These are not universal truths...

[iambiguous]

Let's see how he wiggles out of it this time.

Straw man much?

Unless, of course, that was directed at someone else here.

[Fixed Cross]

See, addressing the guy with philosophical concepts merely results in him exhibiting a deeper feigned ignorance and an increased feigned pride.

However, before I addressed him directly (and thus implicitly played along with the idea that he was seriously trying to get us to think), when I defined his methods, he had no choice but to accept me as his master and put my terms in his mouth, to use a phrase.

All play for power, i.e. the power to be the valuator of the situation, and some commit more strongly to particular methods than others.
Iambiguous has found the very high "affect-quotient" of arrogant feigning of ignorance.

[Fixed Cross]

Probably learned it in 'Nam.

II mean, cause it works.
Its a game of attrition.

[Fixed Cross]

If being is defined as will to power (if being is only experience, it is only experience of will to power) and if this definition identifies a universal fact, then all human writing and speaking would certainly be misunderstood if it wasn't interpreted foremost and a priori to any conveyed meaning as an expression of will to power.

To take something that is said at face value is always to misunderstand its origin, cause, and thus, I would argue, its true meaning.

Scientific statements of fact are included in this. Why make a scientific observation at all? There is no "objective reason" for it.

[Pedro I Rengel]

There is no fight with iambiguous.

There is only the fight,

Within one's self.

Namaste

[Fixed Cross]

No fight with one who never confronts, never looks in the eye.

You either follow the trail of breadcrumbs (misunderstandings for you to correct) or you figure out you already have a loaf of bread (you weren't suffering the doubt he purports).

[iambiguous]

See, addressing the guy with philosophical concepts merely results in him exhibiting a deeper feigned ignorance and an increased feigned pride.

Ah, yes, his beloved "philosophical concepts".

Then, well, back up even further into clouds full of them:

However, before I addressed him directly (and thus implicitly played along with the idea that he was seriously trying to get us to think), when I defined his methods, he had no choice but to accept me as his master and put my terms in his mouth, to use a phrase.

All play for power, i.e. the power to be the valuator of the situation, and some commit more strongly to particular methods than others.
Iambiguous has found the very high "affect-quotient" of arrogant feigning of ignorance.

Note to others...

If you think you understand what he means here as it relates to the relationship between describing what some construe to be universal truths in regard to human interactions in conflict over value judgments, statements about them, and how to differentiate them technically, please provide your own context in which his "philosophical concepts" might be expressed as meaningful given the part that most interest me: actually reconciling or resolving these conflicting goods down here on the ground.

Also, how do you suppose astrology fits into all of this? If that's an appropriate point to being up.

[Fixed Cross]

There is no fight with iambiguous.

There is only the fight,

Within one's self.

Namaste

Lol.

Well yes, to be beyond his shenanigans requires perhaps that one has conquered the bird of intellectual vanity.

[Fixed Cross]

Note to others...

If you think you understand what he means here as it relates to the relationship between describing what some construe to be universal truths in regard to human interactions in conflict over value judgments, statements about them, and how to differentiate them technically, please provide your own context in which his "philosophical concepts" might be expressed as meaningful given the part that most interest me: actually reconciling or resolving these conflicting goods down here on the ground.

Straw men are used to avoid having to engage in conflict, if that answers your question.

They are often preemptively fabricated to distract from problematic experience but often enough spontaneous misapprehension of the case at hand.

Also, how do you suppose astrology fits into all of this? If that's an appropriate point to being up.

Right now the Sun is on the last degree of Scorpio. I don't know what you are asking.

[Fixed Cross]

The problem is Im not as good at weaving straw men.

Well, Im taking up way too much space with my implicit insults to everyone but myself.

[Fixed Cross]

Im just as vainglorious an idiot as this bastard. No doubt about that.

[Pedro I Rengel]

Is conflicting goods like when the canned tomato has beef with the light bulbs?

[Pedro I Rengel]

One thing people don't consider is that maybe iambiguous deserves being lost. Maybe it's good, a good sign. Maybe the world he wants, a world with laws that perfectly dictate how all human interactions should go, would be a horrible fucking world.

[Fixed Cross]

No rather like atoms trying to occupy the same space causing pressure.

Why is the world will to power?
Because it kicked all the other worlds arse

[Fixed Cross]

If I hear a "Universal Truth", I think Coca Cola or Hulk Hogan.

Something which simply is and has its image about it which clearly points to itself, and which people can have around them without being deranged from their own elements, but which provides a placeholder for their continuous responsiveness.

A truth has to have a narrative.

Universal facts are scientific facts, they need nothing to pertain to, to exist.

A truth pertains.
A narcissist wouldn't be able to see that a fact is not a truth.

[Ecmandu]

Iambiguous will NEVER debate me on the concept of consent being the superset of his subset argument because he knows he'll lose, and if he loses that debate, he'll lose his purpose for posting as he has since joining the boards.

Iambiguous already knows himself that he lost that debate, he just doesn't want to make it public, so that he can keep posting the same drivel that philosophy hasn't solved anything.

Yes. There are objective moral truths: No being wants their consent violated.

He avoids me like the plague, and now his reason is not because of my arguments, he's the hero who's taking pity on my mentally ill soul.

[Pedro I Rengel]

But how do you construe that?

[Pedro I Rengel]

In a world of conflicting goods?

You know, as a note?

To others?

[Pedro I Rengel]

WHAT IF MY GOLD CHAIN DOES NOT MATCH MY PRINTER?

[Pedro I Rengel]

What is BEHIND the universal truth?

[Pedro I Rengel]

WHO came up with social justice?

Really, literally, who?

What is justice? What is it?

[Pedro I Rengel]

Qui gets paid?

[Fixed Cross]

What are conflicting goods but an invitation to consent-violation?

[Fixed Cross]

What is BEHIND the universal truth?

the demiurg?

truths are spoken. A universal truth is something which is universally spoken.

[promethean75]

It is a universal truth that I get a demiurge when I watch this video.