QRS delusion

baulz owt · Post by **baulz owt** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 5:31 pm

yes, I've read through most of this forum. Yes, I've cast a lot of it aside. So, I must ask [Q, R, and/or S] why do you cling to your transcended mindset? You clearly haven't "become one with the universe" and are not functional socially (a key aspect of human health, life, and dare I say Truth)

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 5:54 pm

baulz owt wrote:yes, I've read through most of this forum.

Ok, you speed read. That's impressive.

Yes, I've cast a lot of it aside.

Ok, you speed dismiss, that's impressive.

So, I must ask [Q, R, and/or S] why do you cling to your transcended mindset?

Why do skid marks cling to jocks?

You clearly haven't "become one with the universe" and are not functional socially (a key aspect of human health, life, and dare I say Truth)

What does it mean to be "one with the universe" and possibly more importantly, to be "functional socially"? Does it mean I have to cheer for Heath Ledger to get a supporting actor Oscar?

baulz owt · Post by **baulz owt** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 10:54 pm

I mean, aren't you denying life to a certain extent? Does overthinking and overanalyzing not separate the body from the mind, withering your intuition, leaving opportunities behind?

baulz owt · Post by **baulz owt** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 10:56 pm

Or do you present yourself as genius so rigidly so that you must be overcome?

1otherS · Post by **1otherS** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 2:31 am

The sensible Nietzsche would certainly have advised to overcome the QRS...:

-The triumvirate preaches non-attachment yet it pimps Weininger's fishy ideas so much it's ridiculous.

-Dan Rowden has confirmed his drinking problem.

-David Quinn has divorced from his woman and thus created a labile environment for his own kid.

-Kevin Solway has a lot of misogynist undertones in his work.

-They constantly use well known definitions and completely alter their meaning...Leaving everyone asking what the hell they are actually talking about.

-The QRS and their flock regularly write about their outcast status-constantly glorifying it as well...as if they were heroic martyrs.

-Quixotic lifestyle in general.

Conclusion:These guys present an aura of perfection they can't possibly live up to.

Loki · Post by **Loki** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 2:41 am

Last I heard, Dan had explicitly denied his drinking problem. Why do you think otherwise?

Quit bashing my heroes, 1otherS.

1otherS · Post by **1otherS** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 3:42 am

Hey Loki, do you at least agree with my other points?

Loki · Post by **Loki** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:38 am

-The triumvirate hardly ever talk about Weininger

Until you actually experience first hand this 'labile environment' that David's kid is living in, you should shut up. For all you know, David's kid maybe a well nourished, thoughtful child harboring zero resentments and having broad interests.

Kevin Solway's work advocates the compassionate masculinization of women, rather than directing hatred and scorn at them.

- If well known definitions are defined incoherently, then I see nothing wrong with redefining them.

-I'm not familiar with anyone here regularly writing about their outcast status - nor do I see glorification

-Yes, they are idealistic. So what.

What's wrong with having an ideal of perfection you can't live up to? Maybe someday someone will live up to QRS ideals, and maybe QRS are planting the seeds of an idealism that will live many hundreds if not thousands of years into the future.

1otherS · Post by **1otherS** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 6:49 am

Once again you fail to see the QRS for what they are: hypocrites.

-David Quinn has talked about hardcore renunciation YET HAS A KID AND AN EX_WIFE.

-Kevin Solway's essay on women is one-sided and at least chauvinist.

-Dan Rowden aims cynical jokes towards everyone's stance except his own. He takes himself way too seriously.

-What authority does the QRS have to just go around changing definitions? Why even bother stirring up the confusion?

PS I'm not the one surrounding myself with followers and websites to primarily promote insular ideas.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 6:52 am

baulz owt wrote:I mean, aren't you denying life to a certain extent?

Everyone denies life to a certain extent. That is, they deny aspects of life they deem to be false. That's all I ever do as well - I deny the false. Denying "life", per se, is a nonsensical thing.

Does overthinking and overanalyzing

What on earth is overthinking and overanalysing? They also seem nonsensical. Any "problem" requires the exact amount of thought and analysis to overcome it - no more and no less.

not separate the body from the mind, withering your intuition, leaving opportunities behind?

My intuition is just fine. Th rest of what you said is too nebulous for me to respond to.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 6:54 am

baulz owt wrote:Or do you present yourself as genius so rigidly so that you must be overcome?

This statement doesn't seem to mean anything. There's nothing "rigid" about "genius". It's the freest thing in the world!

Freedom from falsity!

