A nod to Phyllo

[Karpel Tunnel]

We had our differences and got snarly on occasion. And then also some overlap. He seemed to be frustrated by things here, so I am hoping he simply decided to spend time differently and everything is alright with him. Or perhaps he is engaged in life in new ways and directly, instead of in the 'about life' way one can here at one step remove. I hope it was a choice and not some catastrophy. And a good choice it seems to me. Of course reflection is good and will continue I am sure. But for some it seems a substitute for life.

I am feeling inspired and have less time each day for a while. To the things themselves....!

well, not bracketed.

[phyllo]

I'm touched that someone cares. That really means something to me.

I'm still alive and 'well'. Or at least no worse than before.

I walked out the door and I don't intend to walk back in. You, no doubt, understand why.

May the Force be with you.

[iambiguous]

Yo, Felix! You're up!!

[phyllo]

You're better than the 'kids'.

[iambiguous]

You're better than the 'kids'.

Uh, you mean no better than them, right?

On the other hand, in order to explore that more substantively, I'm afraid we will need a context.

And it's Kids, not kids. One can be a Kid here at any age. Hell, I've been one myself on occasion.

[phyllo]

No more.

[iambiguous]

No more.

I knew it. One way or another the conclusions that I have come to in regard to "morality here and now and immortality there and then" have sunk down into you as well. And not [I suspect] just in regard to owning up to the possibility/probability that we live in an essentially meaningless world. Other things about the "fractured and fragmented" "I" as well.

But that you have is actually my way of complimenting you. Or, sure, complimenting myself in turn. In, perhaps, coming at least somewhat close to understanding the "human condition"...philosophically.

However profoundly grim and problematic the conclusions might be.

In fact, it may well be that, in Karpel Tunnel's refusal to go there, he has invented this "visceral, intuitive deep-down-inside-me" Self in order to keep the "for all practical purposes" implications of that essentially meaningless world at bay.

I don't know. He says I am wrong about it. But he refuses to go further.

[Karpel Tunnel]

I'm touched that someone cares. That really means something to me.

I'm still alive and 'well'. Or at least no worse than before.

I walked out the door and I don't intend to walk back in. You, no doubt, understand why.

May the Force be with you.

Oh, glad to hear it. I guessed it was a choice, but good to know. Happy New Year. And not only do I know why, I'm packing.

[Karpel Tunnel]

I don't know. He says I am wrong about it. But he refuses to go further.

Actually I did, around the time you starting running around like you won the lottery with your paraphrase. But the thing is, I bear no onus to convince you your hallucinations about my internal life are incorrect. 'Refuses' would have been a silly verb even I didn't clarify. When you've beaten the Randi challenge, then people might have to take your word over their own about their own internal processes. But not before.

Oh, just checked, Randi died in October and stopped the challenge a while back. Ah, well. I'll take a diploma from a known psychic. Knowing you had to take the class would be reward enough.

[iambiguous]

And not only do I know why, I'm packing.

Yep, that will get my arguments out of his head.

You know, if he means it.

Actually, if this is a suggestion that he is leaving ILP himself, that's not good news. Over and again I have noted that minds of his ilk are just as important for keeping ILP from degenerating into minds of Pedro's ilk as minds of my own ilk are.

And it still truly perplexes me what it is exactly about me that disturbs him so. As with Phyllo, I'm more or less convinced it revolves around a rendition of this:

One way or another the conclusions that I have come to in regard to "morality here and now and immortality there and then" have sunk down into you as well. And not [I suspect] just in regard to owning up to the possibility/probability that we live in an essentially meaningless world. Other things about the "fractured and fragmented" "I" as well.

But that you have is actually my way of complimenting you. Or, sure, complimenting myself in turn. In, perhaps, coming at least somewhat close to understanding the "human condition"...philosophically.

However profoundly grim and problematic the conclusions might be.

In fact, it may well be that, in Karpel Tunnel's refusal to go there, he has invented this "visceral, intuitive deep-down-inside-me" Self in order to keep the "for all practical purposes" implications of that essentially meaningless world at bay.

I don't know. He says I am wrong about it. But he refuses to go further.

Just a different one.

And it's not just with me [and now Peter] that he takes umbrage with time and again. KT has this deep seated "sense of reality", and he really doesn't tolerate others critiquing it. I've seen him get pissed off over and again when others don't [eventually] "get what he means".

