Newbie
Posts: 21 
August 20th, 2004, 03:34 PM
It appears that folks here seem to be more interested in their scoring on the ‘Battleground God’ test (“Take the test” thread) and stroking in each other egos than in philosophy as such. The following analysis would probably not be their cup of tea. It assumes a philosopher (or the bud of one), i.e. someone who loves wisdom. People who love wisdom do not need to give themselves kudos for making intellectual discoveries; indeed they would think it too needy, childish, immature. Having said that, I want to join those who thank peapod for the link. It certainly is interesting. I am a ‘pig’ as she says, but I don’t think I am an ingrate.
The game creator(s) evidently belong to the school of logical positivism which holds, in its most pristine form (Alfred Ayer), that metaphysics does not belong to philosophy.
In a nutshell, Ayer , as well as those whom he followed and who follow him, treats philosophical questions as ‘analytical propositions’ and only facts ascertained by experience can be admitted to examination of truthfulness or falsity. However, logic isn’t constrained by experience and therefore no fact can be validated by experience ‘with certitude’. That God or immortal soul exist, are propositions that cannot be validated and therefore lie outside reasoned inquiry.
Ayer was a brilliant thinker which the game creators certainly are not. It may be inferred, that philosophically they are atheists, or people who reject theism. I have shown in my previous post (on take the test) where their belief that the game is ‘value free’ takes a direct hit, so to speak. They pretend that if I defend the internal consistency of belief in a mad rapist, then I am ‘biting a bullet’ because I have to ‘justify the rapist’. That is demonstrably false.
As I continued to play and analyze, I discovered further problems and inconsistencies:
1) The test of rationality in one’s belief in God, is made against a rational belief in the ‘Loch Ness monster’. Would it be rationally sufficient, the game asks, to reject the belief in Loch Ness monster on grounds there is no evidence for it ? The answer should be ‘yes’. This query is followed by a question if the ‘atheist’s’ view that God does not exist is a matter of belief or rationality. I guessed it was ‘rationality’, but really when you think about the proposition – it is a non-sequitur. (And yes, sure enough, if your answer is ‘belief’, you receive a direct hit. I tested it.). For one, such a link relies on the validity of the comparison made between ‘God’ and the Loch Ness monster. However, if one does not think of God as an anthromorphic entity, or finite being locatable in the blue sky blue above or in a Scottish lake, then one cannot make the inference about the nature of the atheist belief , on the basis of a highly improbable existence of a mythical reptile.
The second aspect, which flows from this, is even more troubling.
The creators of the game evidently believe, that if a belief is not rational, it is irrational in the sense that it violates ‘reason’. But beliefs are intuitions which most often precede facts (as in theses), and apparently exist independently from them. So I do not err if I say that the atheist may well act on ‘faith’ in taking the absence of proof in the finiteness of God as the proof of God who by nature is infinite. Now, if you follow this train to its logical conclusion, you will make an astonishing discovery: If God is God, he cannot be said to exist. The word ‘exist’ comes from the Latin exsistere, ‘coming into being’, it implies irreducibly that God is extant as a form in time and space. I deny that, and yet I believe in God.
2) Question #3 asks to assess the theory of evolution. It gives two choices: the theory is either ‘substantially true’ or it is ‘false’. No other choices. This of course is a patently illogical and dishonest manipulation of the ‘game’. If I am to assess something as ‘substantially true’ I must have the opportunity to grade my negative view in a congruous fashion. So I must be allowed to hold that while I accept some parts of the theory I do not believe the theory to be true ‘substantially’ or ‘on the whole’. So let us say that I believe that species indeed evolve, but that it has been demonstrated (e.g. by von Bartalanffy’s research on the reproductive patterns of guppies) that the view they do so by ‘natural selection’ is flawed both logically (natural selection is held to be both the premise and the effect of evolution) and empirically. So: a) does this make me a creationist ? b) can there be another school of thought on our origins which is neither Darwinist nor naively creationist ? c) what do I answer to this silliness ? (Consider also the silliness of asking the test subject to pass a judgement on a highly technical theory. Why would not there be an ‘out’, a don’t-have-a-clue option ?) I answered ‘false’ and got a lecture from the software. Indeed, my answer was held as ‘ammo’ against my views as a ‘creationist’ even though I do not believe that Creation is a biological fact.
3) Can God make 1 + 1 = 72, and can ‘she square circles’? The answer is ‘yes’ if one holds consistently that God can do anything, and is ‘beyond good and bad’. This argument calls for mental acuity in appraising what is objectively true, what is subjectively true and in whether we may have absolute certainty about any fact (I agree with Ayer that we may not). Objectivity then becomes ‘fluid’ and a label for human subjectivities agreeing on how to grasp, order and name physical and spiritual phenomena. So, properly, we would not be speaking of some absolute standard of objectivity but one that is a moving target, as a historically determined intersubjectivity.
Now the game assesses my ‘yes’ in this fashion:
a. In saying that God has the freedom and the power to
do that which is logically impossible.., you are saying that
any discussion of God as ultimate reality cannot be
constrained by basic principles of rationality.
I agree with this proposition and moreover consider the
adjective ‘basic’ superfluous. If God was fully
apprehended by reason, then God being ‘the ultimate
reality’, further evolution of reason would
be impossible, or purposeless at any rate.
b. That would seem to make rational discourse about God
impossible, there is nothing rational that we can say
about God and nothing rational we can say about God
and nothing rational we can say to support our belief or
disbelief in God.
This proposition makes a demonstrably false inference.
Can you spot the problem ? In agreeing that God can
make nonsense become sense, I am not agreeing that
God actually does just that. God not being constrained
by reason (in its historical manifestation) does not in any
way imply that God does ‘behave’ irrationally. So, this
assertion demonstrably misapprehends potentiality for
actuality and makes hilariously inept conclusions on that
basis. Dr Jeremy Stangroom is potentially a
murderer. Does that make the presumption of innocence
impossible in his case ? No, it is possible and therefore
the potentiality of God perverting logic does not in any
way preclude a rational view of God. Since I believe that
God as ultimate reality lies beyond reason,
my faith does not rest on reason but I am surely glad I
don’t have to resort to perverse logic to make my case
for my belief in God. Until indeed God does square circles
or fiddles with my brain to prevent me from seeing the
difference between what is merely possible and what is
real.
