## Aventador and iambiguous go at it

Half-formed posts, inchoate philosophies, and the germs of deep thought.

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

As noted above...

iambiguous wrote:
Maia has begun a new thread. And our friend here is now in a discussion with her: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 3&t=197132

Now, I will not myself participate in any new exchanges with her. She prefers that I don't and I fully respect that.

But where is Aventador -- Pedro? -- going here? Is he really interested in ancient matriarchal civilizations? Or, perhaps, something altogether different?

Now Fixed Jacob has joined the discussion. But, unlike Pedro, he seems to to be quite educated on the subject.

Stay tuned.
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

iambiguous
ILP Legend

Posts: 42193
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

Right. I am attempting to seriously explore the existential relationship between sense deprivation, identity and dasein on Maia's thread and this Stooge comes barreling into it dropping his inane "specks" over and again.
So now you are here fighting with him and you're not there seriously exploring.

What have you achieved?
Look, as I attempted to explain above, for reasons even "I" don't fully understand, I think that, from time to time, you are out to make it all about me. To "get" me. Otherwise I would not designate you as a Stooge now and again. Only with Aventador there has never been a time when [with me] he was not a Stooge.

He gets what he deserves. You know, if "I" do say so myself. And since I believe it is not just a coincidence that my Stooges here are objectivists, I see their reactions to me very, very differently than you do.

That's why Moreno/karpel tunnel always fascinated me. He is the first pragmatist Stooge I have ever come across.

If you had realized that when you were talking to KT, he might not have ended the discussion.
Look, I could see your point here if I was not doing my best to sustain actual philosophical discussions here at ILP:
...
Hardly any mention of Stooges at all here.
Looking at your recent posts, you send most of the time fighting or talking to yourself.

Sure, if that's fun ...
phyllo
ILP Legend

Posts: 12486
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am

Biggs just take a pic of the damn army papers already and post it so aventador can pay you the $1000 he doesn't have. promethean75 Philosopher Posts: 4798 Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm ### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it Iambiguous has continuity of consciousness. That means that he still remembers it being HIMSELF when he 5 years old! He can say, “I remember eating a carrot as a 5 year old”. I’m sure he tells stories about his past. If you don’t walk the talk... you’re full of shit. Everyone knows what a dream is, that’s why there’s a separate word called, “dreams”. Duh! Iambiguous does not live his posts. He has intellectual contraptions that are vapid. Probably autistic. We all have selves iambiguous, get used to it. You need a self in order to type a sentence to post. And you always sound the same ... that’s called an identity. Duh. Ecmandu ILP Legend Posts: 12170 Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am ### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it promethean75 wrote:Biggs just take a pic of the damn army papers already and post it so aventador can pay you the$1000 he doesn't have.

He can't, he didn't go.

I can have them in MagsJ's paypal account of her choice within the week.

I mean this dude must be made of money.

Fine man who never set foot in South East Asia wrote:He actually imagines that I'd do anything to keep him from coming after me!!! As though I hadn't longed turned this into mere entertainment. You know, while waiting for godot.

I would tell you what I think of this, but then you might call Dan~ again. And we will all have to sit here and cry for you.

Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

phyllo wrote:
Right. I am attempting to seriously explore the existential relationship between sense deprivation, identity and dasein on Maia's thread and this Stooge comes barreling into it dropping his inane "specks" over and again.
So now you are here fighting with him and you're not there seriously exploring.

What have you achieved?

For me [not being you] here's how it works: I spend 3 or 4 hours a day here. Most of it contributing posts that [at least to me] are in the general vicinity of philosophy. But, sure, if I encounter Stooges along the way, I do get satisfaction in entertaining himself by, to the best of my ability, humiliating them. But only when they come after me first. Had he contributed to the dream thread by noting his own [serious] opinion regarding the points raised by me and others, this thread would not even exist.

Now is this a "good" thing or a "bad" thing to do? Well, here, my "I" is clearly at odds with your own. Though, sure, go ahead, see if you can figure out why. And which one it ought to be. For me it's all embedded problematically in dasein. Which means in some respects ineffably, inexplicably, unknowingly.

