very nature of human existence because it is imperfect.

I say it will never happen because of the self confidence in myself that I possess. :wink:

Save me from myself? It's almost like you're thinking like an objectivist there, the very thing you're supposedly constantly critiquing. Make up your mind already Biggie, you can't have both.


Ah, here is an example of "substance" from him!

Little or nothing in regard to the points I make above. Instead, he becomes just another Stooge making me the issue.

Really, imagine someone who has read my arguments here over the years actually coming to the conclusion that...

For somebody who says they believe in nothing and that all of human experience is subjective it truly is amazing how you pass judgement on others almost within an objective framework of mind, it's almost like your entire belief system is very inconsistent.


This is completely preposterous! This is Wendy Darling stuff!!
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: 39778
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Joker Here.

Postby Zero_Sum » Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:29 pm

For now on when referring to Biggie we say he is an objectivist pretending not to be one, it's the only thing that makes sense with him.
Last edited by Zero_Sum on Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Zero_Sum
Special Commisar Joker
 
Posts: 4099
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: The People's Republic of the U.S.S.A - My pronouns are 'Fuck You'-

Re: Joker Here.

Postby promethean75 » Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:29 pm

"dumping dozens of two or three line "posts" in dozens of different threads that reconfigure ILP into just another social media wasteland."

Hey that's what I do. You leave zero sum and the rest of the fine people at ILP out if this goddamit.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4038
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: Joker Here.

Postby Zero_Sum » Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:32 pm

promethean75 wrote:"dumping dozens of two or three line "posts" in dozens of different threads that reconfigure ILP into just another social media wasteland."

Hey that's what I do. You leave zero sum and the rest of the fine people at ILP out if this goddamit.


You're like me able to say what you want in a few short sentences or paragraphs, I don't feel the need to write an exceptionally large treatise concerning subjects especially when I know a majority of people won't read it anyways.
User avatar
Zero_Sum
Special Commisar Joker
 
Posts: 4099
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: The People's Republic of the U.S.S.A - My pronouns are 'Fuck You'-

Re: Joker Here.

Postby Zero_Sum » Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:36 pm

What does Biggie even mean by saying exploring stuff with me anyways? He's pretty vague as usual, scratch that, he's the king of vagueness. He complains about nothing being substantive, that coming from a nihilistic subjectivist is pretty hilarious.

He then complains about people's style, interpretation, expression, or foundation of thinking, this coming from a person who denies all objectivIsm showing his true colors once again. It's all so tedious and tiresome.

Also, I won't have to wait for Godot much longer, the bitch is basically almost here concerning national and world events unfolding, FYI.
Last edited by Zero_Sum on Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Zero_Sum
Special Commisar Joker
 
Posts: 4099
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: The People's Republic of the U.S.S.A - My pronouns are 'Fuck You'-

Re: Joker Here.

Postby iambiguous » Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:44 pm

promethean75 wrote:"dumping dozens of two or three line "posts" in dozens of different threads that reconfigure ILP into just another social media wasteland."

Hey that's what I do. You leave zero sum and the rest of the fine people at ILP out if this goddamit.


Yeah, you do.

But exceptions can be made if there is actual wit attached to them. 8)
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 39778
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Joker Here.

Postby iambiguous » Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:47 pm

Zero_Sum wrote:For now on when referring to Biggie we say he is an objectivist pretending not to be one, it's the only thing that makes sense with him.


And this is Pedro stuff. What's next, that I'm "dirty commie bastard"? :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: 39778
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Joker Here.

Postby Zero_Sum » Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:50 pm

iambiguous wrote:
Zero_Sum wrote:For now on when referring to Biggie we say he is an objectivist pretending not to be one, it's the only thing that makes sense with him.


And this is Pedro stuff. What's next, that I'm "dirty commie bastard"? :lol:


Interesting you say that considering as a so called nihilist you sympathize with the neoliberals and Marxists the most every time your personal politics are concerned. For a nihilist your bias certainly shows.
User avatar
Zero_Sum
Special Commisar Joker
 
Posts: 4099
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: The People's Republic of the U.S.S.A - My pronouns are 'Fuck You'-

Re: Joker Here.

Postby Zero_Sum » Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:54 pm

Dan~ wrote:
Zero_Sum wrote:For me national socialism is the best kind of government that exists, it is for me ideal. Unfortunately these days a majority of the population prefers global communism which is depressing, yet here we are.


What makes national socialism great?
Can you describe the main points that you favor?


I make it no secret that I am an ethnocentric kind of man, but more on point, I have no faith whatsoever in neo-liberal democracy and the great thing about national socialism is that it is economically socialist while retaining traditional conservative values concerning all other segments of society beyond economy.

It is one reason I can never support republicanism or libertarianism because I detest and despise economic crony capitalism.

Politically I would describe myself as a socially conservative economic socialist basically. I'm not opposed to economic socialism, I'm opposed to social, racial, sexual, and cultural Marxism.
Last edited by Zero_Sum on Sun Nov 22, 2020 9:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Zero_Sum
Special Commisar Joker
 
Posts: 4099
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:05 pm
Location: The People's Republic of the U.S.S.A - My pronouns are 'Fuck You'-

PreviousNext

Return to Non-Philosophical Chat



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users