Sailing the Seven Seas of Life

[bert]

always has there been this subconscious doxology: "I believe in the Arabian Nights", or "in all my wishfull thinking", and this is certainly as near truth as any other truth - usually more so.Truth is - what we make truth.

[Dave Toast]

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

He wasn't given much of a chance but then he was warned explicitly what not to do and what would happen if he did. So he immediately went ahead and did it anyway.

In effect, he banned himself in lieu of clearly answering the questions put to him.

[brokenhead]

Hey, Dave - how did you catch on to this guy so fast?

[Dave Toast]

I use this brilliant site I found for researching stuff mate. :)

[windhawk]

Now, that it's a new day, I'm a bit confused (don't ask); evidently, I angered someone.

All I can do is apologize... "Son of a whore?" That's a bit harsh.

Try: "On the Mystical Aspect of Fairing the Sea with Sails."

That was my point. Again, I'm sorry. I don't understand why (or what I did to cause such disrespect), but that's my nature.

Fair Winds.

[Dave Toast]

You didn't anger anyone. Broken was just dickin about with sub-standard pirate talk, whilst Carl is given to abruptness and just wanted to know what you meant.

[brokenhead]

You didn't anger anyone. Broken was just dickin about with sub-standard pirate talk, whilst Carl is given to abruptness and just wanted to know what you meant.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

[brokenhead]

I use this brilliant site I found for researching stuff mate. :)

Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

[Tomas]

.

Green Eyes - the sign of the devil!!!


MickyL - I guess this is not a discussion group after all, rather, just a place of green colored eyes? So talking of clowns I guess it is a cue for another article.

-tomas-
Look, you of all people ... should know that Eve mated with the devil and produced Cain. Cain had green eyes!

As far as discussion goes, there is an unspoken rule around these parts - don't be taking that tone with the Admin or any other hangers-on.

As far as my clowns comment (see earlier post) there is a reason why clowns rarely wear green makeup...

.

[windhawk]

I do understand that we should stay on topic around here, but it is nice to see a bit of friendship, now and again.

"Son of a whore," I can deal with a wee bit (have a drink with me, you'll understand), but "sub-standard pirate talk?". THAT offends me. I speak perfect pirate, and I know how to use a semi-colon.

In a rush; with urgency, and need.

[Carl G]

I do understand that we should stay on topic around here, but it is nice to see a bit of friendship, now and again.

Genius Forum is not about friendship. Genius Forum is about lone wolf grunt out the big turd Truth discernment. It's hardcore philosophy. If you want the namby pamby of relationship and emotion, try Worldly Matters. Oh wait, it's closed. Nyahahaha, my friend.

[Dave Toast]

"Son of a whore," I can deal with a wee bit (have a drink with me, you'll understand), but "sub-standard pirate talk?". THAT offends me.

Arrr, and so 't be. Thar lily-livered landlubbin pirate talk be 'bout much use as a wench wi chaastity belt.

I speak perfect pirate, and I know how to use a semi-colon.

Avast, spill yer booty an be tellin' all ye know o' thar semi-colon me hearty. I be thinkin' et be like th'offside rule or thar quaantumphysic. No gentleman o' fortune really be un'erstan'in' et.

[mikiel]

(Back early)

Mate, you keep demonstrating that you don't understand what is put to you. What I quoted from your post is utterly absurd.

As usual, your reply has no substance... merely character assassination. First, you ignored some serious "charges" above and only reacted to my indictment of this forum's signature "...ascetic renunciation, and the solipsist denial of empirical reality"... I can cite a long string of posts (quoting DQ) which testify to the "QRS" doctrine of ascetic renunciation as a requirement for enlightenment, and I have re-quoted my post from "empiricism vs logic" challenging KS's solopsism below. I will not allow your summary dismissal of my position on these issues as "utterly absurd" as if your word on it, as admin. is all it takes, with no specific argument at all. It just doesn't fly, Dan.

I seriously think you've spent too much time in bars boozing it up with your biker pals.

I'll just designate "chararcter assassination" as 'CA' hereafter for brevity sake. You have no idea how moderate my drinking is, but you demnonstrate an unfailng self-righteousness in condeming me for "boozing it up with my biker pals." You are a purebred asshole as well demonstrated in this remark.

You are the most unconscious hypocrite I've ever encountered in all the years of Genius Forum.