Again:

Look, as I attempted to explain above, for reasons even "I" don't fully understand, I think that, from time to time, you are out to make it all about me. To "get" me. Otherwise I would not designate you as a Stooge now and again. Only with Aventador there has never been a time when [with me] he was not a Stooge.

He gets what he deserves. You know, if "I" do say so myself. And since I believe it is not just a coincidence that my Stooges here are objectivists, I see their reactions to me very, very differently than you do.

That's why Moreno/karpel tunnel always fascinated me. He is the first pragmatist Stooge I have ever come across.

phyllo wrote: Sometimes it is about you, rather than your philosophical position.

Sure. But, for me, the only way it makes sense to explore this is in a discussion that revolves around identity, conflicting goods and political economy. My main "thing" here. Then, given a particular context, as the "intelligent and civil" exchange unfolds you and others can more clearly make that distinction. Otherwise it often just devolves into psychobabble.

phyllo wrote: If you had realized that when you were talking to KT, he might not have ended the discussion.

That's for him to elaborate on. Given a particular context. To the best of current understanding he was disturbed that the manner in which I construed a "fractured and fragmented" "I" might be applicable to him as well. Even as a "pragmatist". I still don't get it.

Look, I could see your point here if I was not doing my best to sustain actual philosophical discussions here at ILP:
...
Hardly any mention of Stooges at all here.

phyllo wrote: Looking at your recent posts, you send most of the time fighting or talking to yourself.

Sure, if that's fun ...

You forget that I create those threads not just for those here but for a few virtual friends that I have stayed in touch with over the years. That's a whole different set of exchanges.

Or are you going to suggest that philosophers are able to finally pin down objectively what all us either ought to or not ought to find fun?
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

iambiguous
ILP Legend

Posts: 42193
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

And, you know, just to have it crystal clear (I don't know why he keeps doing this to himself, it makes me cringe a lot):

Fine man who likes to stalk young ladies wrote:Right. I am attempting to seriously explore the existential relationship between sense deprivation, identity and dasein on Maia's thread and this Stooge comes barreling into it dropping his inane "specks" over and again.

Maia wrote:
iambiguous wrote:

And just to make it very clear, the reason I stopped talking to you was because of your quite shocking reaction, as if I had wronged you in some way, when I informed you that I wanted to continue our conversation wholly in private, by email (which I don't any more, by the way).

Furthermore, since you have no actual questions, what's the point of going on about it, going round in circles?

As I noted above...

Now that I'm interested in it, it becomes one more facet of my own exploration into the manner in which I construe human identity as an existential manifestation of dasein. As with all the other subjects on all of the other threads I have begun here at ILP. And since I have created many, many posts on this thread in which to further that exploration, it never occurred to me to start a whole other thread.

So, no, I'm not going to start a new thread. That, from my frame of mind, would be ridiculous.

Look, if you want, contact Carleas and ask him to lock the thread. That way I would be unable to respond further with my own insights here. Again, there are just so many things in this world that can become "beyond my control".

Also, ask yourself what prompts you to react to my posts as you do. I have my own suspicions, but I will keep them to myself.

There was a time, a few weeks ago, when I was considering inviting other blind people to this forum, and this thread, to give you more perspectives. But definitely not any more, not after your reaction.

What you want, as you have said above, is for a whole bunch of blind people to describe their dreams and experiences to you, presumably every day, and if they ever stopped doing so, you would get angry, and fling accusations at them, as you did with me. But since you have no actual questions, it would be up to them to come up with something interesting each time, while you contributed nothing.

I call that voyeuristic, perhaps even fetishistic, and certainly obsessive. And the fact that you had no interest in pursuing our conversation in private, shows just how much you actually valued any "virtual friendship" with me.

So, if you have any common decency, I ask again, stop posting in my thread.

Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

Curly-Joe wrote:
Fine man who never set foot in South East Asia wrote:He actually imagines that I'd do anything to keep him from coming after me!!! As though I hadn't longed turned this into mere entertainment. You know, while waiting for godot.

