I'm rather curious about Coyote's motivation.
Did he recognise the insular nature of that forum and was he just stirring up the pot?
Was he trying to change David or them?
Does David respect Coyote as a philosopher?
Is it possible that they closed the forum because a certain member pointed out the fact that they themselves were arguing in a closed manner and they've closed it while they discuss this amongst themselves? Unlikely though this may be.
<hr />
With regard to me being a 'devotee' of the QRS, I'm aware that this is something I need to be watchful of. For some time I've been wondering if I've been thinking in some sort of rote fashion, but have recently decided that what is actually impacting on me most is more about increasing noticing that their theories are being confirmed by what I see in society, than any respect for them as persons. Much of the respect that I have for them relates to their non-attachment.
This excludes the finer points about the value of Ultimate Reality v's science as discussed by David and argued by NPU, which I presently do not have the capacity to determine either way. So I have a similar view to Dave Toast in that regard.
Ne Plus Ultra
Re: ----
For what it's worth, high-IQ societies are pretty much rubbish across the board. Despite being well-qualified, I've never bothered to apply for one. I would likely not respond to an invitation from one. For the most part, It is a bunch of people who imagine themselves to be inherently superior based on their intelligence level. Then again, QRS is a bunch of people who believe themselves superior based on their philsophical worldview, but to be honest, that isn't as annoying as the high-IQ group. At least QRS had to put in some intellectual effort and independent thought to arrive at thier position. The high-IQ brats are the intellectual equivalent of petualnt rich kids born with a silver spoon in their mouth. They can keep such childish vanities.
Re: ---
Jimhaz said of QRS:
Quote:Quote:<hr>Much of the respect that I have for them relates to their non-attachment.<hr>What non-attachment? The only evidence that I personally have seen of non-attachment has been in Dan, and only to a certain extent. The others, and particularly David, seem quite highly attached to their own ideas. In fact, I'd wager that David is the least open-minded individual on this board. This isn't an "insult David" type of thing, it's just a confirmation of what I see as obvious. QRS, for the most part, are hardly practitioners of non-attachment, although they prescribe it for others readily enough. Since non-attachment in the extreme sense is a fairly ludicrous position in any case, it's probably for the best that QRS set an example of being unable to practice it. Total non-attachment, after all, is equivalent to death.
Quote:Quote:<hr>Much of the respect that I have for them relates to their non-attachment.<hr>What non-attachment? The only evidence that I personally have seen of non-attachment has been in Dan, and only to a certain extent. The others, and particularly David, seem quite highly attached to their own ideas. In fact, I'd wager that David is the least open-minded individual on this board. This isn't an "insult David" type of thing, it's just a confirmation of what I see as obvious. QRS, for the most part, are hardly practitioners of non-attachment, although they prescribe it for others readily enough. Since non-attachment in the extreme sense is a fairly ludicrous position in any case, it's probably for the best that QRS set an example of being unable to practice it. Total non-attachment, after all, is equivalent to death.
-
krussell2004
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 10:23 pm
Re: ----
Quote:Quote:<hr>Then again, QRS is a bunch of people who believe themselves superior based on their philsophical worldview, but to be honest, that isn't as annoying as the high-IQ group.<hr>
I couldn't agree with you more.
Quote:Quote:<hr> At least QRS had to put in some intellectual effort and independent thought to arrive at thier position.<hr>
Yes, you have to give them kudos for that. I must also add here that they never once resorted to deleting any of my posts or attempted to kick me out of this forum despite some of the not so flattering posts I've made with regards to their views. They've certainly passed my test and are a far cry from Ne Plus Ultra.
Quote:Quote:<hr>The high-IQ brats are the intellectual equivalent of petualnt rich kids born with a silver spoon in their mouth. They can keep such childish vanities. <hr>
Now you said a mouthful. In fact, they're not all bad and some are actually quite humble and down to earth. Those that have a superiority complex and/or stunted emotional growth unfortunately make the whole lot look bad. Edited by: krussell2004 at: 2/4/04 9:54 am
I couldn't agree with you more.
