GENIUS FORUMS

If you need an explanation as to why that piece of nonsense was deleted, then you don't belong here.

I'm beginning to think he is actually you, or someone you know.

Dan,

I can surely comprehend such action. Why don't you admit that you are afraid of Manatron's arguments ? We here in the Andromeda system can see everything on the screen. Do not forget that we say this with the uttermost respect and in a non-metaphorical sense. We are scientists and are not on drugs.

You are setting an example, but you do not know the meaning of the word "nonsense".
On the other hand...you are in charge here and we don't want to argue about that. Maybe you would like to argue about something else in the appropriate forum ?

I can assure you dejavu is not Manatron. I may at least hope, that this message will bypass your paranoïd propulsions.

Seriously, I'm had my fill of silliness in this place. I'm one stupid post away from unilaterally closing the board - or at least multiple bannings. "Manatron" has been a reasonable enough poster so far. I have not taken issue with his "arguments" at all to this point. The thread I deleted didn't contain any argument or point. It was a piece of nonsense and there's been too much of that posted here of late.

And before you post as a sock-puppet to comment about something, you might want to consider I am able to check your IP address and therefore know if you're the same person posting under an alias.

I have no intention of a) discussing anything with you; b) unbanning someone that asked/dared to be banned and was clearly not in control.

I think we can see what drugs do to "human" brains.

Dejavu, knock yourself out, you are still and always will be a dicknosed shitweasel wannabe toadshit bi-product.

Bye!

The Prince

Dejavu...i love you !

Dan Rowden wrote:Seriously, I'm had my fill of silliness in this place. I'm one stupid post away from unilaterally closing the board - or at least multiple bannings. "Manatron" has been a reasonable enough poster so far. I have not taken issue with his "arguments" at all to this point. The thread I deleted didn't contain any argument or point. It was a piece of nonsense and there's been too much of that posted here of late.

And before you post as a sock-puppet to comment about something, you might want to consider I am able to check your IP address and therefore know if you're the same person posting under an alias.

Again just ban him.

This thread was obviously made just to irritate you.
If he is really being serious I'd say just being this stupid justifies a ban.

I'd prefer if this board stayed up, on the other hand I've had my experiences trying to operate forums online, and sometimes shutting it down seems the best course of action. It's really easy for people to subvert admin bans. Its just too bad people can't respect a board for its vision and as private property.

dejavu wrote:Boards have visions? Dan is a reasonable man. This is why I like him. I think he's under-appreciated, but this is partly his own fault! :D

Generally yes, they share a vision with their creators and proprietors. You can step outside of this vision without breaking any rules and wind up getting banned by pissed off admins. The "vision" is usually described in an introduction to the board.

Such as: "Genius Forum has very few rules. We do, however, strive to maintain a high level of rationality. Genius does not necessarily discourage or denounce ideas and beliefs, only the false reasoning that underpins them. This is the essence of what serious philosophical inquiry ought be. Overt attempts at spamming or disrupting the board for malicious purposes or continual gratuitous abuse of members will not be tolerated. Other than that the theme is, basically - go for it. "

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=126 (Board Index::Introduction and Explanation::Board Conduct and Usage)

dejavu wrote:Animus, do you think I should be banned?

Well, see, I share Dan's vision, but I don't have the context. I don't really know you in the same context. Furthermore, I may only share Dan's vision in part, it is very hard to tell, at any rate he is the proprietor. I don't know if you are trying to take him for a run to emphasize a point you are trying to make. If that is the case, maybe he'll entertain it, or maybe you are both playing games with the rest of us as some kind of social experiment. More generally, however, I see that Dan is constantly faced with spam and nonsense on this board. He has expressed an appreciation for evolving thought, and stated that different schools of thinking have something to offer people, but for his realm he desires a purer, more distilled, philosophical discussion. And that is precisely the reason I spend any time on this board, despite the fact that it is constantly full of nonsense or primitive thought. I can easily see how one might go through periods of leniency and clamping-down on the amount of nonsense. Every day there is someone new posting something that is both naive and misinformed. I can barely stand to read anyone but Ryan Rudolph comment on the structure and functioning of the human brain, and that is owing to the fact that he and I appear to be the only members with even rudimentary knowledge. It's not something I expect everyone to entertain, its perfectly fine that members comment on the mind but never comment on the brain, but its a bit difficult to tolerate someone remarking on something they know nothing about. And it is patently clear to knowledgeable people when ignorance speaks.