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:05 am

Loki wrote:-The triumvirate hardly ever talk about Weininger

Until you actually experience first hand this 'labile environment' that David's kid is living in, you should shut up. For all you know, David's kid maybe a well nourished, thoughtful child harboring zero resentments and having broad interests.

Yes, I agree. I'm getting a little tired of 1otherS's pitiful gossip posts. He's like a teenage girl with nothing better to offer. David's son is actually one of the best adjusted young men I've known. Though, he probably likes World of Warcraft a bit too much :)

Kevin Solway's work advocates the compassionate masculinization of women, rather than directing hatred and scorn at them.

And that's exactly what Weininger advocated too.

- If well known definitions are defined incoherently, then I see nothing wrong with redefining them.

Exactly. If common usage isn't up to the standard required for serious philosophical thought - and it hardly ever is for obvious reasons - then refinement is necessary. The truth is every philosopher has done it.

-I'm not familiar with anyone here regularly writing about their outcast status - nor do I see glorification

There is no glorification of it; there is only occasional, relevant commentary on certain aspects of it. I don't even think of myself as an outcast. I could only do that if I valued conventional life and couldn't live it.

-Yes, they are idealistic. So what.

Oh, but you have to be romantic, not idealistic! Idealism involves that damnable thing - reality.

What's wrong with having an ideal of perfection you can't live up to? Maybe someday someone will live up to QRS ideals, and maybe QRS are planting the seeds of an idealism that will live many hundreds if not thousands of years into the future.

Acorns and oaks.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:14 am

1otherS wrote:Once again you fail to see the QRS for what they are: hypocrites.

-David Quinn has talked about hardcore renunciation YET HAS A KID AND AN EX_WIFE.

Haha - ex "wife"? I think Sue just broke the tiles with her jaw. What has something David did 16/17 years ago got to do with anything? I hope you know you're making yourself look a little retarded with this sort of post.

-Kevin Solway's essay on women is one-sided and at least chauvinist.

Yes, it's one-sided; it's on the side of truth. Did you expect him to write some bullshit just to balance it out?

-Dan Rowden aims cynical jokes towards everyone's stance except his own. He takes himself way too seriously.

I scoff at posts that contain no substance or attempt at such. It's my way of pushing the person to make more of an effort. Your posts don't even warrant scoffing. They are mostly borderline trolling.

-What authority does the QRS have to just go around changing definitions? Why even bother stirring up the confusion?

What? I wasn't aware language had the status of religious dogma. Colour me naive.

PS I'm not the one surrounding myself with followers and websites to primarily promote insular ideas.

Your insult to the posters here is duly noted. That's about 3 times now you've done that. You might want to rethink that behaviour.

1otherS · Post by **1otherS** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 8:22 am

Dan Rowden wrote:
1otherS wrote:Once again you fail to see the QRS for what they are: hypocrites.

-David Quinn has talked about hardcore renunciation YET HAS A KID AND AN EX_WIFE.
Haha - ex "wife"? I think Sue just broke the tiles with her jaw. What has something David did 16/17 years ago got to do with anything? I hope you know you're making yourself look a little retarded with this sort of post.

1otherS
Have you ever heard of the subject of history? You should try to study the philosophic intent behind it...

-Kevin Solway's essay on women is one-sided and at least chauvinist.
Yes, it's one-sided; it's on the side of truth. Did you expect him to write some bullshit just to balance it out?

1otherS
I'm calling you out on your supposed truths.

-Dan Rowden aims cynical jokes towards everyone's stance except his own. He takes himself way too seriously.
I scoff at posts that contain no substance or attempt at such. It's my way of pushing the person to make more of an effort. Your posts don't even warrant scoffing. They are mostly borderline trolling.

1otherS
You don't see the substance? Well, I can't warrant that you do.

-What authority does the QRS have to just go around changing definitions? Why even bother stirring up the confusion?
What? I wasn't aware language had the status of religious dogma. Colour me naive.

1otherS
If you were a Harvard professor in linguïstics and philosophy and published peer-reviewed essays on your reasons for changing a specific definition...I can see where you're coming from.
You-however- are just a dilettant, correct?

PS I'm not the one surrounding myself with followers and websites to primarily promote insular ideas.
Your insult to the posters here is duly noted. That's about 3 times now you've done that. You might want to rethink that behaviour.

1otherS
It's not an insult- a lot of posters here have a follower-mentality.
How do I know this? Because they re-write your assertions almost verbatim.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 8:58 am

1otherS wrote:
Dan Rowden wrote:
PS I'm not the one surrounding myself with followers and websites to primarily promote insular ideas.
Your insult to the posters here is duly noted. That's about 3 times now you've done that. You might want to rethink that behaviour.
It's not an insult- a lot of posters here have a follower-mentality.
How do I know this? Because they re-write your assertions almost verbatim.