Quote:Quote:<hr> At least QRS had to put in some intellectual effort and independent thought to arrive at thier position.<hr>
Yes, you have to give them kudos for that. I must also add here that they never once resorted to deleting any of my posts or attempted to kick me out of this forum despite some of the not so flattering posts I've made with regards to their views. They've certainly passed my test and are a far cry from Ne Plus Ultra.
Quote:Quote:<hr>The high-IQ brats are the intellectual equivalent of petualnt rich kids born with a silver spoon in their mouth. They can keep such childish vanities. <hr>
Now you said a mouthful. In fact, they're not all bad and some are actually quite humble and down to earth. Those that have a superiority complex and/or stunted emotional growth unfortunately make the whole lot look bad. Edited by: krussell2004 at: 2/4/04 9:54 am
-
krussell2004
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 10:23 pm
Re: ---
removed Edited by: krussell2004 at: 2/3/04 10:54 am
Re: ---
Well, there are exceptions to every generalization, of course.
As for QRS integrity, it is actually pretty decent as far as board operations are concerned. I also have never had a post deleted or a threat of banning made, despite referring to David as a "kook" on one occassion, as well as some similar remarks. Actually, they seem to take that sort of thing rather well, which does speak favorably about their maturity level. In the area of fair and reasonable conduct, there is actually quite a bit to be said for them.
As for QRS integrity, it is actually pretty decent as far as board operations are concerned. I also have never had a post deleted or a threat of banning made, despite referring to David as a "kook" on one occassion, as well as some similar remarks. Actually, they seem to take that sort of thing rather well, which does speak favorably about their maturity level. In the area of fair and reasonable conduct, there is actually quite a bit to be said for them.
-
birdofhermes
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:34 pm
Re: ---
Well, I'm somewhere in chapter 5 I believe and I have to turn in for the night. I don't understand at all why those folks are starting to get upset (haven't gotten to the misogyny yet). This was a direct hit:
Quote:Quote:<hr>David: The priestliness of your attitude also shines through in something you said earlier:
Quote:
AB: I am a CTMU devotee. I believe that there are certain universal truths. Unlike you, I know that science is a bridge between our everyday existence to the core arguements.
David: This is like the pope saying that he is the intermediatory between the human race and God, and that no one can approach God without going through him. With an attitude like this, it is no wonder that you have forgotten how to defend your core beliefs with reason.<hr>
I certainly hope David will start to behave badly tomorrow, as it is most confusing to me when I find myself in agreement with him, and it hardly should bode well for his own confidence.
You guys are sugar coating the misogyny. QRS misogyny is the most extreme and dangerous this world has ever produced, and the only reason they have not harmed women is that they have not the power. I'd feel safer under the Taliban.
Quote:Quote:<hr>David: The priestliness of your attitude also shines through in something you said earlier:
Quote:
AB: I am a CTMU devotee. I believe that there are certain universal truths. Unlike you, I know that science is a bridge between our everyday existence to the core arguements.
David: This is like the pope saying that he is the intermediatory between the human race and God, and that no one can approach God without going through him. With an attitude like this, it is no wonder that you have forgotten how to defend your core beliefs with reason.<hr>
I certainly hope David will start to behave badly tomorrow, as it is most confusing to me when I find myself in agreement with him, and it hardly should bode well for his own confidence.
You guys are sugar coating the misogyny. QRS misogyny is the most extreme and dangerous this world has ever produced, and the only reason they have not harmed women is that they have not the power. I'd feel safer under the Taliban.
-
suergaz
----
I disagree about the misogyny of "QRS" Anna, and I have not found Dan to be a misogynist, though he does have prejudices though about 'americans' which cannot be said to be philosophical. They are all far too laughable. Their concern is not for the highest individuals of both sexes and their conception, but for perversions such as 'Ultimate Reality' 'Absolute truth' 'Pure reason' etc. etc.
-
krussell2004
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 10:23 pm
Re: ---
Quote:Quote:<hr>QRS misogyny is the most extreme and dangerous this world has ever produced, and the only reason they have not harmed women is that they have not the power. I'd feel safer under the Taliban.<hr>
Bull. It's easy for you to say that now in the comfort of living in a free and democratic state with all your rights and freedoms. God, the stuff people type sometimes.