In short, it does not bother me at all, nor is it my place to judge. If Dan decides to evict me then that's his choice, if he decides to remove anyone else, I don't blame him. He is setting the standard for what is appropriate here, and he is quite open to criticism in my experience. After-all this thread exists, as well as many others more clearly meant to irritate or jab Dan. Maybe there are some kinks in his moderation, I honestly don't pay close enough attention, and I've never felt any impending authority. I've always felt basically free to post whatever I want within the declared scope of the board. A while back I found myself coming here less and posted something suggesting I might leave, I was surprised to see many of the names I used to see come up encouraging me to stick around. I realized then, how many of us might read the board, but find few opportunities to add to our understanding or the understanding of others. I've found it basically fruitless to engage in dialog with many of the active board members. People have to be willing to learn from others without getting puffed up in ego and getting into a polarized debate. And I don't think that Dan is betting on everyone that joins the board being able to transcend ego and duality, I think he more or less sizes them up and then cans them if they appear hopeless or too naive. I've no problem with this, otherwise this place would be drenched in nonsense. As to whether or not Dan is capable of such administrative duties, that is quite irrelevant being that he is the moderator, but I think he is quite capable of discerning genuine truth-seekers from others.

Dan asks: Why does thinking matter?

dejavu answers: It's because we want it to.

Before you shut down the board in your irritated and impatient state, consider the philosophical implications of dejavu's answer -

- Can anything that "matters" ever be mattered-about beyond human willing?
- Is thinking a matter of human willing? -
- if not, does it become pure mechanism?
- as pure mechanism, can it be thought of as thinking at all?
- Is there some way to answer the question beyond the pattern of human-made values?
- (Can 'values' be thought of as anything other than human-created?)
- Can thinking "matter" in some other way than this?
- How, then, can thinking 'matter' beyond our choice for it?
etc.

There are other responses here and there from dejavu - thought reactively as gibberish - that can be similarly sounded. And I suspect dejavu can similarly explain. It should be problematic that others [of intelligence] see coherence where someone else does not. It's a problem, not a matter for altogether prohibition.

dejavu: Dan is a free man Tomas, not a freemason.

:)

I actually trust him, unlike you.

I have faith in Dan, too. There was once a time he would have zeroed right in upon the implications of this answer, stepped good-naturedly through the balloons and smoke rings, and sharpened the point on his share of the dialectic, and pressed his respondent to to do the same. dejavu has already shown he's up to it.

You know how the Tao is, paradoxically. We invite what we fuss over. Dan could suffer him to explain, instead.

Maybe you are getting tired, old man ;) Like dejavu, I remember what I've seen in you. Your better-natured self can whoosh past most stuff, dispersing it in the clean breeze of itself and heading straight for a sharper point. Of course, anyone's better nature can do this; that's what it's for.

dejavu: I recall writing, some prick got the hung of it and you wondered why.

Dan: Don't screw with me. Your posts were idiotic spam and you know it. Admit to it or fuck off.

In case myself or others are similarly called out for 'getting' dejavu, or similarly warned to fuck-off for it, I'd just like to remind that not all economy of expression is empty of depth.

like this:

dejavu: I only meant that Blavatsky is dead. I am happy to include the dead, but everyone, scientifically speaking, is living.

Doesn't everything somehow have its place?

One should be laughing from the gust here. Both are analytically accurate and existentially true.
How do [rhetorical] you use the words everything and everyone?
What else shall we call what is?

. . . and what else should be called "philosophy"?

Why, you do say some of the best things, dejavu ;)

i see there are the creative type geniuses
and the uncreative types

Dejavu falls into the creative catagory...whereas the uncreative types like animus
fall into the dry & boring


also there are the geniuses with hearts and the heartless....
acually i think the only real geniuses are ones with heart

then there are those that appear to have a heart/brain
but it is filled with sawdust

If truth has to be "creative" for you to accept it, then you are going to dwell in falsity.

See how far you get into this article before your brain starts begging for release http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Bin ... _synchrony

It has taken me much mental determination to be able to study these things without reward. I understand that people can say things succinctly that hold some truth, but it is far too shallow for my understanding.

So, what do you think Kunga, is there anything to this binding by synchrony? Does the oscillatory binding play a role in consciousness or cognition overall? Or do you think the issue is debatable and why? Or is it just too boring for Kunga, should sprinkle some glitter and candy sprinkles on it for you? So that you can stomach it.

Come to think of it Kunga, I think this video was made with your mentality in mind: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gBLXJsDnII

I actually find that article on binding by synchrony quite creative and interesting.

Animus....yes it was boring...yes the A=A was up my alley.

There are many different personalities here at the genius form.
All i was saying is that some people are more creative (vibrant,colorful,poetic, humorous)
and some are not (dry, boring, )

the truth can be found in any of these interpretations.

i'm not saying the truth has to be shiney & sparkling & pink & flowerly to appeal to me (your gross misunderstanding)

it is sad that the genius here is devoid of humility & compassion
instead only arrogance is considered genius.

i can admit i'm not as smart as you guys
can you admit you're arrogant ?

This literature is more what interests me :


http://www.amazon.com/Lady-Lotus-Born-G ... 1570623848


But i understand your taste for the technical/dry informational textbook knowledge ....your life experiences are the cause.
Why aren't you at a University studying ? Seriously. You could be a brain surgeon .

Kunga wrote:Animus....yes it was boring...yes the A=A was up my alley.