This would be an excellent place for an example of my hypocricy to back up your point. Nada. Your worshippers will take your word for it tho. Why bother backing it (or any other 'CA' up with substance!

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.

If you would take the trouble to re-examine the context to which I was responding in my "childhood abuse" post, you would find the most absurd possible characterization of women. I challenged the "satire" and sarcasm of the clip in question and the follow-up posts, and it was owned as legitimate QSR philosophy. Now you simply and lamely whine that I don't understand. Try explaining it in the context cited above. Clearly pathological woman-hating.


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.

Laughing it off won't make *it* go away... the indictments above.
It is as weak as it gets in the world of debate. (I wasn't kidding about my debate credentials... or did you catch that post in the admittedly bogus "debate tactics" thread.

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.

I understand solipsism as completely as any philosopher and way moreso than you, and tomorrow I will cite the posts which put QSR
solidly into the solipsist camp. This condescending crap that " it has already been explained to you" might work for your bitches and roll-over yes-men, but I know what empirical science is and what idealism is in all its flavors, so you can not bullshit me with your aire of authority as a big cheeze here.

Here is you appetizer. The full meal deal will expose your arrogance and stupidity much more clearly.

From the "Empiricism vs logic" thread :
-------------------
Kevin Solway wrote:

mikiel wrote:

Kevin Solway wrote:Therefore it follows, logically, that your statement, "Empiricism is required, by definition, to establish relevance to the world" has no relevance to the world, according to you.


You are making a circular argumet here


It's your argument, not mine. You are the one arguing that is it "of no relevance to the world" that "Empiricism is required to establish relevance to the world".

I'm just restating your position to highlight its inadequacies.

If there is any empirical evidence that "Empiricism is required to establish relevance to the world", then I'm interested to see it, even though empirical evidence has its limitations.



If you review my posts in this thread you wil find that I'm the one saying that empiricism is the info gathering branch which can verify (or not) the assumptions of a premise as to relevance to the "real world." It is inductive, from the particulars observed empirically to the generalization of the conclusion. (And, of course deduction goes the other way from the general to the particular.)
So, they go hand in hand. If one needs verification of relevance to the "real world" then, empiricism and its logical tool, inductive reasoning is required.
So, you see it is *not* I who is arguing that it is "of no relevance to the world" that "Empiricism is required to establish relevance to the world"... (one too many redundant repetitions of a tautology here :)
----------------

mikiel
PS: On second thought, the project of citing posts which reveal the solipsism of the QSR clique/cult seems not really worth the effort. After all, there is no substantial response to my specifics anyway. I don't think you three are intelligent enough to know the meaning of solipsism..,or "genius" for that matter.

For the audience, however... briefly... the simplest contrast will give the lie to the bullshit denial Dan just barfed out:
For solipsists, It's all in the mind. For empiricists and all laymen who trust their senses to give relevant info about the world beyond the mind, it's *not* all in the mind.
The finer points of meaning of the following words and dyads are debateable beyond the aboove basics: external/internal (false dichotomy), objective/subjective (consciousness transcends this duality) physical/metaphysical (the dimensions from manifest to transcendental are all one continuum) idealism/realism (concepts for sophomoric debate.)
"Pure reason" without a worldly reality check (yes, engage senses) is irrellevant to life... which "happens" in the *real objective* world.
No, morons, its not all in your (singular) mind. The enlightened realization is called (in the realm of *integral philosophy*) non-dual awareness. The world and the mind are both *real.*
Get over it, QSR.
mikiel

[Blair]

fuck off douchebag.

What part of this do you not understand?

[Carl G]

Old Prince, The Sour Pickle Sucker of Genius Forums, has creaked open his tower window and spoken!

[mikiel]

Old Prince, The Sour Pickle Sucker of Genius Forums, has creaked open his tower window and spoken!

All I saw was putrid drool foaming from his mouth. He didn't *say* anything.
What kingdom are you "prince" of anyway, the sewers?
What part of my post did you not understand. I'm guessing it was *all* over your head.

This is how actual debate gets constantly derailed by certified morons here... yet again.
mikiel

[Carl G]

Old Prince, The Sour Pickle Sucker of Genius Forums, has creaked open his tower window and spoken!

All I saw was putrid drool foaming from his mouth. He didn't *say* anything.
What kingdom are you "prince" of anyway, the sewers?
What part of my post did you not understand. I'm guessing it was *all* over your head.