As peapod prefers poetry, here is one of the most beautiful expressions of devotion (that I know of) to that which holds us and that which we may not see lest the game of life and death be spoiled. It does not say that God exists – that is folly – it simply describes a philosophical mind that knows God, and the extent it may know God without being presumptuous:
You're inside every kindness.
When a sick person feels better, you'that
and the onset of the disease too.
You're sudden, terrible screaming.
Some problems require that we go for help:
when we knock on a stranger's door,
you sent us. Nobody answers: it's
you! When work feels necessary, you
are the way workers move in rhythm,
you are what is: the field, the players,
the ball, those watching. Someone
claims to have evidence that you do
not exist. You're the one who brings
the evidence in, and the evidence
itself. You are inside the soul's
great fear, every natural pleasure,
every vicious cruelty. You are in
every difference and irritation.
Someone loves something; someone else
hates the same. There you are.
Whatever eyes see, what anyone wants
or not: political power, injustice,
material possessions, those are your
script, the handwriting that we study.
Body, soul, shadow. Whether reckless
or careful, you are what we do. It's
absurd to ask your pardon. You're
inside repentance, and sin! The wonder
of various jewels, agate, emerald.
How we are during a day, then at night,
you are those moods and qualities.
The pure compassion we feel for each
other. Every encampment has a tent
where the leader is and also the wide
truth of your majestic tent overall.....
Jelaluddin Rumi (1207-73).
In conclusion, there is an interesting incident in the life of Sir Alfred J. Ayer. Shortly before his death, he had an out-of-body experience while choking on a sandwich. A ferocious atheist, he denied that the experience was 'proof of God's existence'. Logically, he was correct, and I truly respect the integrity of the man. He could have simply stayed silent on his experience.
But what do you think ? On the terms that I have outlined here, did Ayer experience 'God' ? (The reason I am putting the word in quotation marks is that, he may not have believed in that which overwhelmed him at the point of near-death, but indeed he could have inferred that the mind-state he was in was what religious people point to as the 'presence of God'.) Here is what JC would likely say about the incident:
The kingdom of heaven can be likened unto a philosopher who choked on his fish meal and went to God. Howbeit he recovered for it was not his time yet. And when the doctors gathered he said unto them ‘Nay, God was not there and I was Nowhere, for it could be proven only that I devoured more of the fish than I could swallow’. And the doctors were astonished at the cleverness of the man. But verily, I say unto you, the kingdom of heaven is not given unto them that seek in the clutter of this world that which puts forth and puts away; even the philosopher.
It appears that folks here seem to be more interested in their scoring on the ‘Battleground God’ test (“Take the test” thread) and stroking in each other egos than in philosophy as such. The following analysis would probably not be their cup of tea. It assumes a philosopher (or the bud of one), i.e. someone who loves wisdom. People who love wisdom do not need to give themselves kudos for making intellectual discoveries; indeed they would think it too needy, childish, immature. Having said that, I want to join those who thank peapod for the link. It certainly is interesting. I am a ‘pig’ as she says, but I don’t think I am an ingrate.
The game creator(s) evidently belong to the school of logical positivism which holds, in its most pristine form (Alfred Ayer), that metaphysics does not belong to philosophy.
In a nutshell, Ayer , as well as those whom he followed and who follow him, treats philosophical questions as ‘analytical propositions’ and only facts ascertained by experience can be admitted to examination of truthfulness or falsity. However, logic isn’t constrained by experience and therefore no fact can be validated by experience ‘with certitude’. That God or immortal soul exist, are propositions that cannot be validated and therefore lie outside reasoned inquiry.
Ayer was a brilliant thinker which the game creators certainly are not. It may be inferred, that philosophically they are atheists, or people who reject theism. I have shown in my previous post (on take the test) where their belief that the game is ‘value free’ takes a direct hit, so to speak. They pretend that if I defend the internal consistency of belief in a mad rapist, then I am ‘biting a bullet’ because I have to ‘justify the rapist’. That is demonstrably false.
As I continued to play and analyze, I discovered further problems and inconsistencies:
1) The test of rationality in one’s belief in God, is made against a rational belief in the ‘Loch Ness monster’. Would it be rationally sufficient, the game asks, to reject the belief in Loch Ness monster on grounds there is no evidence for it ? The answer should be ‘yes’. This query is followed by a question if the ‘atheist’s’ view that God does not exist is a matter of belief or rationality. I guessed it was ‘rationality’, but really when you think about the proposition – it is a non-sequitur. (And yes, sure enough, if your answer is ‘belief’, you receive a direct hit. I tested it.). For one, such a link relies on the validity of the comparison made between ‘God’ and the Loch Ness monster. However, if one does not think of God as an anthromorphic entity, or finite being locatable in the blue sky blue above or in a Scottish lake, then one cannot make the inference about the nature of the atheist belief , on the basis of a highly improbable existence of a mythical reptile.
The second aspect, which flows from this, is even more troubling.
The creators of the game evidently believe, that if a belief is not rational, it is irrational in the sense that it violates ‘reason’. But beliefs are intuitions which most often precede facts (as in theses), and apparently exist independently from them. So I do not err if I say that the atheist may well act on ‘faith’ in taking the absence of proof in the finiteness of God as the proof of God who by nature is infinite. Now, if you follow this train to its logical conclusion, you will make an astonishing discovery: If God is God, he cannot be said to exist. The word ‘exist’ comes from the Latin exsistere, ‘coming into being’, it implies irreducibly that God is extant as a form in time and space. I deny that, and yet I believe in God.
