Philosophy forum

[editec]

I am, therefore I post.

LOL

Except here for most of us, I think it's more like..

I troll, therefore I am.

 

[Ravi]

Yeah, wait until the second year. However, it STILL won't get you a subforum.

You might want to check out the Religion forum before being so gung-ho. That forum STAYS trashed because of a certain crowd of anti's that won't let anyone else post or have a decent discussion. A philosophy forum would be the same.

Support has nothing to do with the philosophy forum. Ive been entertained in the religion forum and have a lot of posts there. It doesnt seem that bad...but then again, I refuse to be told what to do or think there as well. Debate is something I love to do...especially when facts can be presented that enlighten the other parties involved.

Jamie

Several of us are still waiting in the other thread for you to back up your "facts"

I get it now, The Illusion means The Lie. So very very philosophical.

 

[MaggieMae]

gunny, for what it is worth, my wife isn't an elitist. she likes to think, and be inspired to think. her-and my-approach is to ask the dangerous questions and see where they lead. that sometimes creates anger, granted, but we hope more for such questioning to inspire thought that we can learn from and use to stoke our own thinking processes.

I see a big RED flag in your careful comment. A cult recruiting tactic maybe?

i have been found out. yes, i worship eastern russian organically grown baby carrots, and have been sent out among the dirty unwashed uninitiated to recruit followers for that colorful band of tubers (they will eventually take over the world donchaknow).

care to join? all you need to do is erect a greenhouse, and grow the little fellers to receive a tax exempt growing space! think of it! a footprint as big as you want, and all tax freeeeeeee!!!!!

your red should lean a little more towards pinkish orange.

Perhaps you should have better defined what you mean by 'dangerous' questions, or omitted the word entirely. I can't recall ever having a philosophical discussion with anyone, ever, where the topic delved into 'dangerous' territory. Dangerous how? I think you're forgetting that there is an enormous amount of suspicion about the people standing next to you these days, let alone anonymous ones we meet on the Internet.

 

[MaggieMae]

Gunny - what can in hurt to put in a philosophy sub-forum? Let it run for 90 days and if it's complete shit, then trash it.

And whatever happened to your tame zone or whatever it was going to be called -- where you actually had to use facts to back up your arguments (one would think that should be a pre-requisite for posting on this forum as a whole, but I guess the standards here can't be THAT high)?

However...to stick with the theme here, what are "facts"?? I post "facts" all the time but they are called lefty lies anyway. [HEY!! I guess that's a 'dangerous' question!! I'm beginning to get it.]

 

[del]

How can you speak of danger and not know about BA Baracus.

I pity the fool.

If you are going to cyberstalk me, please at least stay on topic in all my topics. Your useless poignant insulting and trolling is getting to be annoying. If you want my attention, all you have to do is ask, but the insults and other pointless posting is really getting old.

I dont mind if people challenge what I have to say in my topics, but the insults, pointless derailing of my threads, and argumentative fallacies are pretty pathetic.

Id appreciate it and respect you more if you did. Thanks.

Jamie

you don't get to decide who posts what where and these claims of *cyberstalking* are getting tiresome.

since none of the above comments are a) addressed to you; b) insulting in any way and c)are actually kinda funny, it makes you look like like a bigger horse's ass than you might actually be.

knock it off.

 

[Barb]

It would be a forum where mindless drones blather on endlessly, enamored of their own words and juvenile musings, and never have to support any of the idiocy they spout.

Like a message board utopia.

How do you really feel, allie?

Not all philosophy is the sole property of leftist, wannabe-intellectual elitists. It actually can be interesting sometimes, depending on the philosophy.

Philosophy would be a nice addition to the board. There's a lot to learn from and argue about between different philosophers, and hundreds to choose from.

 

[Barb]

Yeah, wait until the second year. However, it STILL won't get you a subforum.

You might want to check out the Religion forum before being so gung-ho. That forum STAYS trashed because of a certain crowd of anti's that won't let anyone else post or have a decent discussion. A philosophy forum would be the same.

Support has nothing to do with the philosophy forum. Ive been entertained in the religion forum and have a lot of posts there. It doesnt seem that bad...but then again, I refuse to be told what to do or think there as well. Debate is something I love to do...especially when facts can be presented that enlighten the other parties involved.

Jamie

Have you noticed in the Religion and Ethics forum what the sub-header says? Religion, Philosophy ....

So you are here to enlighten, huh? Think I've heard this line before and know where it goes.

Reciprocity seems to be implied with mention of enlightenment.

 

[Barb]

What do you know of danger?

Will you ask the most burning questions of the age, such as 'How can they redo the A-team if George peppard is dead??!'