I would tell you what I think of this, but then you might call Dan~ again. And we will all have to sit here and cry for you.

Here go again.

Pick one:

1] a "condition"
2] a "tongue in cheek" joke
3] a sick obsession with machismo

Given one of them, he now seems intent on suggesting that I contacted Dan to go after him here because he is so effective in thumping me. I need to get him banned in order to retain what's left of my self-respect.

Or, sure, let him explain it.

You have to remember just how may times [on Pedro's Corner alone] I made a complete fool out of him.

You know, if I do say so myself.

What he should do is to talk phoneutria into coming back here and taking his place in "getting" me. Although, with her, it might really happen.

But at least it would feel like an actual challenge.
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

iambiguous
ILP Legend

Posts: 42193
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

Curly-Joe wrote:And, you know, just to have it crystal clear (I don't know why he keeps doing this to himself, it makes me cringe a lot):

Fine man who likes to stalk young ladies wrote:Right. I am attempting to seriously explore the existential relationship between sense deprivation, identity and dasein on Maia's thread and this Stooge comes barreling into it dropping his inane "specks" over and again.

iambiguous wrote:

And just to make it very clear, the reason I stopped talking to you was because of your quite shocking reaction, as if I had wronged you in some way, when I informed you that I wanted to continue our conversation wholly in private, by email (which I don't any more, by the way).

Furthermore, since you have no actual questions, what's the point of going on about it, going round in circles?

As I noted above...

Now that I'm interested in it, it becomes one more facet of my own exploration into the manner in which I construe human identity as an existential manifestation of dasein. As with all the other subjects on all of the other threads I have begun here at ILP. And since I have created many, many posts on this thread in which to further that exploration, it never occurred to me to start a whole other thread.

So, no, I'm not going to start a new thread. That, from my frame of mind, would be ridiculous.

Look, if you want, contact Carleas and ask him to lock the thread. That way I would be unable to respond further with my own insights here. Again, there are just so many things in this world that can become "beyond my control".

Also, ask yourself what prompts you to react to my posts as you do. I have my own suspicions, but I will keep them to myself.

There was a time, a few weeks ago, when I was considering inviting other blind people to this forum, and this thread, to give you more perspectives. But definitely not any more, not after your reaction.

What you want, as you have said above, is for a whole bunch of blind people to describe their dreams and experiences to you, presumably every day, and if they ever stopped doing so, you would get angry, and fling accusations at them, as you did with me. But since you have no actual questions, it would be up to them to come up with something interesting each time, while you contributed nothing.

I call that voyeuristic, perhaps even fetishistic, and certainly obsessive. And the fact that you had no interest in pursuing our conversation in private, shows just how much you actually valued any "virtual friendship" with me.

So, if you have any common decency, I ask again, stop posting in my thread.

Right, like I hadn't attempted to explain my own thoughts on continuing the thread. As though her frame of mind here is the only one that counts.

Besides, I was the one who reminded her that she could contact Carleas and get the thread locked. I would be disappointed if that happened but in no way would I argue that, if it was locked, it was the wrong thing to do. Sure, Carleas might find her reasons more persuasive than mine. Things like this are always going to be subjective.

In other words, from my frame of mind, Maia isn't out to "get" me. She's not accusing me of lying about something as important [to me] as the year I spent in Vietnam. An experience that changed everything in my life.
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

iambiguous
ILP Legend

Posts: 42193
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

Lol, somewhat different than what you had described, isn't it?

Sounds more like a dude who for some reason decided to make a move on a person that ostensibly is a young girl on the internet, got turned down, and took it badly.

I mean, if you insist, I can quote some of the stuff you wrote.

It's fucking horrid.

(Dan~, I am using 'fucking' here as an adjective to a situation, not a direct insult at anybody)

iambiguous wrote:Pick one:

1] a "condition"
2] a "tongue in cheek" joke
3] a sick obsession with machismo

I choose

4] dishes it out but can't take it

What is it you like to say to people? You didn't have the balls? Dan~, it's only what he himself says to people. come on, Dan~.

Anyway, you couldn't take it and went crying to Dan~.

Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

Also, you didn't go to Vietnam.

You non-lying non-scumbag.

In any case, if you did, I would be out $1000. And I am currently here, happily sitting on$1000. What is ze probleem?

Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

Aventador wrote:Anyway, you couldn't take it and went crying to Dan~.

Lol, you couldn't take it and went crying to Dan~ on the very thread you made to "go at it" with me.

Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

What's the problem, kid?

Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

A "condition" it is then.

To put it mildly!!

Speaking of which, no one can be more eager to follow your "debate" with ecmandu than I am.

Dueling "conditions" as it were.

May the least disturbed win?
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

iambiguous
ILP Legend

Posts: 42193
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

Curly=Joe wrote:Lol, somewhat different than what you had described, isn't it?

Sounds more like a dude who for some reason decided to make a move on a person that ostensibly is a young girl on the internet, got turned down, and took it badly.

Actually, Maia confided to me in an e-mail about a member here who really was stalking her. She had to get PavlovianModel to deal with it. But he just kept popping up.

I won't mention the name though. And I'll leave it up to you to figure out why.
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

iambiguous
ILP Legend

Posts: 42193
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

weird fat bastard who stalks people online wrote:Actually, Maia confided to me in an e-mail about a member here who really was stalking her. She had to get PavlovianModel to deal with it. But he just kept popping up.

I won't mention the name though. And I'll leave it up to you to figure out why.

Why don't you explain to me why you fucking weirdo?

More from the archives of gold (from that same thread, of course):

Honestly could this guy be any more of a creep? After she had already asked him to stop stalking wrote:I can't even begin to describe just how surreal this has all become to me given my own reaction to our exchange. From my frame of mind it was your enthsuiasm that allowed it to blossum into something more than just an exchange of ideas.

I particularly liked "blossum." At least we know this creepy fat fuck is not American. Not the kind of mistake an American makes.

Maybe he did go to Vietnam, but as a Soviet advisor?

No.

This nerveless bag of meat never went anywhere where he couldn't stuff his face with cheetos.

Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

Never even knew Vietnam existed until the 80's wrote:
May the least disturbed win?

I don't know fatty, will you ever claim these \$1000? They are getting so heavy in my pocket. What gives?

Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

I mean seriously what a creep wrote:Yeah, I get why most react to that as they do. I just thought that you might be different.

Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

Curly-Joe wrote:
weird fat bastard who stalks people online wrote:Actually, Maia confided to me in an e-mail about a member here who really was stalking her. She had to get PavlovianModel to deal with it. But he just kept popping up.

I won't mention the name though. And I'll leave it up to you to figure out why.

Why don't you explain to me why you fucking weirdo?

Trust me: you don't want me too.
he said enigmatically

Curly-Joe wrote:More from the archives of gold (from that same thread, of course):

"Honestly could this guy be any more of a creep? After she had already asked him to stop stalking"]

No, she asked me to stop posting on the thread. I explained to her why I would not.

I can't even begin to describe just how surreal this has all become to me given my own reaction to our exchange. From my frame of mind it was your enthsuiasm that allowed it to blossum into something more than just an exchange of ideas.

Curly-Joe wrote:I particularly liked "blossum." At least we know this creepy fat fuck is not American. Not the kind of mistake an American makes.

Read the exchange as it first unfolded. Come up with your own word.

And now suddenly I'm fat. Again, he just makes this shit up as he goes along.

But why?!!!

Back again to this:

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

"...someday he might finally confront whatever or whoever turned him into a fulminating fanatic in exchanges with me. And, perhaps, be able to engage in a substantive exchange with me without configuring into the feckless fool he becomes.

Something has clearly pissed him off in life. Something that compels him to come into places like this and, with me, vent!!! Thus it seems [to me] that he needs to make scapegoats of those he construes to be part of whatever he is outraged about. But what is it? And how did it come about?

And why me? Why not others?

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

A "condition", sure. But which one is it?!!
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

iambiguous
ILP Legend

Posts: 42193
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

never went to Vietnam wrote:Trust me: you don't want me too.
he said enigmatically

Jesus Christ what, what is it?