2) Question #3 asks to assess the theory of evolution. It gives two choices: the theory is either ‘substantially true’ or it is ‘false’. No other choices. This of course is a patently illogical and dishonest manipulation of the ‘game’. If I am to assess something as ‘substantially true’ I must have the opportunity to grade my negative view in a congruous fashion. So I must be allowed to hold that while I accept some parts of the theory I do not believe the theory to be true ‘substantially’ or ‘on the whole’. So let us say that I believe that species indeed evolve, but that it has been demonstrated (e.g. by von Bartalanffy’s research on the reproductive patterns of guppies) that the view they do so by ‘natural selection’ is flawed both logically (natural selection is held to be both the premise and the effect of evolution) and empirically. So: a) does this make me a creationist ? b) can there be another school of thought on our origins which is neither Darwinist nor naively creationist ? c) what do I answer to this silliness ? (Consider also the silliness of asking the test subject to pass a judgement on a highly technical theory. Why would not there be an ‘out’, a don’t-have-a-clue option ?) I answered ‘false’ and got a lecture from the software. Indeed, my answer was held as ‘ammo’ against my views as a ‘creationist’ even though I do not believe that Creation is a biological fact.
3) Can God make 1 + 1 = 72, and can ‘she square circles’? The answer is ‘yes’ if one holds consistently that God can do anything, and is ‘beyond good and bad’. This argument calls for mental acuity in appraising what is objectively true, what is subjectively true and in whether we may have absolute certainty about any fact (I agree with Ayer that we may not). Objectivity then becomes ‘fluid’ and a label for human subjectivities agreeing on how to grasp, order and name physical and spiritual phenomena. So, properly, we would not be speaking of some absolute standard of objectivity but one that is a moving target, as a historically determined intersubjectivity.
Now the game assesses my ‘yes’ in this fashion:
a. In saying that God has the freedom and the power to
do that which is logically impossible.., you are saying that
any discussion of God as ultimate reality cannot be
constrained by basic principles of rationality.
I agree with this proposition and moreover consider the
adjective ‘basic’ superfluous. If God was fully
apprehended by reason, then God being ‘the ultimate
reality’, further evolution of reason would
be impossible, or purposeless at any rate.
b. That would seem to make rational discourse about God
impossible, there is nothing rational that we can say
about God and nothing rational we can say about God
and nothing rational we can say to support our belief or
disbelief in God.
This proposition makes a demonstrably false inference.
Can you spot the problem ? In agreeing that God can
make nonsense become sense, I am not agreeing that
God actually does just that. God not being constrained
by reason (in its historical manifestation) does not in any
way imply that God does ‘behave’ irrationally. So, this
assertion demonstrably misapprehends potentiality for
actuality and makes hilariously inept conclusions on that
basis. Dr Jeremy Stangroom is potentially a
murderer. Does that make the presumption of innocence
impossible in his case ? No, it is possible and therefore
the potentiality of God perverting logic does not in any
way preclude a rational view of God. Since I believe that
God as ultimate reality lies beyond reason,
my faith does not rest on reason but I am surely glad I
don’t have to resort to perverse logic to make my case
for my belief in God. Until indeed God does square circles
or fiddles with my brain to prevent me from seeing the
difference between what is merely possible and what is
real.
As peapod prefers poetry, here is one of the most beautiful expressions of devotion (that I know of) to that which holds us and that which we may not see lest the game of life and death be spoiled. It does not say that God exists – that is folly – it simply describes a philosophical mind that knows God, and the extent it may know God without being presumptuous:
You're inside every kindness.
When a sick person feels better, you'that
and the onset of the disease too.
You're sudden, terrible screaming.
Some problems require that we go for help:
when we knock on a stranger's door,
you sent us. Nobody answers: it's
you! When work feels necessary, you
are the way workers move in rhythm,
you are what is: the field, the players,
the ball, those watching. Someone
claims to have evidence that you do
not exist. You're the one who brings
the evidence in, and the evidence
itself. You are inside the soul's
great fear, every natural pleasure,
every vicious cruelty. You are in
every difference and irritation.
Someone loves something; someone else
hates the same. There you are.
Whatever eyes see, what anyone wants
or not: political power, injustice,
material possessions, those are your
script, the handwriting that we study.
Body, soul, shadow. Whether reckless
or careful, you are what we do. It's
absurd to ask your pardon. You're
inside repentance, and sin! The wonder
of various jewels, agate, emerald.
How we are during a day, then at night,
you are those moods and qualities.
The pure compassion we feel for each
other. Every encampment has a tent
where the leader is and also the wide
truth of your majestic tent overall.....
Jelaluddin Rumi (1207-73).
In conclusion, there is an interesting incident in the life of Sir Alfred J. Ayer. Shortly before his death, he had an out-of-body experience while choking on a sandwich. A ferocious atheist, he denied that the experience was 'proof of God's existence'. Logically, he was correct, and I truly respect the integrity of the man. He could have simply stayed silent on his experience.
But what do you think ? On the terms that I have outlined here, did Ayer experience 'God' ? (The reason I am putting the word in quotation marks is that, he may not have believed in that which overwhelmed him at the point of near-death, but indeed he could have inferred that the mind-state he was in was what religious people point to as the 'presence of God'.) Here is what JC would likely say about the incident:
The kingdom of heaven can be likened unto a philosopher who choked on his fish meal and went to God. Howbeit he recovered for it was not his time yet. And when the doctors gathered he said unto them ‘Nay, God was not there and I was Nowhere, for it could be proven only that I devoured more of the fish than I could swallow’. And the doctors were astonished at the cleverness of the man. But verily, I say unto you, the kingdom of heaven is not given unto them that seek in the clutter of this world that which puts forth and puts away; even the philosopher.
Newbie
Posts: 21
August 20th, 2004, 10:01 PM
You like philosophy, peapod ?
Quoting
Oh, peapod, you are a being of such simple needs ! The world has found another natural axis. But sorry, in the first place, I am not into apes, second,....it's like the woman who asked me if I thought I was God's gift to women ? I said: 'Don't worry, only to the deserving ones !'
Why shouldn't we stroke each ego? we can't wait for you to do it. Why do you keep bringing me into your ****? Are you in love with me or something scary like that.
You like philosophy, peapod ?
Newbie
Posts: 21
August 20th, 2004, 10:24 PM
.
Believe it, reverend ?
Quoting
No, I am one of them natural pneumatikoi/gnostikoi aka bipolars. The 'drug' is called 'serotonin', it is a neurotransmitter, and the effect of the body overproducing it has been allegorically described by John 2:1-11 (cf. Lk 1:15, Mt 11:19, Acts 2:14-17, 1 Cor 10:4, Eph 5:18, Thomas 13, Thomas 10
Have you ever tried peyote, Solo?