Something that, ironically enough, isn't nearly as important to those who are "fractured and fragmented" in regard to moral and political value judgments.

[Karpel Tunnel]

Iambiguous's assertions in the above....
I didn't go further with it. ------ But I did, in the same thread as what he keeps paraphrasing.
I am leaving to get away from his arguments. ------ Apart from the psychic claim, there are much scarier arguments - Buddhism considers him to be a religious believer in a persistant self, for example - than those out there. I've gone into this with him.
KT has this deep seated "sense of reality", and he really doesn't tolerate others critiquing it. I've seen him get pissed off over and again when others don't [eventually] "get what he means". ------- I never said the first part. The rest is his interpretation, and he puts things in quotes that I did not say in the context he presents. IOW an implicit lie.

Notice that when other people present ideas to Iamb he asks for an argument that would convince all rational people.

But he just gets to state things about my internal life - my motivations for example - based on unstated arguments that would not even convince a couple of people here. IOW hypocrisy. But it's great someone finally solved the problem of other minds.

Ever notice how Iamb's assertions about other people's minds miraculously make him look better, others he's angry at worse?

Who else does this? Who else tells people what they are thinking as part of a dominance (attempt) pattern?

Satyr.

HIs behavior bothered me. Then he made the mistake of waxing nostaligically about those great forums back then with real philosophers and I saw that he posted the same things and they reacted to his BEHAVIOR the same way. Sure, his arguments bothered some of them, but people got pissed at his behavior. And he had to know this, so he was lying, theatrically, in an attempt to put down people here, I would guess. Before I was never sure before that he knew he was lying. I always wondered what was really going on in him. There was an asterisk.

So, yeah, it's his behavior, not his arguments, though I am sure his arguments bother some people.

I know he'll keep presenting his psychic claims about what is really going on in me, with the conviction that it could not possibly be his behavior that I hated. And he's never explained why that isn't the case.

Good luck to him convincing all rational people that he knows what I really was bothered by. The popularity of his thread on me is likely a hint of their interest in his unsupported theories about what my real motivations are. His psychic work.

Hypocrite or narcissist? Maybe Wendy will make another poll about which is the more characteristic Iamb trait. I love how he plays to the gallery, but he has no gallery, except PK and PK doesn't even understand Iamb's arguments, the ones I am supposed to be so afraid of.

Anyway, got a new job starting Monday, and I find I am getting pissed off at too many people. With a few exceptions it's just team posting and team attacking, and yeah, binary thinking is the zeitgeist. I am finding I avoid discussions in my private life also. There are no gray areas any more.

Like old Bush to said, you are either with us or against us.

You can't even breathe a serious question or possible nuance on an issue. Then you are in league with the devil.

It used to be only fundamentalists I'd encounter like that and a few vegans and NRA members.

Now it's everybody.
Philosophy goes on, but philosophy forums are like McCarthy hearings.

So, I am really glad that Phyllo is happily focused elsewhere.

Von River seemed to just dip in for a taste.

Gloominary has his work cut out not being clearly on any team overall.

And it's nearly all politics. Politics politics. Other areas of inquiry are drained. And the discussions remaining there are often so vague I can't even decide what the position is.

Similar patterns in other philosophy forums. Perhaps not so immediatly diving into insults, but exploration is fading away. Team identification is prioritized. So few are unsure of anything. Everyone one knows exactly how countries of 100s of millions should be organized.

Anyway, I would guess the coming economic crises will make philosphical assertions a less prioritized activity for all of us.

I wish us luck in the coming period. I hope I have been overly pessimistic.

Take care all.

[iambiguous]

I don't know. He says I am wrong about it. But he refuses to go further.

Actually I did, around the time you starting running around like you won the lottery with your paraphrase.

Note to others:

What the fuck is he talking about here? See if you can find his explanation for examining the gap between his "visceral, intuitive, deep-down-inside-me" Self and my own fractured and fragmented "I". In regard to a particular set of circumstances.

But the thing is, I bear no onus to convince you your hallucinations about my internal life are incorrect. 'Refuses' would have been a silly verb even I didn't clarify.

I think I have made it clear that I place no "onus" on him. I'm just genuinely mystified as to how this Self of his is understood by him in a way that "I" is understood by me given the arguments I make in my signature threads.