Likes to stalk girls wrote:No, she asked me to stop posting on the thread. I explained to her why I would not.

Iam.... Iam! There are pages and pages! Do you really want me to keep quoting?

It satisfies some masochistic side of you, doesn't it?

estimated weight: heavy wrote:Read the exchange as it first unfolded. Come up with your own word.

Come up with my own word. Lol you wrote it. You wrote 'blossum.' Hahahahahahahahahahaha

dishes out but can't take wrote:And now suddenly I'm fat. Again, he just makes this shit up as he goes along.

You just have that air about you. That fat fuck air. Like cheetos are a constitutive part of your system now.

never went to Vietnam wrote:And why me? Why not others?

You crazy son of a bitch you created this thread hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

Dan~, if you really don't like any of this, considering it's a thread started in the first place as a personal attack, I suggest to move it to the rant house. He insults people on a daily basis, myself included, and I don't see why actions taken shouldn't affect him too.

Don't say he doesn't ad-hom. Read closer and be honest. Your self-discipline is unrivaled, I believe you will see it even if you don't want to.

Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 28, 2021 1:34 am

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

So now you are here fighting with him and you're not there seriously exploring.

What have you achieved?

Biggus wrote:

For me [not being you] here's how it works: I spend 3 or 4 hours a day here. Most of it contributing posts that [at least to me] are in the general vicinity of philosophy. But, sure, if I encounter Stooges along the way, I do get satisfaction in entertaining himself by, to the best of my ability, humiliating them. But only when they come after me first. Had he contributed to the dream thread by noting his own [serious] opinion regarding the points raised by me and others, this thread would not even exist.

Now is this a "good" thing or a "bad" thing to do? Well, here, my "I" is clearly at odds with your own. Though, sure, go ahead, see if you can figure out why. And which one it ought to be. For me it's all embedded problematically in dasein. Which means in some respects ineffably, inexplicably, unknowingly.
So you're saying that you are satisfied with the threads in which you participate. You feel that you are achieving what you want. And you are entertaining yourself.

It doesn't seem that way from my observations but I guess I'm not reading it right.
phyllo wrote:
If you had realized that when you were talking to KT, he might not have ended the discussion.

That's for him to elaborate on. Given a particular context. To the best of current understanding he was disturbed that the manner in which I construed a "fractured and fragmented" "I" might be applicable to him as well. Even as a "pragmatist". I still don't get it.
He elaborated repeatedly.
phyllo wrote:
Looking at your recent posts, you send most of the time fighting or talking to yourself.

Sure, if that's fun ...

You forget that I create those threads not just for those here but for a few virtual friends that I have stayed in touch with over the years. That's a whole different set of exchanges.
Or are you going to suggest that philosophers are able to finally pin down objectively what all us either ought to or not ought to find fun?
Philosophers don't have to do that.

They can look one person ... his statements, this actions, his reactions ... and come to a conclusion about whether he is having fun or not. And whether he could have more fun by doing something differently.

Then it's the old ... You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.
phyllo
ILP Legend

Posts: 12486
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

Curly-Joe wrote:
never went to Vietnam wrote:Trust me: you don't want me too.
he said enigmatically

Jesus Christ what, what is it?

Likes to stalk girls wrote:No, she asked me to stop posting on the thread. I explained to her why I would not.

Iam.... Iam! There are pages and pages! Do you really want me to keep quoting?

It satisfies some masochistic side of you, doesn't it?

estimated weight: heavy wrote:Read the exchange as it first unfolded. Come up with your own word.

Come up with my own word. Lol you wrote it. You wrote 'blossum.' Hahahahahahahahahahaha

dishes out but can't take wrote:And now suddenly I'm fat. Again, he just makes this shit up as he goes along.

You just have that air about you. That fat fuck air. Like cheetos are a constitutive part of your system now.

never went to Vietnam wrote:And why me? Why not others?

You crazy son of a bitch you created this thread hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Given that there is no philosophical content whatsoever in his endless taunts, and given that the taunts themselves are so preposterous and witless, I can only be willing now to continue our "discussion" when one and/or both of these sorry-ass components of his change.