.Believe it, reverend ?
Super Genius
Posts: 1,320
Location: Winnipeg
Location: Winnipeg
August 21st, 2004, 08:45 AM
Quote:
Funny, I don't remember serotonin being mentioned in the Bible. I asked about the peyote because I think you might be interested in the effects...don't reject new experiences out of hand.
No, I am one of them natural pneumatikoi/gnostikoi aka bipolars. The 'drug' is called 'serotonin', it is a neurotransmitter, and the effect of the body overproducing it has been allegorically described by John 2:1-11 (cf. Lk 1:15, Mt 11:19, Acts 2:14-17, 1 Cor 10:4, Eph 5:18, Thomas 13, Thomas 10.
.
Don't bother arguing, I KNOW!
Posts: 10,754
Location: pumpkin pie bungalow
Location: pumpkin pie bungalow
August 21st, 2004, 11:10 AM
My turn revrend
Come into my parlor said the spider to the fly............Man I cannot believe I am reading this crap, slurping my coffee waiting for the boat to be fueled, internet cafes everywhere now. I should be thinking about which hootchie to use to hook myself a nice chinook salmon. Think I will use the small pink "squirt" tie it up to to a 40 pound leader, trolled behind a hotspot plaid flasher, that outta get me a big fish. Only Gamakatsu hooks for peapod, expensive but you would be surprised what an extra 30 cents per hook can produce.
Talk about an "ego" reading that ayers rant I nodded out at least a half dozen times. Unlike Des who just told me his story of hooking a 231.6 halibut near Jordon river, he is a legend in these parts. A spreader bar baited with a chunk of salmon belly lured the big fish.
The battle raged for just over one hour when Des near exhaustion had to rest. He tied the line off to his anchor buoy to regain some strength and composure. After a ten minute rest Des untied the line and began to pump and reel the big fish. The battle was going in the halibut’s favour pulling his small sport boat around for a brief time. Suddenly, the catch started to come to the surface with little effort. To Des's surprise the big “barn door” was in the jaws of a hungry sealion! The assist from the creature from the deep made all the difference. After an hour plus, the tussle with the sealion drained the big fish of enough energy to allow des to harpoon the big lunker.
Oh ya, fishing gets peapod all excited...but back to your bull****. Wait a second now, you something strange there. "peapod you are a being of simple needs" No western man would utter those words to women, a womens needs are anything but simple, just ask any western man my friend.
One thing solo, you gotta do something about your humor, it sucks! I have not heard such dumb ass insults since grade two. Now if you had said "your mothers a hamster, and your father smells of elderberries" I might have been crushed. The ape remark was hard to read it was so dumb ass.
No pesky suitor, I concede you to be the top philosopher at the board, nobody nodds me out like you do. ya the arab poem is nice, I prefer my own brand of of stuff, like this ode to all my X's .
Xerox candy bar
AH!
your just a copy,
of all the candy bars,
I have eaten before
Well condescending suitor, looks like its time to put on my lucky toque, the boats ready to go. Here are some tips that are far more useful than poetry and philsolpy.
Learn the rhythm of the river, there are times on a river when its feeding time for fish. On the ocean depth is critical. watch everything when a fish is being caught, count pulls, or the down rigger turns when the lucky fisherperson resets his gear. Watch and learn about the fish, a secret to angling the big one.
Continue with the game...your serve...keep your eye on the ping pong ball. I gotta get a life.
My turn revrend
Come into my parlor said the spider to the fly............Man I cannot believe I am reading this crap, slurping my coffee waiting for the boat to be fueled, internet cafes everywhere now. I should be thinking about which hootchie to use to hook myself a nice chinook salmon. Think I will use the small pink "squirt" tie it up to to a 40 pound leader, trolled behind a hotspot plaid flasher, that outta get me a big fish. Only Gamakatsu hooks for peapod, expensive but you would be surprised what an extra 30 cents per hook can produce.
Talk about an "ego" reading that ayers rant I nodded out at least a half dozen times. Unlike Des who just told me his story of hooking a 231.6 halibut near Jordon river, he is a legend in these parts. A spreader bar baited with a chunk of salmon belly lured the big fish.
The battle raged for just over one hour when Des near exhaustion had to rest. He tied the line off to his anchor buoy to regain some strength and composure. After a ten minute rest Des untied the line and began to pump and reel the big fish. The battle was going in the halibut’s favour pulling his small sport boat around for a brief time. Suddenly, the catch started to come to the surface with little effort. To Des's surprise the big “barn door” was in the jaws of a hungry sealion! The assist from the creature from the deep made all the difference. After an hour plus, the tussle with the sealion drained the big fish of enough energy to allow des to harpoon the big lunker.
Oh ya, fishing gets peapod all excited...but back to your bull****. Wait a second now, you something strange there. "peapod you are a being of simple needs" No western man would utter those words to women, a womens needs are anything but simple, just ask any western man my friend.
One thing solo, you gotta do something about your humor, it sucks! I have not heard such dumb ass insults since grade two. Now if you had said "your mothers a hamster, and your father smells of elderberries" I might have been crushed. The ape remark was hard to read it was so dumb ass.
No pesky suitor, I concede you to be the top philosopher at the board, nobody nodds me out like you do. ya the arab poem is nice, I prefer my own brand of of stuff, like this ode to all my X's .
Xerox candy bar
AH!
your just a copy,
of all the candy bars,
I have eaten before
Well condescending suitor, looks like its time to put on my lucky toque, the boats ready to go. Here are some tips that are far more useful than poetry and philsolpy.
Learn the rhythm of the river, there are times on a river when its feeding time for fish. On the ocean depth is critical. watch everything when a fish is being caught, count pulls, or the down rigger turns when the lucky fisherperson resets his gear. Watch and learn about the fish, a secret to angling the big one.
Continue with the game...your serve...keep your eye on the ping pong ball. I gotta get a life.
Newbie
Posts: 21
August 21st, 2004, 11:38 AM
....well, serotonin in NT is called 'Holy Sprite' or some'n. ..incidentally, you are not one of them fundamentally challenged preachers, are you ? Gheezwiz, y'all get the meanin' of allegory, don't you ?