Bull. It's easy for you to say that now in the comfort of living in a free and democratic state with all your rights and freedoms. God, the stuff people type sometimes.
Re: ----
I agree that Bird went a bit far. Still, she has a point in that if QRS misogyny were widely accepted, other individuals would act on it. I don't get the sense that QRS themselves would take any direct action to harm women even if they had the power, but someone else who adopted their views very well might. If QRS thinking regarding women had widespread influence, it would only be a matter of time before some misguided but 'well-meaning' leader or government initiated a "final solution to the female problem." It is defintely not safe to promote such ideas, and Bird is not without reason in her concern.
Re: ----
Naturyl: What non-attachment?
Well I agree we can’t we completely detached from emotions, but the more you are detached from them the more you are likely to become attached to wisdom. It is their attachment to wisdom which directs their lives, rather than interrelationship emotions, and I view that as a good thing for those who think deeply (but not for all). Look what high IQ's do to those who remain completely attached to emotions - they can't see outside their box.
Well I agree we can’t we completely detached from emotions, but the more you are detached from them the more you are likely to become attached to wisdom. It is their attachment to wisdom which directs their lives, rather than interrelationship emotions, and I view that as a good thing for those who think deeply (but not for all). Look what high IQ's do to those who remain completely attached to emotions - they can't see outside their box.
-
Thomas Knierim
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2002 6:20 pm
Re: ----
<span style="color:white;">Naturyl: If QRS thinking regarding women had widespread influence, it would only be a matter of time before some misguided but 'well-meaning' leader or government initiated a "final solution to the female problem." It is defintely not safe to promote such ideas, and Bird is not without reason in her concern.</span>
Perhaps that is why they have labeled it 'dangerous thought'?!
Thomas
Perhaps that is why they have labeled it 'dangerous thought'?!
Thomas
Re: ----
I think the truth is that the QRS harm us all, male and female, and that is why they are not misogynists. As an aside mental harm to me is little different to physical harm.
However, it is harm we accept by coming here. The choice is always ours. We come here because we are drawn to some at least some aspects of thier wisdom, even Thomas, who has made it his goal to fight against them, supposedly for the sake of others.
I find their harm to be acceptable and required because of the potentiality of the human race to make it's own destruction using science. Science without the application of philosophical wisdom is ultimately more harmful to the human race as we can see by our destruction of our environment. The same applies to Paul's and Suergaz's views about love being the answer to this dilemma. Love requires us to retain all the other conflicting emotions, and these other conflicting emotions end up defeating love.
Edited by: jimhaz at: 1/25/04 3:15 pm
However, it is harm we accept by coming here. The choice is always ours. We come here because we are drawn to some at least some aspects of thier wisdom, even Thomas, who has made it his goal to fight against them, supposedly for the sake of others.
I find their harm to be acceptable and required because of the potentiality of the human race to make it's own destruction using science. Science without the application of philosophical wisdom is ultimately more harmful to the human race as we can see by our destruction of our environment. The same applies to Paul's and Suergaz's views about love being the answer to this dilemma. Love requires us to retain all the other conflicting emotions, and these other conflicting emotions end up defeating love.
Edited by: jimhaz at: 1/25/04 3:15 pm
-
Thomas Knierim
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2002 6:20 pm
Re: The closed system
<span style="color:white;">Kevin: It is a very serious thing to accuse someone of misogyny.</span>
I don't make accusations; I am only stating the obvious, and that's hardly libel. It seems that most participants and observers here seem to agree with my description.
<span style="color:white;">Kevin: Your claim of "hatred of women" needs be backed up with evidence.</span>
Well, nothing could be easier than that. For supporting quotes please look up the 'misogynist' thread.
Thomas
I don't make accusations; I am only stating the obvious, and that's hardly libel. It seems that most participants and observers here seem to agree with my description.
<span style="color:white;">Kevin: Your claim of "hatred of women" needs be backed up with evidence.</span>
Well, nothing could be easier than that. For supporting quotes please look up the 'misogynist' thread.