Otherwise, how can I ever hope that our exchange will, well, blossom.
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

iambiguous
ILP Legend

Posts: 42193
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

Are u saying u were this guy (@ 1:55), Biggs?

I can't believe this. I was hoping you killed like seventy three gooks in the midnight jungle with only a knife while blitzed out of ur mind on heroin laced with PCP, and now I find out your only weapon was a typewriter?

You just shattered my dreams dude. You were my Rambo once upon a time. I want u to know that.
promethean75
Philosopher

Posts: 4798
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

### Re: Aventador and iambiguous go at it

phyllo wrote: So now you are here fighting with him and you're not there seriously exploring.

What have you achieved?

Biggus wrote::

For me [not being you] here's how it works: I spend 3 or 4 hours a day here. Most of it contributing posts that [at least to me] are in the general vicinity of philosophy. But, sure, if I encounter Stooges along the way, I do get satisfaction in entertaining himself by, to the best of my ability, humiliating them. But only when they come after me first. Had he contributed to the dream thread by noting his own [serious] opinion regarding the points raised by me and others, this thread would not even exist.

Now is this a "good" thing or a "bad" thing to do? Well, here, my "I" is clearly at odds with your own. Though, sure, go ahead, see if you can figure out why. And which one it ought to be. For me it's all embedded problematically in dasein. Which means in some respects ineffably, inexplicably, unknowingly.

phyllo wrote: So you're saying that you are satisfied with the threads in which you participate. You feel that you are achieving what you want. And you are entertaining yourself.

Yes, yes and yes.

On the other hand, whatever that means.

In other words, as I have noted with you over and again, given the manner in which I construe my "self" here as the existential embodiment of dasein, there is only so much that even "I" can understand about my own motivation and intentions. It's like my reaction to Maia on the thread that precipitated this one: I said what I "honestly and introspectively" thought and felt about it.

After all, whatever other option is there for me?

phyllo wrote: It doesn't seem that way from my observations but I guess I'm not reading it right.

My best guess: that's because you're not me and don't really have a clue as to what does motivate me to post as I do. But, again, given the subjects being discussed here that's entirely normal for me. Besides, the "entertainment" part revolves almost entirely around the My Six Stooges here. Including you from time to time.

phyllo wrote: If you had realized that when you were talking to KT, he might not have ended the discussion.

That's for him to elaborate on. Given a particular context. To the best of current understanding he was disturbed that the manner in which I construed a "fractured and fragmented" "I" might be applicable to him as well. Even as a "pragmatist". I still don't get it.

phyllo wrote: He elaborated repeatedly.

Then back to dasein. His elaborations were sufficient for him. And for you? But not for "me". Now how do we go about pinning down -- philosophically or otherwise -- whether his posts were in fact sufficient?

phyllo wrote: Looking at your recent posts, you send most of the time fighting or talking to yourself.

Sure, if that's fun ...

You forget that I create those threads not just for those here but for a few virtual friends that I have stayed in touch with over the years. That's a whole different set of exchanges.

phyllo wrote: Your virtual friends read your posts and think this is all good stuff? Including the dogfights?

No, by and large they are only interested in the threads I create that revolve around actual philosophical themes. They go back to exchanges we had ourselves in Yahoo Groups, e-philosophy and the Ponderer's Guild. Including one ILP member who no longer posts here now but engages in the occasional email exchange with me.

Also, even though there is not much in the way of feedback from ILP as it exist now, I still note that the "view count" keeps going up and up. So, it's nice to know that many different folks are interested enough in what I argue here to read my posts. That's not nothing to me.

Or are you going to suggest that philosophers are able to finally pin down objectively what all us either ought to or not ought to find fun?

phyllo wrote: Philosophers don't have to do that.

They can look one person ... his statements, this actions, his reactions ... and come to a conclusion about whether he is having fun or not. And whether he could have more fun by doing something differently.

Then it's the old ... You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

Note to others:

You know, whatever that means.
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

iambiguous
ILP Legend

Posts: 42193
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

PreviousNext