Quoting
Rev, I am a child of the sixties; do not presume to lecture to me on how to abuse my mind Quote:
Funny, I don't remember serotonin being mentioned in the Bible. I asked about the peyote because I think you might be interested in the effects...don't reject new experiences out of hand.
No, I am one of them natural pneumatikoi/gnostikoi aka bipolars. The 'drug' is called 'serotonin', it is a neurotransmitter, and the effect of the body overproducing it has been allegorically described by John 2:1-11 (cf. Lk 1:15, Mt 11:19, Acts 2:14-17, 1 Cor 10:4, Eph 5:18, Thomas 13, Thomas 10.
.
....well, serotonin in NT is called 'Holy Sprite' or some'n. ..incidentally, you are not one of them fundamentally challenged preachers, are you ? Gheezwiz, y'all get the meanin' of allegory, don't you ?
Newbie
Posts: 21
August 21st, 2004, 01:29 PM
What the fudge, is 'western man' ? Your favourite stereotype of a servile masochistic male nullity ? Let me take an outrageous guess : Women's studies 101 ?
What I meant by you having 'simple needs' is that I read you as someone who feels naturally entitled to dominate but doesn't have the drive to dedicate herself to something, pursue it and excel in it. So, the only way you can dominate is by whimsy. And the only guys you can dominate would be, let me make an outrageous guess, guys not too sure of themselves and not too sure how to handle their overbearing mother. Who do you think you are kidding, Miss I-could-be-a-big-fish-if-I-want-to ?
No western man would utter ..... ! I fart in your general direction !
I spoke to the Goddess about you. She says: Give her hell ! I gave her brains and spunk and she's wasting away. You show her stuff and she runs away to look for fish who would kiss her big butt. Tell her I won't send her any she would care for !
I said to myself, this babe can't be more than half of my age - let's just see if she isn't just a tad too cocky....
Quoting
you are reading it, that's the thing, ...
My turn revrend
Come into my parlor said the spider to the fly............Man I cannot believe I am reading this crap,...
Come into my parlor said the spider to the fly............Man I cannot believe I am reading this crap,...
Quote:
....and no doubt you have a firm grasp of the points I was making...but if I am to be honest with you, I don't think you have a clue - at least you don't show you have a clue - and that's why you would rather bull**** your way out of it and go fishing.......I just wanted to know where you thought you had a knack for philosophy. That's about it.
Talk about an "ego" reading that ayers rant I nodded out at least a half dozen times.
Quote:
peapod, you live in a strange world ! I am not uttering 'those words' to 'women', I am uttering them to you, and I do that because you are conceited and not nearly as debonnaire as you like to think.
Oh ya, fishing gets peapod all excited...but back to your bull****. Wait a second now, you something strange there. "peapod you are a being of simple needs" No western man would utter those words to women, a womens needs are anything but simple, just ask any western man my friend.
What the fudge, is 'western man' ? Your favourite stereotype of a servile masochistic male nullity ? Let me take an outrageous guess : Women's studies 101 ? What I meant by you having 'simple needs' is that I read you as someone who feels naturally entitled to dominate but doesn't have the drive to dedicate herself to something, pursue it and excel in it. So, the only way you can dominate is by whimsy. And the only guys you can dominate would be, let me make an outrageous guess, guys not too sure of themselves and not too sure how to handle their overbearing mother. Who do you think you are kidding, Miss I-could-be-a-big-fish-if-I-want-to ?
No western man would utter ..... ! I fart in your general direction !
Quote:
Yeah, yeah...I gotta do something about this, about that, I am too conceited, too arrogant, too dumb-ass-unfunny, I have a chip on my shoulder, and I am a pig......peapod, do you really believe I am smitten ? You kidding ?!
One thing solo, you gotta do something about your humor, it sucks! I have not heard such dumb ass insults since grade two. Now if you had said "your mothers a hamster, and your father smells of elderberries" I might have been crushed. The ape remark was hard to read it was so dumb ass.
Quote:
Oh, yes the persistent buzz between your ears that is craving but that insists on being worshipped as thought !
No pesky suitor, I concede you to be the top philosopher at the board, nobody nodds me out like you do. ya the arab poem is nice, I prefer my own brand of of stuff, like this ode to all my X's .
Xerox candy bar
AH!
your just a copy,
of all the candy bars,
I have eaten before
Xerox candy bar
AH!
your just a copy,
of all the candy bars,
I have eaten before
I spoke to the Goddess about you. She says: Give her hell ! I gave her brains and spunk and she's wasting away. You show her stuff and she runs away to look for fish who would kiss her big butt. Tell her I won't send her any she would care for !
Quote:
....and this, I take, does not 'feel' condescending to you. Did it ever occur to you that my attitude has to do with you starting our acquiantance by talking down to me ?
Well condescending suitor, looks like its time to put on my lucky toque, the boats ready to go. Here are some tips that are far more useful than poetry and philsolpy.
I said to myself, this babe can't be more than half of my age - let's just see if she isn't just a tad too cocky....
Quote:
Remember what the Goddess said, peapod ! Don't pick on me, I am just a mesenger !
Learn the rhythm of the river, there are times on a river when its feeding time for fish. On the ocean depth is critical. watch everything when a fish is being caught, count pulls, or the down rigger turns when the lucky fisherperson resets his gear. Watch and learn about the fish, a secret to angling the big one.
Continue with the game...your serve...keep your eye on the ping pong ball. I gotta get a life.
Continue with the game...your serve...keep your eye on the ping pong ball. I gotta get a life.
Don't bother arguing, I KNOW!
Posts: 10,754
Location: pumpkin pie bungalow
Location: pumpkin pie bungalow
August 22nd, 2004, 03:14 PM
LOL... Ya I am reading it bully suitor, but the thing is I know I am reading
it and why, do you? I enjoy messing with you, its
so easy. Your asumptions crack me up. You are the worst kind of thinker,
an intelluctual snob! Ya I get it, you are educated, you can read a book,
talk down to you? One thing to know something about nothing, but quite
another thing to rub in peoples faces. Thats the trouble with bullies, they
don't like it when somebody dishes it right back at them. Instead of trying
to share any the knowledge or wisdom with some humility, in a way that I
might respect and learn something from, you post your sneer with a smiley
rolling eyes. Ya only your opinion is right, only your observations in
life are worth anything, you arrogant condescending snob. Do you really
think if I did have a question about Philosophy, assuming I am capable of
having one, I would ask you. You are all data, there is no depth.