There are many different personalities here at the genius form.
All i was saying is that some people are more creative (vibrant,colorful,poetic, humorous)
and some are not (dry, boring, )

the truth can be found in any of these interpretations.

i'm not saying the truth has to be shiney & sparkling & pink & flowerly to appeal to me (your gross misunderstanding)

it is sad that the genius here is devoid of humility & compassion
instead only arrogance is considered genius.

i can admit i'm not as smart as you guys
can you admit you're arrogant ?

I'm down with all kinds of expression, but not typically here on Genius. I tread lightly introducing any theology or mythology into the mix. To do something like that, one has to beak it down into something more concrete and intelligible and explain what is indicated by the mythology, and why wouldn't we do so if our goal was to better our understanding? There are no gold stars or special tags for winning an argument as far as I know. Its somehow about overcoming ones own delusions, and in the service of that it helps to not goad other members, but to be clear and concise. We are advanced thinkers after-all, we ought to treat each other in such a manner.

If you think you aren't smart then you aren't smart. If you think I'm smart, then take it from a smart person that neither doubting your intelligence or taking pride in it is helpful to you. Perseverance and self-sacrifice is probably all you need to apprehend very complicated subjects. Perhaps the only obstacle to you understanding computational neuroscience is the massive weight of the task. I tell you that my thinking has changed drastically in order to understand many things, I was not smart, but I have become smart-er.

Kunga wrote:This literature is more what interests me :


http://www.amazon.com/Lady-Lotus-Born-G ... 1570623848


But i understand your taste for the technical/dry informational textbook knowledge ....your life experiences are the cause.
Why aren't you at a University studying ? Seriously. You could be a brain surgeon .

Sounds interesting....

In order of most recent and receding, my reading has consisted of:

THE TRANSFORMATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS INTO WISDOM
IN THE CHINESE CONSCIOUSNESS-ONLY SCHOOL
ACCORDING TO THE CHENG WEI-SHI LUN
by Ronald Epstein
http://online.sfsu.edu/~rone/Buddhism/Y ... USNESS.htm

Clement of Alexandria's Paedagogus and Protrepticus
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.toc.html

http://www.predictablyirrational.com/?p=760&date=1
Predictably Irrational » Blog Archive » Creating God in Our Own Image
www.predictablyirrational.com
When we make decisions we think we're in control, making rational choices. But are we? Dan Ariely unmasks the subtle but powerful tricks our minds play on us.

And if you want to see a partial list of some of my reading past, current and future this link might help: http://www.facebook.com/ryan.shirk?v=ap ... 2392094817

i'm not here to impress anyone with all the books i have read.
i know i sound like an idiot.
i'm nothing like that.
i don't care to impress anymore
i don't care to show off my intellectual skills or knowledge.
i only came back here to interject some positive vibes for Dejavu
as my heart was breaking to see him verbally abused.
he has a heart of gold


goodbye

"i only came back here to interject some positive vibes for Dejavu
as my heart was breaking to see him verbally abused.
he has a heart of gold".

All that glitters is not gold... ;-)

I too, in the recent roasting session, cried bitter tears to see the poor boy abused so terribly. I sat there for a good hour banging my bloody forehead against the wall and saying Why? Why? Why?

Then I just fell down in a catatonic heap...

...and all of a sudden The Heavens Opened!

This is the kind of treatment Alex reserves for his Girly Cadets.

Kunga wrote:i only came back here to interject some positive vibes for Dejavu
as my heart was breaking to see him verbally abused.
he has a heart of gold
goodbye

Oh yeah, you're the fruit (vegan/vegetarian) who lives for all things India.

Do not you have any remorse for the verbal abuse dejavu (suergaz) heaped on Kelly Jones & Mohamed?

Hmm, I'd always imagined you, Alex, more like the big fat gay guy in Modern Family, Cameron.

Alex...funny, and yeah i know...life sucks and we gotta suck up to the shit...if we ain't tough we ain't gonna make it no how ...i know....i just couldn't keep my fuckin self quiet anymore.....i bursted my emotional fattened blubbery heart out.....


Tomas....Dejavu isn't mean-spirited when he slams people...he tells the truth in a funny way.....i especially liked the one when he called Kelly the "strap on" guy...lol


and i just had a cheeseburger...i'm 60% vegan/vegetarian

Kunga wrote:Tomas....Dejavu isn't mean-spirited when he slams people...he tells the truth in a funny way.....i especially liked the one when he called Kelly the "strap on" guy...lol

Dejavu is none other than suergaz. He hasn't changed. David Quinn called him on it and he [Dejavu/Suergaz] announced over on Worldly Matters he'd be gone for a "fortnight".

When you start 15 new threads in one day on Genius, he's got a screw loose. He's a druggie.

That said, he may be a cool bloke in person but this forum is an excellent place to trade ideas, not to insult/abuse fellow posters. Funny is a two-edged sword.

I dunno about you but I read all posts here. Good, bad, ugly.