I doubt you would dare such a question!!!

i would not, mostly because i have no real idea what the a team is. i imagine you do though?

i am amazed at your....vitriol? does the mere thought of asking questions raise anger in your fevered mind?

i am supposing that your offer a greater sense of danger than you think i can, so feel free to begin a thread with your most "dangerous" question.

You dare to try and speak of philosphy, yet you don't know of one of the greatest thinkers of our age, Hannibal Smith?

It seems your idea is an epic failure, and I love it when a plan comes together!

Oh poop, they're trying to get a worthy thread established and you have to counter with pop culture, really? C'mon. We're all engaged in philosophy here, wouldn't it be interesting to check out some of the greats? Its said to be, academically, one of the more interesting roads to poverty.

 

[Barb]

I pity the fool.

If you are going to cyberstalk me, please at least stay on topic in all my topics. Your useless poignant insulting and trolling is getting to be annoying. If you want my attention, all you have to do is ask, but the insults and other pointless posting is really getting old.

I dont mind if people challenge what I have to say in my topics, but the insults, pointless derailing of my threads, and argumentative fallacies are pretty pathetic.

Id appreciate it and respect you more if you did. Thanks.

Jamie

Look "Jamie" how was I stalking YOU by replying to something between Xenophon and Vinny? Did you forget who you were supposed to be again?

As for what I said, Xenophon got it. It was a joke based on the theme he was riffing on. If you can't take this level of fun & games you aren't going to last around here. Period. Grow a thicker skin or move on. If you can't take me quoting Mr. T in response to something you weren't even involved in then this prolly isn't the place for you.

Maybe. Still, maybe she's trying to make a little space for herself and others who would like to go a little bit in another direction. There's plenty of lighthearted fun here, she's trying to get the mods to make a space for other interests. What would it hurt?

 

[vincubus]

It would be a forum where mindless drones blather on endlessly, enamored of their own words and juvenile musings, and never have to support any of the idiocy they spout.

Like a message board utopia.

How do you really feel, allie?

Not all philosophy is the sole property of leftist, wannabe-intellectual elitists. It actually can be interesting sometimes, depending on the philosophy.

Philosophy would be a nice addition to the board. There's a lot to learn from and argue about between different philosophers, and hundreds to choose from.

indeed. hobbes recognizes that each of us desires power, and the saving grace is that we are all comfortable at different levels of power. hobbes is also for a strong central government. he had to be protected by a king, as he was an atheist. those who free think often anger many others who are more mediocre. a shame that.

and while we are discussing power, we could discuss matters of coersion, and the responsibility one has over anothers actions, and abuse of power in the name of friends, and the tyranny of social order.

like a chess game, these thoughts demand advanced anticipation.

you seem an interesting poster. i will pay more attention to your posts in the future/

 

[Barb]

Politics derived from Philosophy and is just as Chatty Kathy as anything else Philosophy is also something that is highly debated. I know you know this, Gunny, but you cant discredit me for trying

Jamie

My response was to Echo. There is NOTHING philosophical about HER CHatty Kathy forum, trust me. It's more like posting two gay male models and asking which one is the bigger hunk.

I'm considering your request. I'm just trying to figure out who on this board could actually post in it honestly.

I'm wondering who among us really knows enough philosophy to post on such a forum?

I mean real philosophy, now, not OUR philosophies, but the real stuff.

I know damned well I'm not conversant about the real debates that exist in that field.

Are any of us really qualified to pontificate like a philosopher here?

Probably not to the level to discuss with philosophers, but we could discuss philosophers. I took Western Civ. Many of my other classes had reference to the thinkers of past times. It isn't that hard to read someones work and agree or disagree, we do it all the time. Here, Ill start, there's plenty to disagree with View attachment $One Feminist View.doc

 

[Amanda]

i would not, mostly because i have no real idea what the a team is. i imagine you do though?

i am amazed at your....vitriol? does the mere thought of asking questions raise anger in your fevered mind?

i am supposing that your offer a greater sense of danger than you think i can, so feel free to begin a thread with your most "dangerous" question.

You dare to try and speak of philosphy, yet you don't know of one of the greatest thinkers of our age, Hannibal Smith?

It seems your idea is an epic failure, and I love it when a plan comes together!

Oh poop, they're trying to get a worthy thread established and you have to counter with pop culture, really? C'mon. We're all engaged in philosophy here, wouldn't it be interesting to check out some of the greats? Its said to be, academically, one of the more interesting roads to poverty.

Hey Barb... this is also in reply to your message directed at me, but this 1 had the bit I wanted to quote.

If you think for 1 second that "checking out the greats" means discussing established or well known philosophers then I believe you're mistaken. "Jamie" wants a place to pontificate, and the only "great" I think she recognizes is Vinny. Read some of their threads. "Jamie" starts a thread about some subject, a few replies come in, and any that take issue in any way shape or form are pounced on by Vinny who proceeds to insult and berate in flowery prose.