Thomas
Re: ----
I neglected to say what that harm is. It is that their theology makes us reflect more deeply on our relationships with others, causing us a degree of emotional turmoil. Much of this turmoil is indirect. They increase the degree our non-acceptance of societies/loved ones irrationality, resulting in rejection from others that do not understand this viewpoint.
Re: Ne Plus Ultra
For the record, I'm only a short way into chapter two, and I'm ready to fully agree with whoever pointed out that Andrew Beckwith seems to have no business in any an 'elite' group. The man is not particularly bright by any standards, much less those of intellectual elitism. What he is doing there is a mystery to me, David beats him up with ease.
The poster known as M, however, is far more substantial. I'm assuming that there will be others like 'M' joining the fray, although Bird seems to feel that David is still fending them off well into page five. I'm wondering when I'm going to see something impressive from this group. So far, I'm getting the idea that David may be right in characterizing them as hysterics who ran him off in a fit.
The poster known as M, however, is far more substantial. I'm assuming that there will be others like 'M' joining the fray, although Bird seems to feel that David is still fending them off well into page five. I'm wondering when I'm going to see something impressive from this group. So far, I'm getting the idea that David may be right in characterizing them as hysterics who ran him off in a fit.
Re: ----
Jimhaz -
Well, in the sense that QRS 'hurt people' by making them examine themselves and their relationships, we can hardly fault them, lest we be like the ignorant mob who demanded Socrates' death for similar reasons. If that was all they did, I really couldn't object. Unfortunately, I don't think that they are entirely Socratic - they want to undermine not only things that people hold dear, but things that are mandated by Nature itself. Male/female differences in thinking are an expression of the yin/yang universal dialectic, and are not going away just because some of us may not like one aspect or the other. In short, they want to make things 'better' (from their point of view) than they actually can be - entangling them in a Quixotic effort from which little good can ultimately come.
In Zen, the importance of abandoning the concept of 'improvement' is stressed. People are forever trying to 'improve' things that they haven't any business tampering with. Obviously, this does not mean that we neglect necessary upkeep, but it does mean that we don't try to overextend ourselves in a fit of hubris. Nature is very unconcerned with our whims and will ensure that most attempts at 'improvement' end in frustration.
Well, in the sense that QRS 'hurt people' by making them examine themselves and their relationships, we can hardly fault them, lest we be like the ignorant mob who demanded Socrates' death for similar reasons. If that was all they did, I really couldn't object. Unfortunately, I don't think that they are entirely Socratic - they want to undermine not only things that people hold dear, but things that are mandated by Nature itself. Male/female differences in thinking are an expression of the yin/yang universal dialectic, and are not going away just because some of us may not like one aspect or the other. In short, they want to make things 'better' (from their point of view) than they actually can be - entangling them in a Quixotic effort from which little good can ultimately come.
In Zen, the importance of abandoning the concept of 'improvement' is stressed. People are forever trying to 'improve' things that they haven't any business tampering with. Obviously, this does not mean that we neglect necessary upkeep, but it does mean that we don't try to overextend ourselves in a fit of hubris. Nature is very unconcerned with our whims and will ensure that most attempts at 'improvement' end in frustration.
...
Quote:Quote:<hr>I think the truth is that the QRS harm us all, male and female, and that is why they are not misogynists. As an aside mental harm to me is little different to physical harm.<hr>
I agree with that.
Although I don't agree with all "Truths" they describe, especially (but not only) the ones about women, I do think they have a few good ideas about the nature of the universe. In my opinion, the harm comes from the spiritual path they propose. It can falsify us in our own motives.
Quote:Quote:<hr>The same applies to Paul's and Suergaz's views about love being the answer to this dilemma. Love requires us to retain all the other conflicting emotions, and these other conflicting emotions end up defeating love.<hr>
And I disagree with that. Yes, love requires us to retain emotions, but they are not necesseraly conflicting nor need to defeat love. I don't say it's a sollution to any dillema though, because I have no pretentions of saving the world. There's no dillema for me.
I agree with that.
Although I don't agree with all "Truths" they describe, especially (but not only) the ones about women, I do think they have a few good ideas about the nature of the universe. In my opinion, the harm comes from the spiritual path they propose. It can falsify us in our own motives.