Do I like philosophy? how dumb ass are you anyway? fishing is philosophy!
Here is an excellent
philosopher and a darn good fisherman to. although I doubt that you will be
able to get it.
There is something mystical about fishing for trout. Living and spawning in
the most beautiful places in the world, they're very colorful creatures,
very streamlined and hydrodynamic. They are part of the stream; born from
stones, their eggs hatched from the gravel of the riverbottom, they live in
quiet wooded glens and very clear, cold streams.
The stream itself is almost like an immortal entity. It's cyclical, always
moving, flowing down to the ocean and returning to the land as rain.
When you go fishing in the stream you are partaking of this immortal entity.
You see your reflection in the stream, and you can almost lose yourself in
the mortal cycles. For example, the adult life of a mayfly, a primary food
source of a trout, is just a single day. Its Latin name is Ephemerella.
More than anything else, I'd say my underlying purpose is of "observer." The
processes of writing and painting for me are at once the same and different.
They both resemble the composition of a song - the need to bring closure to
a creative endeavor, hopefully at the height of their individual
possiblities.
My basic life philosophy is founded on contrast theory. You could not see
anything if it weren't for its opposite. That is why for me a heaven or
paradise is a completely ludicrous idea. It makes no sense at all to have
enjoyment in a place where everything is perfect. As Machiavelli says in his
"Prince", "contrast makes virtue apparent." And Hesse in "Narcissus and
Goldmund:" "Any life expands and flowers only through division and
contradiction. What are reason and sobriety without the knowledge of
intoxication? What is sensuality without death standing behind it? What is
love without the eternal mortal enmity of the sexes?"
Ever felt that when a fishing in a river for steelhead? ever fish at night?
if you did you might feel this,
Its very queer, especially on dark nights, when your thoughts wander to the
vast
cosmogonal themes in other spheres, to feel the faint jerk, which comes to
interrupt
your dreams and link you to nature again. It seemed as if I might cast my
line upward
into the air, as well as downward into this element, which was scarcely more
dense, thus I caught
two fishes as it were with one hook.
Do you know who said this?
To go fishing is the chance to wash one's soul with pure air, with the rush
of the brook, or with the shimmer of sun on blue water. It brings meekness
and inspiration from the decency of nature, charity toward tackle-makers,
patience toward fish, a mockery of profits and egos, a quieting of hate, a
rejoicing that you do not have to decide a darned thing until next week. And
it is discipline in the equality of people- for all people are equal before
fish.
Womens studies 101! Nope! wrong again! try fly fishing 101. peapod will
reach a new physophical plane when
she can master the water ballet, done to prefection, pure concentration
foused into the perfect moment. Everything
slipping way in the rushing river. An elegant, looping cast ties your body
and your mind to everything around you.
Ya, who is the real waste around here me or you? I don't need to match wits
with you, I prefer more worthy opponets.
A nice 30 pound tyee would a great battle, peapod trying to outwit, out play
something with the brain the size of a breadcrumb, the breadcrumb wins alot.
Know what I mean? get it?
Man, you go on with some intelluctal rant, and than you say something dumb
ass like you are throwing a fart my way? What are you a really smart kid in
grade 2? Did you really type that out? Well it just happens I grew up with
brothers who made it their mission in life to include me in all their
farting experiences. I been in the trenches with the best of them, so feel
free, fire away!
Ya solo, I get up every morning and look in the mirror, and say " Dam you
are fine!" and than I say " It does not get much
better than that" Than I do a little cocky strut in front of the mirror,
the strut gets real good if there is a good tune playing.
My brother use to do the same stuff to himself in the mirror, than he would
do his little strut, the thing is he use add a little something special to
his strut, he could grab his balls, lift and squeeze in one quick movement,
the ultimate peacock strut.
He does the same thing when he lands a fish.
Male domination, not my trip solo. I like men, most of them are smart, lots
are good and kind, to many are good fishermen, some of my best friends are
men, including X's. But every now and than one comes along like yourself
solo, they come in female versions to, and peapod forgets what mama told
her, if someone has to show you their intellectual rank, its best to ignore
them. I have enjoyed my time in the mud with you, but mama was right, as
usual. Ya sure, you got it bad for me, you are just like Paddy Mcdonald in
grade 4! Always pestering me, trying to beat me up, my brother told me he
did it because he had a secret crush on me, like you solo, he was a dumb ass
to. Most of all tho, I love how it bugs you so much!
Bye the way peapod had a great battle with a 18 pound chinook, it made her
very "think" alot. Can't prove it tho, I operate on the catch and release. There I go again bragging, but its allowed in fishing.
program. Now I think I will ignore you.
LOL... Ya I am reading it bully suitor, but the thing is I know I am reading
it and why, do you? I enjoy messing with you, its
so easy. Your asumptions crack me up. You are the worst kind of thinker,
an intelluctual snob! Ya I get it, you are educated, you can read a book,
talk down to you? One thing to know something about nothing, but quite
another thing to rub in peoples faces. Thats the trouble with bullies, they
don't like it when somebody dishes it right back at them. Instead of trying
to share any the knowledge or wisdom with some humility, in a way that I
might respect and learn something from, you post your sneer with a smiley
rolling eyes. Ya only your opinion is right, only your observations in
life are worth anything, you arrogant condescending snob. Do you really
think if I did have a question about Philosophy, assuming I am capable of
having one, I would ask you. You are all data, there is no depth.
Do I like philosophy? how dumb ass are you anyway? fishing is philosophy!
Here is an excellent
philosopher and a darn good fisherman to. although I doubt that you will be
able to get it.
There is something mystical about fishing for trout. Living and spawning in
the most beautiful places in the world, they're very colorful creatures,
very streamlined and hydrodynamic. They are part of the stream; born from
stones, their eggs hatched from the gravel of the riverbottom, they live in
quiet wooded glens and very clear, cold streams.
