GENIUS FORUMS

Dan Rowden wrote:
Now, Michael, when you say it's been "published" by them, do you mean in one of their formal printed journals or in one of their myriad special interest group newsletters (that any moron can publish to)?

There's small comfort lying in the fact his essays now are also published by the Genius Realms, known throughout the Web and beyond to be a couple of sickly, deranged, woman-hating anti-Semites.

Arrr, it will hurt them book sails [sic]!

Sailing the Seven Seas of Lies, is more like it.

Goodbye, Michael.

Dan Rowden wrote:Goodbye, Michael.

I hope that means you've banned him.

It does.

Ooooh. I guess I was right the first time. Man overboard.

A-ban-Dan ship! (ooh, look, words within words).

At least give us a chance before the draconian Dan stick is wielded. That's an all too easy escape for him there.

I wanted to see if he was a fuckin Man United fan. That would have confirmed it. He's probably a City fan if he's actually from Manchester though.

I guess Dan solved Groucho's paradox.

Wasn't banning him too extreme?

maestro: A ban is extreme, but this is a pretty clear-cut case of spam.

Why would any board or admin thereof tolerate an arsehole whose only intention is to promote himself and be a condescending, patronising twat? I'm sorry, but I refuse to give the Levy's of this world a forum through which to sell their brand of idiocy. Let them post their twaddle at ezine sites that publish anything and everything. He had a choice and he made it; I merely facilitated.

DvR wrote:
"There's small comfort lying in the fact his essays now are also published by the Genius Realms, known throughout the Web and beyond to be a couple of sickly, deranged, woman-hating anti-Semites. "
Interesting. I knew about the woman-hating in conjunction with the knee-deep testosterone-driven circle-jerk mentality (also the myopic view of enlightenment as requiring ascetic renunciation, and the solipsist denial of empirical reality)...

But "anti-Semitic" is a new one here for me. Fits well with the extremely bigoted mentality again recited above,tho.

Got any anti-Semitic quotes for me to chew on?
(Off to vaction now.)
mikiel

...ascetic renunciation, and the solipsist denial of empirical reality...

Honestly, is it your mission in life to make bricks look insubstantial?

Dan Rowden wrote:

...ascetic renunciation, and the solipsist denial of empirical reality...

Honestly, is it your mission in life to make bricks look insubstantial?

(vacation departure delayed)
Wow! Hardly! After all of the above serious indictments, you respond only to the one piece where I am the champion of the tangible, objective , empirically evidential world and the admin here (DQ anyway) has refused to even answer my challenge, "How are you not a solipsist?"

Actually as a part time stonemason/bricklayer, I have a better than average appreciation of the tangible and substantial nature of bricks. So your reply here strikes me as totally off-the-(brick) wall....

Not suprising, tho. Your only and repeated reply to my post about the admin.'s woman-hating as an indication of seriously abused childhood was labeling it "tripe" and other derisions without substantial rebuttal.
You've only ever relied on name calling here in reaction to any/everything I've presented. A piss-poor excuse of an admin. for a forum with such a lofty title.
And I've spoken only Truth-as-I-know-it here!

mikiel

Mate, you keep demonstrating that you don't understand what is put to you. What I quoted from your post is utterly absurd. I seriously think you've spent too much time in bars boozing it up with your biker pals. You are the most unconscious hypocrite I've ever encountered in all the years of Genius Forum. There is nothing substantive in your "critiques" of QSR philosophy - there can't be, because you simply don't understand it. If you think labeling a sophisticated and internally coherent and consistent philosophy of the feminine a product of "childhood abuse" is a credible thing to so, you are profoundly mistaken. It's laughable at its core. The reason your assertions don't get more than one line dismissals and derision is because they don't warrant anything more than that. If you manage, at some point, to say something intelligent, you'll get a substantive reply.

And, it has already been explained to you that a rejection of the standard perception of "objective" empirical reality, does not, of itself, constitute solipsism. The trouble is you don't take any notice of what is actually said to you.

solipsism: 1. Philosophy. the theory that only the self exists, or can be proved to exist. (dictionary.com)

In Chapter Six of Wisdom of the Infinite, David explains why it is certain that something other than the self exists, albeit in a way that cannot be experienced. If I take sentences out of context, I can read solipsism into the chapter, but taken as a whole it's not solipsism.

Dan Rowden wrote:I'm sorry, but I refuse to give the Levy's of this world a forum through which to sell their brand of idiocy.

Well is it likely that turd would sell any of his books here? He can't even sell his freebee wishy-washy prose.

...

Ah, now you've got it.

Singlehand her. Know thyself. Understand Being (with a capital "B").

Then take a child with you. Teach them to sail.

Ah, now you've got it.

Singlehand her. Know thyself. Understand Being (with a capital "B").

Then take a child with you. Teach them to sail.

Windtalk, what's this supposed to mean?

Carl G wrote:

Ah, now you've got it.

Singlehand her. Know thyself. Understand Being (with a capital "B").

Then take a child with you. Teach them to sail.

Windtalk, what's this supposed to mean?

Aargh, I'll have ye tossed in irons and rolled off the plank, ye scurvy son of a whore!!!

Sail alone.

We just like the wind.

Many negative characterizations were seen of Mr. Levy, but I have yet to see any, personally. Is responding in a way other than expected cause for negative characterization? Where is the threat? Has he initatied threads where no discussion is possible?

LOL whateverz