Culminating by and large 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.

And to the best of my knowledge he has refused to explore this with me given a particular context on the philosophy board. And all I can do then is to speculate as to why he does. After all, I didn't "foe" him, he "foed" me. And "refuse" because I have often found that in "polemicist mode" I can fluster some into digging all the deeper.

And I would never argue that his own sense of self is "incorrect" in regard to "I" at the existential intersection of identity, value judgments and political economy. On the contrary, my whole philosophy here revolves around suggesting that there is no necessarily rational or irrational approach to resolving these things. Not in a reality where in my view "I" in the is/ought world revolves around daseins able to express reasonable but conflicting value judgments in a world where ever and always what ultimately counts is who has the power to enforce one set of behaviors rather than others.

[Ecmandu]

I know why you guys are moral nihilists...

Because you’re intelligent. I just happen to be slightly more intelligent on the topic of existence.

Why are you moral nihilists because you are intelligent?

Because somehow, you are keenly aware that a win/lose type of reality is meaningless... and it is.

But I offer meaning... try to make reality win/win/win for every existent.

Just trying it gives meaning, succeeding is meaning itself.

I find it really sad that you folks have so much cognitive dissonance that you’ve taken it upon yourselves to ignore that part of me in you.

You are not a great person until everyone is a great person.

I’ve become something other, and most of you aren’t watching my new teachings. I’m the ‘crazy Ecmandu guy’ right...?

I’m not fucking crazy. In your minds coddling me by ignoring me is all of you coddling yourselves.

You think I’m a troll trying to bait you? Everything but!

I’m explaining existence to you. I know it’s harder than being a moral nihilist. To MAKE meaning.

[phyllo]

To MAKE meaning.

Well, yeah.

But these guys who talk about meaninglessness, generally want some sort of deity to come and tell them what they should be doing ... "Become an accountant because it's part of my grand plan for the universe." - "Yes, Lord." - "What next, Lord?"

What else could it be, right?

[Ecmandu]

To MAKE meaning.

Well, yeah.

But these guys who talk about meaninglessness, generally want some sort of deity to come and tell them what they should be doing ... "Become an accountant because it's part of my grand plan for the universe." - "Yes, Lord." - "What next, Lord?"

What else could it be, right?

I agree with you. From my perspective it’s fucking insane. Unless you make everyone god, you are not god.

That’s the problem with people... they want to be god at the expense of others... they want to win. Being a person with my personal privileges ... I always ask myself “what are you going to do with it?” Every moment of everyday I ask myself this question. Lots of people do.

The one thing I teach is that unless everyone is great, you are not, nor ever will be great.

People have funny ways of believing that existence eventually makes everyone great through some bizarre type of faith, so they ignore the great work.

Bullshit. That’s not good enough for me.

Work is hard. The great work is the hardest.

[iambiguous]

But he just gets to state things about my internal life - my motivations for example - based on unstated arguments that would not even convince a couple of people here. IOW hypocrisy. But it's great someone finally solved the problem of other minds.

Huh?

This...

But if you come and say God says pedophilia is good, or you have a logical proof (somehow) a secular one that proves pedophilia is good, I will not override my revulsion. Because that revulsion is, at least now, more me than a bunch of words on a page that seem, even to me, logical. Are you different?

...came from him. Him giving us a peek into his "internal life".

I'm just ever after him to examine/describe what this means "for all practical purposes" given a particular context involving conflicting goods. And as it contrasts with my own far more disintegrated "I".

And, in regard to moral and political value judgments, what disturbs the objectivists [and apparently Karpel] here is the arguments I make in my signature threads. In other words, what if they are reasonable points to make? And what if they are applicable to the objectivists [and Karpel] as well?

Then he made the mistake of waxing nostaligically about those great forums back then with real philosophers and I saw that he posted the same things and they reacted to his BEHAVIOR the same way. Sure, his arguments bothered some of them, but people got pissed at his behavior. And he had to know this, so he was lying, theatrically, in an attempt to put down people here, I would guess. Before I was never sure before that he knew he was lying. I always wondered what was really going on in him. There was an asterisk.

Note to others:

Go to this thread and decide for yourself which of us makes the most sense in regard to this "accusation": https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 6&t=195958

Anyway, got a new job starting Monday, and I find I am getting pissed off at too many people. With a few exceptions it's just team posting and team attacking, and yeah, binary thinking is the zeitgeist. I am finding I avoid discussions in my private life also. There are no gray areas any more.