This is how actual debate gets constantly derailed by certified morons here... yet again.
mikiel

Ah, your shtick is over the top. Cretinous overkill. Drool in its own right. Non-geniusic spew.

[Tomas]

-carlos santana-
Carl G - Old Prince, The Sour Pickle Sucker of Genius Forums, has creaked open his tower window and spoken!




-pentagon war pig-
All I saw was putrid drool foaming from his mouth. He didn't *say* anything.

-tomas-
Pace yourself mikiel, pace yourself!




-pentagon war pig-
What kingdom are you "prince" of anyway, the sewers?

-tomas-
The prince of genius forums....




-pentagon war pig-
What part of my post did you not understand. I'm guessing it was *all* over your head.

-tomas-
The 98-lb. weakling spits out sand.




-pentagon war pig-
This is how actual debate gets constantly derailed by certified morons here... yet again.
mikiel

-tomas-
Yup, those stratospheric 170 IQ's ... certified.




-carlos santana-
Ah, your shtick is over the top. Cretinous overkill. Drool in its own right. Non-geniusic spew.



.

[mikiel]

To the awesome intelligence of "fuck off, douchebag" I stooped to his level, just for the hell of it and answered in terms of the putrid drool foaming from the mouth of the prince of sewers.

Pretty silly, really.*
But you know me... not one to run from a fight, even if it's instigated by a severly handicapped idiot (Prince.) I'd upgrade Dan to 'moron' based on his replies to me.

*Especially since there is a serious challenge to Dan's "CA" sans substance still awaiting his further name calling and empty condescension... or... (I would faint outright) his actual rebuttal to my several posts comprizing the several counts of the indictment.

mikiel

[mikiel]

While I'm slumming amongst the dregs of the forum... just for fun and adventure:
-tomas-
"Yup, those stratospheric 170 IQ's ... certified."

Still steamed up with small dick syndrome, wanting to cut the big guy down to your size I see. Ain't gonna happen. Here's a bit more salt for the wound.
My Graduate Record Exam score was 99th percentile. I'll 'splain it to you. There ain't no higher score for all graduating seniors in college.

And, yes, my thesis required intercollegiate, interdisciplinary cooperation among the examiners... and, yes, I aced it.

Btw: my ave IQ (3rd repetition) for the big two tests (one for children, the other for adults) was 174. That extra four points is what put me in the one out of 600,000 category for rarity.
Seems you'd be tired of hearing about it by now. But I'll keep slapping you with it if you enjoy the humiliation. Masochists have needs too, I know.
(What, still not an inteligent word from you? I know you're just here for the snarling bloody dog fight, but, for christ sake, you are losing big-time. Even stupid dogs know when to give it up and slink away. You are looking way more pathetic than I thought before, and that was pretty pathetic.)

mikiel

[Tomas]

.



-Philo Beddoe-
Dan Rowden - Mate, you keep demonstrating that you don't understand what is put to you. What I quoted from your post is utterly absurd.

-tomas-
Yeah, Mikiel - you better get your act together...




-Philo glares at Mikiel-
I seriously think you've spent too much time in bars boozing it up with your biker pals.

-tomas-
This sort of drunk enjoys his biker crank (meth).





-Philo bruskly shakes his head-
You are the most unconscious hypocrite I've ever encountered in all the years of Genius Forum.

-tomas-
Indeed. Very feminine-minded, too!




-Philo further illustrates-
There is nothing substantive in your "critiques" of QSR philosophy - there can't be, because you simply don't understand it.

-tomas spots another angle-
Probably nibbles on paint chips when he's traipsing on down off of Mt. Sinai.




-Philo exhibits his superior thought-processing skills-
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.

-tomas-
Yes, a mind is a terrible thing to waste...




-More classic Philo-
The reason your assertions don't get more than one line dismissals and derision is because they don't warrant anything more than that.

-tomas-
Can I get a witness?




-Philo at his best-
If you manage, at some point, to say something intelligent, you'll get a substantive reply.

-tomas-
As of June 12th, he's the same as he ever was :-(




-Philo moves in for the kill-
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.

-tomas-
Well, do ya, punk?




-Philo's parting shot-
The trouble is you don't take any notice of what is actually said to you.



.

[mikiel]

On a whim... Just a little clean-up detail here. It didn't feel right to leave Tomas' little melodrama here as the last word on the actual exchange above between Dan and myself on Sat. 5/24.

Scroll up and take a look if reality interests you more than Tomas' little drama.
mikiel