Quote:Quote:<hr>The same applies to Paul's and Suergaz's views about love being the answer to this dilemma. Love requires us to retain all the other conflicting emotions, and these other conflicting emotions end up defeating love.<hr>
And I disagree with that. Yes, love requires us to retain emotions, but they are not necesseraly conflicting nor need to defeat love. I don't say it's a sollution to any dillema though, because I have no pretentions of saving the world. There's no dillema for me.
Re: ----
Quote:Quote:<hr>It can falsify us in our own motives.<hr>So can most versions of Buddhism, which is clearly the chief inspiration behind QRS worldview. It is my belief that Buddhism is somewhat dangerous in this sense. Some insightful students, like Thomas, have the wherwithal to interpret Buddhism in terms appropriate for Western consumption. Most interpretations, however, manage to sooner or later run counter to the Western spirit at a fundamental level and can therefore lead us to delusion rather than genuine enlightenment. The Eastern and Western mindsets, like those of men and women, have genuine differences, and often what is sustenance to one is poison to the other. For Westerners, non-attachment is non-existence rather than Nirvana. If we try to train ourselves to seek it too forcefully, we will, as Rairun put it, "falsify ourselves in our own motives." I haven't been able to express myself as well as I would have liked in this post, but I trust that the insightful among us will be able to discern my meaning in spite of my poor communication.
Re: ----
we can hardly fault them, lest we be like the ignorant mob who demanded Socrates' death for similar reasons.
Agree, there is no fault and they do warn people in the introduction to the forum. They do what they do and the fact that people are curious and ignore that warning is not their fault.
they want to undermine not only things that people hold dear, but things that are mandated by Nature itself. Male/female differences in thinking are an expression of the yin/yang universal dialectic, and are not going away just because some of us may not like one aspect or the other. In short, they want to make things 'better' (from their point of view) than they actually can be
In Zen, the importance of abandoning the concept of 'improvement' is stressed. People are forever trying to 'improve' things that they haven't any business tampering with. Obviously, this does not mean that we neglect necessary upkeep, but it does mean that we don't try to overextend ourselves in a fit of hubris. Nature is very unconcerned with our whims and will ensure that most attempts at 'improvement' end in frustration.
I cannot agree with this.
As a species, to me evolution is the main determinant, not yin and yan. Evolution has more power. Presently males are becoming more female and females a more masculine - where is the yin and yan in that. We are beginning to overcome yin and yang. This is occurring as a result of our increasing ability to influence the environment. Although evolution theory concerns itself with the physical, I view minds as just a manifestation of the physical and therefore scientific advances are a result of evolution - science is empirical trail and error resulting in improvement via the survival of the fittest theories.
Where do we go from here? For me it is to make us into gods, using science. In a way Godliness is the complete removal of yin and yang.
Agree, there is no fault and they do warn people in the introduction to the forum. They do what they do and the fact that people are curious and ignore that warning is not their fault.
they want to undermine not only things that people hold dear, but things that are mandated by Nature itself. Male/female differences in thinking are an expression of the yin/yang universal dialectic, and are not going away just because some of us may not like one aspect or the other. In short, they want to make things 'better' (from their point of view) than they actually can be
In Zen, the importance of abandoning the concept of 'improvement' is stressed. People are forever trying to 'improve' things that they haven't any business tampering with. Obviously, this does not mean that we neglect necessary upkeep, but it does mean that we don't try to overextend ourselves in a fit of hubris. Nature is very unconcerned with our whims and will ensure that most attempts at 'improvement' end in frustration.
I cannot agree with this.
As a species, to me evolution is the main determinant, not yin and yan. Evolution has more power. Presently males are becoming more female and females a more masculine - where is the yin and yan in that. We are beginning to overcome yin and yang. This is occurring as a result of our increasing ability to influence the environment. Although evolution theory concerns itself with the physical, I view minds as just a manifestation of the physical and therefore scientific advances are a result of evolution - science is empirical trail and error resulting in improvement via the survival of the fittest theories.
Where do we go from here? For me it is to make us into gods, using science. In a way Godliness is the complete removal of yin and yang.