The stream itself is almost like an immortal entity. It's cyclical, always
moving, flowing down to the ocean and returning to the land as rain.
When you go fishing in the stream you are partaking of this immortal entity.
You see your reflection in the stream, and you can almost lose yourself in
the mortal cycles. For example, the adult life of a mayfly, a primary food
source of a trout, is just a single day. Its Latin name is Ephemerella.
More than anything else, I'd say my underlying purpose is of "observer." The
processes of writing and painting for me are at once the same and different.
They both resemble the composition of a song - the need to bring closure to
a creative endeavor, hopefully at the height of their individual
possiblities.
My basic life philosophy is founded on contrast theory. You could not see
anything if it weren't for its opposite. That is why for me a heaven or
paradise is a completely ludicrous idea. It makes no sense at all to have
enjoyment in a place where everything is perfect. As Machiavelli says in his
"Prince", "contrast makes virtue apparent." And Hesse in "Narcissus and
Goldmund:" "Any life expands and flowers only through division and
contradiction. What are reason and sobriety without the knowledge of
intoxication? What is sensuality without death standing behind it? What is
love without the eternal mortal enmity of the sexes?"
Ever felt that when a fishing in a river for steelhead? ever fish at night?
if you did you might feel this,
Its very queer, especially on dark nights, when your thoughts wander to the
vast
cosmogonal themes in other spheres, to feel the faint jerk, which comes to
interrupt
your dreams and link you to nature again. It seemed as if I might cast my
line upward
into the air, as well as downward into this element, which was scarcely more
dense, thus I caught
two fishes as it were with one hook.
Do you know who said this?
To go fishing is the chance to wash one's soul with pure air, with the rush
of the brook, or with the shimmer of sun on blue water. It brings meekness
and inspiration from the decency of nature, charity toward tackle-makers,
patience toward fish, a mockery of profits and egos, a quieting of hate, a
rejoicing that you do not have to decide a darned thing until next week. And
it is discipline in the equality of people- for all people are equal before
fish.
Womens studies 101! Nope! wrong again! try fly fishing 101. peapod will
reach a new physophical plane when
she can master the water ballet, done to prefection, pure concentration
foused into the perfect moment. Everything
slipping way in the rushing river. An elegant, looping cast ties your body
and your mind to everything around you.
Ya, who is the real waste around here me or you? I don't need to match wits
with you, I prefer more worthy opponets.
A nice 30 pound tyee would a great battle, peapod trying to outwit, out play
something with the brain the size of a breadcrumb, the breadcrumb wins alot.
Know what I mean? get it?
Man, you go on with some intelluctal rant, and than you say something dumb
ass like you are throwing a fart my way? What are you a really smart kid in
grade 2? Did you really type that out? Well it just happens I grew up with
brothers who made it their mission in life to include me in all their
farting experiences. I been in the trenches with the best of them, so feel
free, fire away!
Ya solo, I get up every morning and look in the mirror, and say " Dam you
are fine!" and than I say " It does not get much
better than that" Than I do a little cocky strut in front of the mirror,
the strut gets real good if there is a good tune playing.
My brother use to do the same stuff to himself in the mirror, than he would
do his little strut, the thing is he use add a little something special to
his strut, he could grab his balls, lift and squeeze in one quick movement,
the ultimate peacock strut.
He does the same thing when he lands a fish.
Male domination, not my trip solo. I like men, most of them are smart, lots
are good and kind, to many are good fishermen, some of my best friends are
men, including X's. But every now and than one comes along like yourself
solo, they come in female versions to, and peapod forgets what mama told
her, if someone has to show you their intellectual rank, its best to ignore
them. I have enjoyed my time in the mud with you, but mama was right, as
usual. Ya sure, you got it bad for me, you are just like Paddy Mcdonald in
grade 4! Always pestering me, trying to beat me up, my brother told me he
did it because he had a secret crush on me, like you solo, he was a dumb ass
to. Most of all tho, I love how it bugs you so much!
Bye the way peapod had a great battle with a 18 pound chinook, it made her
very "think" alot. Can't prove it tho, I operate on the catch and release. There I go again bragging, but its allowed in fishing.
program. Now I think I will ignore you.
Member
Posts: 198
Location: Eastern USA
Location: Eastern USA
August 22nd, 2004, 04:06 PM
Clearly some on this board take themselves far too seriously. The purpose of the "test" was for fun and conversation on this board, not a debate as to who is the greatest or deepest thinker here.
I don't see where the posting of results was stroking of egos, but a friendly discussion and comparison between people who have found a common place to convene and hold such discussions.
Solo712, you have proven with no doubt that you are a person of deep thought and great intellect. Yet the quote Peapod wrote came from one of the greatest (in my opinion) and most poignant characters of this century. Yet he was a simple and humble man, who did not try to impress with his knowledge, choosing rather to speak to everyone as equals. This gave more weight to his ideas than blathering on and on about what he knew.
That said, I must agree with Solo that the "test" was full of inconsistencies, and I also took it several times with varying results.
By the way Peapod, there is a book, don't remember the name offhand, which is a collection of letters written to Hoover by children of his era, and his replies to these letters. I will google the title for you, it is a very interesting read.
Clearly some on this board take themselves far too seriously. The purpose of the "test" was for fun and conversation on this board, not a debate as to who is the greatest or deepest thinker here.
I don't see where the posting of results was stroking of egos, but a friendly discussion and comparison between people who have found a common place to convene and hold such discussions.
Solo712, you have proven with no doubt that you are a person of deep thought and great intellect. Yet the quote Peapod wrote came from one of the greatest (in my opinion) and most poignant characters of this century. Yet he was a simple and humble man, who did not try to impress with his knowledge, choosing rather to speak to everyone as equals. This gave more weight to his ideas than blathering on and on about what he knew.
That said, I must agree with Solo that the "test" was full of inconsistencies, and I also took it several times with varying results.
By the way Peapod, there is a book, don't remember the name offhand, which is a collection of letters written to Hoover by children of his era, and his replies to these letters. I will google the title for you, it is a very interesting read.
Don't bother arguing, I KNOW!