A forum where no proof is required would be ideal because "Jamie" has already been caught citing an imaginary news article.

"They" also have the disturbing habit of signing the wrong name at the bottom of their posts. I think what we have here is A troll that thinks he's fooling us. As Ravi has noted the SN "The Illusion" may be literal. You can play along if you'd like, no harm I suppose, but I think it's in all of our best interest to recognize what's going on here for what it is.

 

[Barb]

You dare to try and speak of philosphy, yet you don't know of one of the greatest thinkers of our age, Hannibal Smith?

It seems your idea is an epic failure, and I love it when a plan comes together!

Oh poop, they're trying to get a worthy thread established and you have to counter with pop culture, really? C'mon. We're all engaged in philosophy here, wouldn't it be interesting to check out some of the greats? Its said to be, academically, one of the more interesting roads to poverty.

Hey Barb... this is also in reply to your message directed at me, but this 1 had the bit I wanted to quote.

If you think for 1 second that "checking out the greats" means discussing established or well known philosophers then I believe you're mistaken. "Jamie" wants a place to pontificate, and the only "great" I think she recognizes is Vinny. Read some of their threads. "Jamie" starts a thread about some subject, a few replies come in, and any that take issue in any way shape or form are pounced on by Vinny who proceeds to insult and berate in flowery prose.

A forum where no proof is required would be ideal because "Jamie" has already been caught citing an imaginary news article.

"They" also have the disturbing habit of signing the wrong name at the bottom of their posts. I think what we have here is A troll that thinks he's fooling us. As Ravi has noted the SN "The Illusion" may be literal. You can play along if you'd like, no harm I suppose, but I think it's in all of our best interest to recognize what's going on here for what it is.

Amanda, I rarely agree with you, but I like you, and do not direct my coments at you, but to you. Ok?

I honestly have never seen either of them on here, but thought the idea of a philosophy forum (or sub) interesting. I'll look around. It won't be today (way past my bedtime) but I'll get back.

 

[JBeukema]

I mean real philosophy, now, not OUR philosophies, but the real stuff....
...
Are any of us really qualified to pontificate like a philosopher here?

That's quite ignorant. The first and greatest philosophers were really little more than annoying children who kept asking irritating question.. Socrates was renowned for never shutting up and always asking 'why?' and 'but you said'.

I do the same thing, but usually just pisses people off...

 

[The Illusion]

An imaginary news article huh? Did I not say that it was through the Brookings Register and some even went on the site? I told them that you have to pay to get the news..the e edition otherwise I could not link it. Not everything is on the internet, Amanda. Not everything on the internet is believable either. So for you to say that it is an imaginary news article means that you have proof that it never existed. I encourage you to call The Brookings Register and find out what issue date that the article came out on and then post evidence that you called them...otherwise, like you are doing to me, I could call you a liar.

The topic of masturbation being taught in schools is a real issue so whether or not I could cite the actual news story doesnt matter. I posted other links to similar topics that dealt with masturbation being taught in schools.

You speculate a lot and point the finger a lot, and you chastise me for not citing things when Ive never seen you cite one thing - just merely critisize people. I have never seen you post any content either. The only thing Ive seen you do on this site is be negative toward people and make snide remarks or put a smiley down as your response. In fact, you have been on every single thread Ive posted making those same snide comments - not ONE single remark that would allocate that you were on topic. You attacked me as a person, not the content and you don't even know me. Could I sit here and chastise you for that? Sure I could. Do I? No.. I dont. I chose to simply ask you to stop and so far you have. In fact, you actually asked me an intelligent question on the founding fathers are not christian thread, which I appreciated.

So, until you can prove that I am indeed a liar, and that the news article never existed, you can cease and desist calling me a liar. I stated that I cannot replicate what was in the newspaper because I didnt know if it would infringe on copyright or not and I cannot indeed link you because it is not on the "free" internet.

Thank you for your consideration.

Jamie

 

[manifold]

I'm wondering who among us really knows enough philosophy to post on such a forum?

I mean real philosophy, now, not OUR philosophies, but the real stuff.

I know damned well I'm not conversant about the real debates that exist in that field.

Are any of us really qualified to pontificate like a philosopher here?

Spoken like someone who doesn't really grasp the concept.

We are ALL qualified to pontificate on philosophy. Very few are qualified to pontificate on anything else.

 

[vincubus]

I mean real philosophy, now, not OUR philosophies, but the real stuff....
...
Are any of us really qualified to pontificate like a philosopher here?

That's quite ignorant. The first and greatest philosophers were really little more than annoying children who kept asking irritating question.. Socrates was renowned for never shutting up and always asking 'why?' and 'but you said'.