See, what did I tell you above or on another thread? He does get pissed off over and over and over again at those who in an exchange with him don't eventually come around to agreeing with how his own "visceral, intuitive, deep-down-inside-me" Self sees things. It's hardly just me. With me, however, I was challenging him to see how his own "visceral, intuitive, deep-down-inside-me" Self itself as just another existential contraption rooted subjectively/subjunctively in dasein. That for all practical purposes his reaction to me really wasn't all that far removed from the objectivists here.

Really, think about it: how is his "visceral, intuitive, deep-down-inside-me" Self not just but one more example of "binary" thinking?!

So, has he left ILP? Again, I hope not. Aside from our own "failure to communicate", he was one of the few left here going back to the time when I first became a member myself. One less counterweight to the Kids, the social media yak yak yakkers and the near Nazis that have overrun the site of late.

[Mr J]

Hate to see Karpel Tunnel and Phyllo leave, they offered their own contrary opinions where this place will be stale without them.

Variety is the spice of life. Karpel Tunnel is always fun to argue with.

[Artimas]

I'm touched that someone cares. That really means something to me.

I'm still alive and 'well'. Or at least no worse than before.

I walked out the door and I don't intend to walk back in. You, no doubt, understand why.

May the Force be with you.

Appreciate you and St. James too, I remember first coming to these forums being a very militant atheist and self righteous liberal, I remember the discussions and snarly arguments we would have about Jesus and god so I would just like to recognize and thank those who argued against me in the past to help expose me to new light, it feels good to understand to the extent of which I do and although I could possibly have done it on my own alone through much a priori trial and error, I am glad I didn’t have to, it was much quicker being criticized by people who care about fellow man. So cheers to those who criticize and share with others for the sake of care and education.

[Artimas]

To MAKE meaning.

Well, yeah.

But these guys who talk about meaninglessness, generally want some sort of deity to come and tell them what they should be doing ... "Become an accountant because it's part of my grand plan for the universe." - "Yes, Lord." - "What next, Lord?"

What else could it be, right?

I agree with you. From my perspective it’s fucking insane. Unless you make everyone god, you are not god.

That’s the problem with people... they want to be god at the expense of others... they want to win. Being a person with my personal privileges ... I always ask myself “what are you going to do with it?” Every moment of everyday I ask myself this question. Lots of people do.

The one thing I teach is that unless everyone is great, you are not, nor ever will be great.

People have funny ways of believing that existence eventually makes everyone great through some bizarre type of faith, so they ignore the great work.

Bullshit. That’s not good enough for me.

Work is hard. The great work is the hardest.

God is merely a force, a driver. It is our relationship with this force that determines one being it or not. It is a choice to pursue that god, wisdom. The path of power, responsibility, love and understanding.

[Artimas]

To MAKE meaning.

Well, yeah.

But these guys who talk about meaninglessness, generally want some sort of deity to come and tell them what they should be doing ... "Become an accountant because it's part of my grand plan for the universe." - "Yes, Lord." - "What next, Lord?"

What else could it be, right?

I agree with you. From my perspective it’s fucking insane. Unless you make everyone god, you are not god.

That’s the problem with people... they want to be god at the expense of others... they want to win. Being a person with my personal privileges ... I always ask myself “what are you going to do with it?” Every moment of everyday I ask myself this question. Lots of people do.

The one thing I teach is that unless everyone is great, you are not, nor ever will be great.

People have funny ways of believing that existence eventually makes everyone great through some bizarre type of faith, so they ignore the great work.

Bullshit. That’s not good enough for me.

Work is hard. The great work is the hardest.

There is no win with being god or recognizing such until every last life has reached that state of understanding to be in alignment, this god is a collective of humanity but also independent of life by being wisdom itself, which can also appear or be recognized in inanimate or unconscious matter as well.

(sorry for double post)

[iambiguous]

Hate to see Karpel Tunnel and Phyllo leave, they offered their own contrary opinions where this place will be stale without them.

Variety is the spice of life. Karpel Tunnel is always fun to argue with.

Yeah, me too.