Posts: 10,754
Location: pumpkin pie bungalow
Location: pumpkin pie bungalow
August 22nd, 2004, 04:42 PM
Promethus, I like you. I could learn something from you. I think you "fish" you might find this an interesting read. Its called a jerk on end, reflections of a mediocre fisherman.
"In some ways it's a ridiculous human passion," renowned author and art critic Robert Hughes confesses of his lifelong devotion to fishing. But it is a powerful, abiding passion nonetheless, one that Hughes shares with presidents and paupers, philosophers and truants, mystics and macho deep-sea warriors. Author of the acclaimed The Fatal Shore: The Epic of Australia's Founding, The Culture of Complaint, and American Visions: The Epic History of Art in America, Hughes now brings his wit, insight, critical eye, and incomparable genius for narrative to bear on the pastime he loves best.Hughes acknowledges that if he were to amortize the market value of the fish he catches in a year against the expense of catching them, he'd be shelling out about $55 a pound on bluefish alone. But clearly he's not in it for the money. In A Jerk on One End, Hughes traces his love of fishing back to his earliest boyhood on Sydney Harbor, Australia, and recounts the high and low points of his career with rod and reel--the first surge of triumph when he snagged a six-pound bonito, the shame of having his father catch him trout-fishing with live bait (the most perfidious failing in the eyes of every fly-fisher), hair-raising shark tales he picked up on the Sydney waterfront.Here too is a history of fishing going back to classical antiquity, along with meditations on the art and philosophy of fishing and deep draughts of the finest fishing writing through the ages. Hughes gazes long and hard into the shining eyes of his prey and captures the essence of each noble species in brilliant verbal portraits--the delicate striped bass, most amenable to cooking and most susceptible to urban pollutants; the infinitely treacherous tarpon; the fastidious, elusive trout; the giant bluefin tuna, which holds the dubious honor of being the most expensive and sought after animal on earth. And in one unforgettable passage, he adopts the fish's point of view and forces us to imagine the horror of being hooked and reeled into an alien element.Fishing, Hughes asserts, taught him patience as a boy and reverence for nature as man. In the concluding pages of this splendid book, he draws on this reverence to make a powerfully reasoned plea for the ecology of the sea. Mixing memoir, history, adventure, folklore, and stunning descriptions of the fathomless mysteries of the deep, Robert Hughes has written an absolutely magnificent volume. A Jerk on One End is a superb piece of prose and a profound meditation on the beauty, the excitement, and the peerless pleasures of fishing--and of life. -
Promethus, I like you. I could learn something from you. I think you "fish" you might find this an interesting read. Its called a jerk on end, reflections of a mediocre fisherman.
"In some ways it's a ridiculous human passion," renowned author and art critic Robert Hughes confesses of his lifelong devotion to fishing. But it is a powerful, abiding passion nonetheless, one that Hughes shares with presidents and paupers, philosophers and truants, mystics and macho deep-sea warriors. Author of the acclaimed The Fatal Shore: The Epic of Australia's Founding, The Culture of Complaint, and American Visions: The Epic History of Art in America, Hughes now brings his wit, insight, critical eye, and incomparable genius for narrative to bear on the pastime he loves best.Hughes acknowledges that if he were to amortize the market value of the fish he catches in a year against the expense of catching them, he'd be shelling out about $55 a pound on bluefish alone. But clearly he's not in it for the money. In A Jerk on One End, Hughes traces his love of fishing back to his earliest boyhood on Sydney Harbor, Australia, and recounts the high and low points of his career with rod and reel--the first surge of triumph when he snagged a six-pound bonito, the shame of having his father catch him trout-fishing with live bait (the most perfidious failing in the eyes of every fly-fisher), hair-raising shark tales he picked up on the Sydney waterfront.Here too is a history of fishing going back to classical antiquity, along with meditations on the art and philosophy of fishing and deep draughts of the finest fishing writing through the ages. Hughes gazes long and hard into the shining eyes of his prey and captures the essence of each noble species in brilliant verbal portraits--the delicate striped bass, most amenable to cooking and most susceptible to urban pollutants; the infinitely treacherous tarpon; the fastidious, elusive trout; the giant bluefin tuna, which holds the dubious honor of being the most expensive and sought after animal on earth. And in one unforgettable passage, he adopts the fish's point of view and forces us to imagine the horror of being hooked and reeled into an alien element.Fishing, Hughes asserts, taught him patience as a boy and reverence for nature as man. In the concluding pages of this splendid book, he draws on this reverence to make a powerfully reasoned plea for the ecology of the sea. Mixing memoir, history, adventure, folklore, and stunning descriptions of the fathomless mysteries of the deep, Robert Hughes has written an absolutely magnificent volume. A Jerk on One End is a superb piece of prose and a profound meditation on the beauty, the excitement, and the peerless pleasures of fishing--and of life. -
Super Genius
Posts: 1,320
Location: Winnipeg
Location: Winnipeg
August 23rd, 2004, 06:56 AM
I'm one of those internet-ordained atheist reverends, Solo. I understand allegory very well, thanks. What I don't understand is people who feel themselves superior to others based on knowing a few big words.
Quote:
How could you possibly know that "Holy Sprite" means seratonin? It could mean opium, for all you know.
Rev, I am a child of the sixties; do not presume to lecture to me on how to abuse my mind ....well, serotonin in NT is called 'Holy Sprite' or some'n. ..incidentally, you are not one of them fundamentally challenged preachers, are you ? Gheezwiz, y'all get the meanin' of allegory , don't you ?
I'm one of those internet-ordained atheist reverends, Solo. I understand allegory very well, thanks. What I don't understand is people who feel themselves superior to others based on knowing a few big words.
Don't bother arguing, I KNOW!
Posts: 10,754
Location: pumpkin pie bungalow
Location: pumpkin pie bungalow
August 23rd, 2004, 12:04 PM
Hey galaniomama
Nice to see you back. Checking out my ass are you? Next time let me know, and I will put a little strut into it for you 
You got work to do for change? no sleeping at your desk today? Send some my way would ya.
Hey galaniomama
Nice to see you back. Checking out my ass are you? Next time let me know, and I will put a little strut into it for you You got work to do for change? no sleeping at your desk today? Send some my way would ya.