Please name these posters so they can defend their honour if they so wish. If you can't or won't, I suggest you cease this cowardly display of snide mud-slinging.

baulz owt · Post by **baulz owt** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 12:06 pm

Dan, I basically can't understand how you can tolerate life on a straight line (no ups or downs). Please elucidate the reasons why Truth gets you off so much. I don't feel like reading your work.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 12:40 pm

We all value something - or, most of us do - I just happen to value Truth uppermost; it's simply how I'm constituted. As for tolerating life with no ups or downs, well, that's how I mostly experience it. There's nothing to "tolerate". The forces that caused the conventional ups and downs just don't exist as they once did. The reason for that is I discovered that those causes are delusional in nature and eliminated them (to the degree that I have). It's natural that you'd find this state of affairs alien, because you're filtering it through all your conventional ego-based attachments and desires.

The question is, do you want to have fun or do you want to be true?

baulz owt · Post by **baulz owt** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 1:24 pm

I know I am coming off as a retard. This is because I have been in my head so much that I can't even write my thoughts coherently. I killed my ego and truly felt nihilism and have been going crazy but have ultimately opted for fun; I can delude myself with my autotheism. I am forcing myself to believe that everyone (and perhaps everything) is the same and that I can continue to enjoy a minimal social life and enjoy the sense of it being "real." Once alone again, I can be brought back to my 'enlightened base' as I call it. Yes, I know I'm not enlightened but I do think there is an ability to have the best of both worlds. I'm a virgin and perhaps when I have sex I will consider that the greatest feeling and stop smoking pot.

Unidian · Post by **Unidian** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 3:01 pm

Pot, eh?

1otherS · Post by **1otherS** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 6:45 pm

1otherS
It's not an insult- a lot of posters here have a follower-mentality.
How do I know this? Because they re-write your assertions almost verbatim.

Dan Rowden
Please name these posters so they can defend their honour if they so wish. If you can't or won't, I suggest you cease this cowardly display of snide mud-slinging.[/quote]

1otherS
Go through this forum's history...Plenty of names should pop up if you truly value your consciousness.

I can easily rifle off five names but that would result in even more pissing-contests I'm not interested in.

What I'm trying to say: this message board tells a tale of fanaticism...

-Self-proclaimed enlightened folks
-Kabbalists
-People talking about pseudo-science like Indigo-children and The Secret
-Some Neil-guy getting accused of being a social darwinist
-A young adult bragging about his superior IQ-score without the intellectual "chops" to back it up.
...

One more question:
What good is planting ideals for other people when you can't even live up to them yourself?
The QRS sensually paints this grand ideal of perfection, but fails to actually adhere to its most basic guidelines.

You know what that's called? HYPOCRISY

Quote:
What's wrong with having an ideal of perfection you can't live up to? Maybe someday someone will live up to QRS ideals, and maybe QRS are planting the seeds of an idealism that will live many hundreds if not thousands of years into the future.

1otherS
Spreading an idea you don't honor yourself in actions is Quixotic at best and at the worst cult-like.

baulz owt · Post by **baulz owt** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:46 am

I've yet to witness any indication that permanent transcendence is even possible. It really is quixotic at best. Now I have to go moisturize my skin, it's like 15 degress out. Peace.

baulz owt · Post by **baulz owt** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:49 am

Yes, pot. It seems to be the best ego-filling drug to me and comes with the huge bonus of being relatively harmless to my ongoing goals of physical and mental fitness. I need an "ego-filling drug" because I rarely socialize and it anesthetizes that sense of a void.

baulz owt · Post by **baulz owt** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:54 am

I mean, isn't it in our biology to sense the void in order to propagate our species? I don't comprehend how wisdom and subsequent knowledge of loneliness as an illusion rids one of this void. I can see how wisdom would enable you to overcome your petty ego urges. It's clear to me that every single person follows their own religion, so it's cool if you want to try to transcend into nothing. I just don't see the possibility of sustaining that.

Shahrazad · Post by **Shahrazad** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:27 am

Baultz, I've heard that pot destroys brain cells (neurons), which do not regenerate. In other words, it does permanent damage.

baulz owt · Post by **baulz owt** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 6:34 am

Shah, thank you for the warning. However, I'm inclined to disagree/delude myself.

edit: I use relatively small amounts.

GENIUS FORUMS

QRS delusion

QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion

Re: QRS delusion