If for no other reason than that ILP loses two more members who, in my view, actually did seem to love philosophy in a way that the yak yak yak crowd, the social media sorts and the fulminating fanatics of your ilk often make a mockery of. Hell, even promethean75 seems more and more inclined to go there now. To have "fun" discussions on the poop thread.

Still, I have to be honest and acknowledge that I may well be the cause in turn. Especially given those who, philosophically, were objectivists themselves in regard to "I" in the is/ought world. And whatever strange contraption Karpel Tunnel was here.

Down through the years, in one or another philosophy venue, I have managed to make any number of avid philosophers doubt their commitment to it. Again, as I noted previously, for 3 reasons:

1] I argue that while philosophers may go in search of wisdom, this wisdom is always truncated by the gap between what philosophers think they know [about anything] and all that there is to be known in order to grasp the human condition in the context of existence itself. That bothers some. When it really begins to sink in that this quest is ultimately futile, some abandon philosophy altogether. Instead, they stick to the part where they concentrate fully on living their lives "for all practical purposes" from day to day.

2] I suggest in turn it appears reasonable that, in a world sans God, the human brain is but more matter wholly in sync [as a part of nature] with the laws of matter. And, thus, anything we think, feel, say or do is always only that which we were ever able to think, feel, say and do. And that includes philosophers. Some will inevitably find that disturbing. If they can't know for certain that they possess autonomy, they can't know for certain that their philosophical excursions are in fact of their own volition.

3] And then the part where, assuming some measure of autonomy, I suggest that "I" in the is/ought world is basically an existential contraption interacting with other existential contraptions in a world teeming with conflicting goods --- and in contexts in which wealth and power prevails in the political arena. The part where "I" becomes fractured and fragmented.

Only_Humean, Faust, Mo, Uccisore...Moreno, Phyllo?

I can't help but wonder if it might be me they were dispensing with rather than the "mob" that has overrun ILP now.

[Mr J]

Biggie, you don't like me because you don't even understand my philosophy and you've never made an attempt to even try to understand, so really, your petty insults do you no favors. You and others think you got me all figured out, you really don't. I also don't take life or philosophy all that serious either because I view the entire world now going through the entropic process of crashing down. You of course don't like that along with many others because you still pitifully believe there is something in this current world worth saving or salvaging, I of course don't.

I'm just a guy waiting for when the primordial earth takes all of modern mankind's artifices, abstracts, ridiculous notions, cultural inventions, and simulations throwing them up into a huge global event of chaos. I'll be such a happy boy on that day, I hope I'm alive to see it as a witness. Only on that day will the world truly change along with being free and men like you will be brought to tears or ruin.

[iambiguous]

Biggie, you don't like me because you don't even understand my philosophy and you've never made an attempt to even try to understand, so really, your petty insults do you no favors. You and others think you got me all figured out, you really don't. I also don't take life or philosophy all that serious either because I view the entire world now going through the entropic process of crashing down. You of course don't like that along with many others because you still pitifully believe there is something in this current world worth saving or salvaging, I of course don't.

I'm just a guy waiting for when the primordial earth takes all of modern mankind's artifices, abstracts, ridiculous notions, cultural inventions, and simulations throwing them up into a huge global event of chaos. I'll be such a happy boy on that day, I hope I'm alive to see it as a witness. Only on that day will the world truly change along with being free and men like you will be brought to tears or ruin.

Can you believe this clown!!

Like I didn't give him all the opportunity in the world to explain his philosophy with respect to this:

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 si
gnature 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.

He pulled back immediately when the discussion was no longer "fun" for him.

Look, he and his ilk now basically control the boards. They've "won". Not much to celebrate from my point of view, but, hey this is the internet, right? The lowest common denominator often rules!

And now, sadly enough, here too.

[phyllo]

I can't help but wonder if it might be me they were dispensing with rather than the "mob" that has overrun ILP now.

My main reasons are:

The pool of posters is too small to sustain a discussion.

A lot of the current posters are just interested in making unsubstantiated statements. They avoid a discussion or followup.

A lot of the current posters are nasty and insulting.


The bottom line is that I'm not getting much out of being here. I can find better ways to spend my time.

[Ecmandu]

I’m going to be realistic here:

You have two guys who have me on ignore before I made some of the best posts the earth has ever known. The writing was on the wall.

That’s what you get with ignorers... abandonment

Give them all the accolades you want, have it break and shatter your heart....

Life still goes on.