I do the same thing, but usually just pisses people off...

many of us engage in philosophy, although not to the degree that spinoza, descartes, kant etc do. we ponder things. we ask why, how, etc. it is small wonder that physics is the child of early philosophy, and interestingly enough, is coming almost full circle back to that via quantum theory.

philosophy is merely to ask. jamie and i sat over lunch at pizza hut and discussed rights of kids versus are they property to do with as we choose relating to spanking/beating/slapping. should we recognize that our kids have some rights, then we have more an obligation to guide them without violence. should we see them as property, then should we be allowed to treat them any way we choose? i am not socrates, nor is jamie ayn rand. we are just ordinary ppl asking questions of ourselves and others. some others can stand the traffic and respond back in kind. others cannot. i wouild just wish those others who cannot would stop trying to drag us down to their level. i am sure they have other things they could be doing.

 

[vincubus]

I'm wondering who among us really knows enough philosophy to post on such a forum?

I mean real philosophy, now, not OUR philosophies, but the real stuff.

I know damned well I'm not conversant about the real debates that exist in that field.

Are any of us really qualified to pontificate like a philosopher here?

Spoken like someone who doesn't really grasp the concept.

We are ALL qualified to pontificate on philosophy. Very few are qualified to pontificate on anything else.

aye. your post, more brief, arrived before mine. well said.

 

[Xenophon]

Oh poop, they're trying to get a worthy thread established and you have to counter with pop culture, really? C'mon. We're all engaged in philosophy here, wouldn't it be interesting to check out some of the greats? Its said to be, academically, one of the more interesting roads to poverty.

Yes, there are certainly many candidates here for deep delvings here, aristotle.

The idea is ludicrous and is treated with the derision it deserves, its main proponents cannot even handle some light banter, and they want to explore the mysteries of the universe?

Even Col decker laughs at such nonsense.

 

[Amanda]

I hate to multi-quote, but in this case I think it's warranted...

An imaginary news article huh? Did I not say that it was through the Brookings Register and some even went on the site? I told them that you have to pay to get the news..the e edition otherwise I could not link it.

Yea, you did say you had to pay, which was untrue. I was 1 of those that went to the site and I had no trouble reading news articles and there wasn't 1 that had the word masturbation in it going back a year.

Not everything is on the internet, Amanda. Not everything on the internet is believable either.

Wow, that's so true. Especially in your case.

So for you to say that it is an imaginary news article means that you have proof that it never existed. I encourage you to call The Brookings Register and find out what issue date that the article came out on and then post evidence that you called them...otherwise, like you are doing to me, I could call you a liar.

See above. I went, news was available and readable. Your article wasn't there.

The topic of masturbation being taught in schools is a real issue so whether or not I could cite the actual news story doesnt matter.

That shit's sig worthy.

I posted other links to similar topics that dealt with masturbation being taught in schools.

That doesn't make your imaginary story real and THAT is the issue.

You speculate a lot and point the finger a lot, and you chastise me for not citing things when Ive never seen you cite one thing - just merely critisize people.

Well duh, I don't cite things, I give my opinion.

I have never seen you post any content either. The only thing Ive seen you do on this site is be negative toward people and make snide remarks or put a smiley down as your response.

You've read all of my 3500+ posts? Talk about cyberstalking.

In fact, you have been on every single thread Ive posted making those same snide comments - not ONE single remark that would allocate that you were on topic.

Oh bullshit, I participated in your suicide thread. Another lie.

You attacked me as a person, not the content and you don't even know me.

Not exactly. I attacked you as a non-person. I think you're a figment of Vinny's imagination. We're still waiting for an explanation as to why sometimes Vinny's posts are signed with your name. It's obvious Vinny is going to some trouble to differentiate his style from yours so when it's written Vinny-style and has your name at the bottom it's pretty obvious what's going on.

Could I sit here and chastise you for that? Sure I could. Do I? No.. I dont. I chose to simply ask you to stop and so far you have. In fact, you actually asked me an intelligent question on the founding fathers are not christian thread, which I appreciated.

Wait a second, didn't you just say:

not ONE single remark that would allocate that you were on topic.

You seem to be having as much trouble keeping your accusations straight as you do remembering which account you're logged in with.

So, until you can prove that I am indeed a liar, and that the news article never existed, you can cease and desist calling me a liar. I stated that I cannot replicate what was in the newspaper because I didnt know if it would infringe on copyright or not and I cannot indeed link you because it is not on the "free" internet.

I don't need to prove anything to you, I went and looked, it wasn't there. I'm satisfied. So are many others. If you say it's real the burden of proof is on you. Get the paper and scan the article if that's the only way. You're losing credibility fast.

Thank you for your consideration.

Jamie

I'm just here to help, no charge for my services.