Re: ----
In Zen, the importance of abandoning the concept of 'improvement' is stressed.
Yes, but probably only so as to gain a sense of contentment by containing the destructive emotions. It is the destructive emotions/instincts such as greed, envy and hate that create evolutionary improvements, so by containing these in individuals contentment occurs as desires are held in bay. That is OK for individuals but it is a dead end in terms of improving the human race.
Yes, but probably only so as to gain a sense of contentment by containing the destructive emotions. It is the destructive emotions/instincts such as greed, envy and hate that create evolutionary improvements, so by containing these in individuals contentment occurs as desires are held in bay. That is OK for individuals but it is a dead end in terms of improving the human race.
Re: ----
Paul, No I'm not. Nor do I ever think I'll be a genius as described by QRS.
Nor do I consider myself to be a particularly great thinker. At the same time I often feel I can cut to the heart of a matter. I think this is because my brain is not encumbered by other, mostly irrelevant things. I have been single for a long time, so I have head start over most people in detaching myself from the emotional aspects of a concept. On the downside, being single has also meant that I have a suit of attachments of a solitary nature.
Nor do I consider myself to be a particularly great thinker. At the same time I often feel I can cut to the heart of a matter. I think this is because my brain is not encumbered by other, mostly irrelevant things. I have been single for a long time, so I have head start over most people in detaching myself from the emotional aspects of a concept. On the downside, being single has also meant that I have a suit of attachments of a solitary nature.
-
Kevin Solway
- Posts: 2766
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 8:43 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Re: ---
birdofhermes wrote:
Quote:Quote:<hr>QRS misogyny is the most extreme and dangerous this world has ever produced, and the only reason they have not harmed women is that they have not the power. I'd feel safer under the Taliban.<hr>
Here is an interesting snippet of information, which readers can do with what they will:
Despite the fact that I am, supposedly, one of the most extreme "haters of women" (ie, misogynists) the world has ever known, for some reason none of the women in my life have been able to detect it. And these women are not themselves "haters of women", who would, presumably, agree with my views, but are ordinary, everyday women, of the kind you would meet anywhere. Even though these women have the astounding intuitive abilities we all know, with which they can read a person's body language, and perceive their unspoken feelings, still they cannot detect this hatred that I am supposed to have, and nor do they detect that I have "walls-up" with regard to them.
Many women who know me say that I am "the exact opposite of a misogynist". Some of these women say that I have "too much respect for women", and that I should not hold women's opinions in as high a regard as I do (and which I do on principle), and which leads me to lend women's views such great significance.
Never in my daily life (daily, or at any other time!) have I tried to restrict a woman's freedom, and in fact, I have always pushed to increase women's freedom to determine their own lives. I have only ever encouraged women to think for themselves and do as they please. I never treat a woman as inferior just because she is, supposedly, a woman.
Quote:Quote:<hr>QRS misogyny is the most extreme and dangerous this world has ever produced, and the only reason they have not harmed women is that they have not the power. I'd feel safer under the Taliban.<hr>
Here is an interesting snippet of information, which readers can do with what they will:
Despite the fact that I am, supposedly, one of the most extreme "haters of women" (ie, misogynists) the world has ever known, for some reason none of the women in my life have been able to detect it. And these women are not themselves "haters of women", who would, presumably, agree with my views, but are ordinary, everyday women, of the kind you would meet anywhere. Even though these women have the astounding intuitive abilities we all know, with which they can read a person's body language, and perceive their unspoken feelings, still they cannot detect this hatred that I am supposed to have, and nor do they detect that I have "walls-up" with regard to them.
Many women who know me say that I am "the exact opposite of a misogynist". Some of these women say that I have "too much respect for women", and that I should not hold women's opinions in as high a regard as I do (and which I do on principle), and which leads me to lend women's views such great significance.
Never in my daily life (daily, or at any other time!) have I tried to restrict a woman's freedom, and in fact, I have always pushed to increase women's freedom to determine their own lives. I have only ever encouraged women to think for themselves and do as they please. I never treat a woman as inferior just because she is, supposedly, a woman.