GENIUS FORUMS

Yes, I know he that button, but for those whom had that button hit, he would also number among those who didn't get his point at all.

I suspect.

Dan Rowden wrote:Yes, I know he that button, but for those whom had that button hit, he would also number among those who didn't get his point at all.

I suspect.

I can't really figure out what you mean by this sentence.

That he doesn't know he hit that button?
Or that that is the button he was trying to push and is listing those who had it pushed as those who didn't get his point?

He wasn't talking about biological women with all his "conquering" talk - he was talking about "WOMAN". Though, an element of the former is necessarily also involved in any sexual dynamic.

Women conquer men in sex, too, in their own way.

Dan Rowden wrote:He wasn't talking about biological women with all his "conquering" talk - he was talking about "WOMAN". Though, an element of the former is necessarily also involved in any sexual dynamic.

Women conquer men in sex, too, in their own way.

hmm. I actually originally questioned whether he meant that, but after he started saying that he had treated her well and such in his next posts, I decided he actually meant a real woman.

And, yes, I think sex is basically one big bartering act between people...

Yes, it's true sex is psychological (primarily) barter. But I still think the general idea of Aaron's thread and story is being lost.

When we "conquer" anything, we do so that of the element of our minds that retains power over us. No man "conquers" Woman by fucking a few girls - unless one happens to see through that reality fully. Aaron clearly hasn't, therefore he hasn't conquered Woman at all; he has, at best, had some quality insight.

I think he has overplayed his facade. But, let's see.

Dan Rowden wrote:When we "conquer" anything, we do so that of the element of our minds that retains power over us.

That sentence structure just isn't clear to me, so let me state what I think you were trying to say, and please correct me if I am wrong:

When we "conquer" anything, we do so to conquer that element of our minds that retains power over us.

Aaron never got my original point, and the point that others tried to make as well, that taking pride in the degridation of others is not a sign of wisdom. Actually, since all of us are one, by degrading others he is also degrading himself - which you kind of hinted at by asking him to look at the woman within. He then uses various means of trying to play "all-powerful one" which is also degrading as well as ego-boosting.

He couldn't hold the Socratic "I'm looking for a teacher" game more than 2 pages and overdid it well into the realm of falseness (Those who play the "I'm looking for a teacher" game tend to totally miss how Socrates actually went about it). He sounds like he did some reading of this forum and the links before he did any posts, so it isn't like I'm totally dismissing him - but as for

Dan Rowden wrote:The question is, if what's he's saying hasn't hit a chord, why is he being taken so seriously?

Dan, the board was slow enough that people were even responding to spam... Beyond that though, the people here now do seem to be genuinely interested in helping everyone who comes here become wiser. He's here, and he's posting, so people are trying to help.

Aaron,

However, I'll will treat people as they appear to me.

That's what everyone does. It's also known as "projection".

You are a fool for believing what you cannot know for sure.

If what you write is honest, then everything I said about you is known for sure. If what you are saying is make-believe -- if it's a persona -- then what I am saying about you is not true. It's that simple. I never bother trying to tell whether or not someone is showing their true face, because I don't think anyone is worth that much effort. I have my own projects to deal with that have nothing to do with sitting around figuring out whether or not Aaron Mathis is legit or not.

The fool fails to discriminate from what is worth believing from what is not worth believing.

The fool spends his time trying to figure out the stupid riddles that a newbie on a forum tries to present to the class. If you have something worth saying, just out and say it.

I care about your doings too brother!

Good. The only ethical systems worth anything are those that deal with intentions. Whether you are successful is secondary.

I went fishing some time ago. I put bait on a hook, not only to feed the fish…..lol

There are ways of detecting the fools. Rowden appears to be not one of them. But you seem to be.

I have a different attitude than Rowden toward bullshitters. The most important things that I say are intentionally downplayed, so they reply to the wrong parts -- and accept the right parts as self-evident. It works because my personality is generally hostile.

Exactly, you don’t know.

I'll one up you: you don't even know whether your own writing is good or not.

However, that's not important at all. That's skill, and has nothing to do with genius. What are you intentions? Are you just showing off?

I learned by thinking about the consequences of my experiences Trevor.

You learned by thinking about cause and effect. Excellent.

I will agree that exposure to Aaron has been enlightening. I now understand Dan's earlier point of how attachment to truth can lead away from enlightenment. I'd tried to give up my attachment to truth for my exhusband, but I gave it up in the wrong way which is what caused it to snap back on me so hard. I get it now.

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:I will agree that exposure to Aaron has been enlightening. I now understand Dan's earlier point of how attachment to truth can lead away from enlightenment. I'd tried to give up my attachment to truth for my exhusband, but I gave it up in the wrong way which is what caused it to snap back on me so hard. I get it now.

That was an act of submissive virility, Elizabeth. Such is what the world needs.

And Dan, I will be responding to your questions shortly.

Dan Rowden wrote: So, Aaron, what is Woman to you?

Gravity, neediness, centrality, somethingness. In other words: illusion.

Look at the male dog. He is normally attentive to the whole family, playing with kids. This is femininity in itself. However, the amplitude is turned up more than just a little bit when the jupiter of the female dog enters the picture! Woah! The male dog is flung into her, orbiting mindlessly - turned into a dull moon!

Sniffing her bum and mounting her. He has become one with her. Woman is an embarassing dance. The male pigeon is a great joke too, look at his funny dance!

Before the female entered the picture, the male dog was of a more diluted and masculinized femninity, playing with the family. But he goes almost totally unconscious when faced with a gravity so potent as his biolgoical mate!

Think of carrying the bright lantern a few feet in front of you on a moonless and cloudless night. Why do you need this lattern on such a clear night? You can't see the heavens, let alone the fox up ahead there in the blue field. You miss the tranquil pond. Stand along the ponds shore at night and stare down into the abyss of stars.

Woman is constricted pupils, born of squalid, tumultuous, fearful, crude, chemically driven judgement.

Always adding more, only to unwittingly limit the self even further.

Masculinity is the capacity for maximum dialation, maximum pain.

How great is the sun! But when it goes down and sets, how great is it to realize billions.

What is her nature, what is her power?

See above.

Why need she be conquered?

When I say conquer, I mean: 'overcome'. I assume you mean this as well.

Clarity is sought and attained simply for its own sake.

Perhaps certain ones become motivated to achieve wisdom simply because they fail to see how security can be attained in any other way.

Achieving wisdom, clarity is conquest, overcoming.

The overcoming of all that leaves one bewildered, frightened and craving.

And, moreover, how much of that which needs to be conquered is purely a product of a man's own mind.

What isnt a product of man's own mind? Manifestations, comprising the world, are an organization conducted by the brain, the mind.

But then again, what is mind? The mind is you, and I think that you will find, if you question with enough virility, that you are not even there to begin with.

Life is woman!

You're suergaz, aren't you?

I don't think Suergaz would say those things, unless he is even more scoundrally than I thoght.

sscaula wrote: You're suergaz, aren't you?

How do you figure? I went back and read a few suergaz posts. The girlish entity was in denial of the non-existence of self and things! What a fool. Suergaz didnt appear to have much arrogance, nor much opinion on woman.

Suergaz was a Gadfly only in the sense that Mariah Carey would be if she promoted her glitter soundtrack to the members of Aristotle's Lycaeum school in Athens, BC.

Iolaus wrote:I don't think Suergaz would say those things, unless he is even more scoundrally than I thought.

Yes, unlike me, Suergaz never wrote like a genius, I agree.

Suergaz wasnt even scoundrally. He was such a girlish sort of fellow. For all I know Suergaz was a she. It was hard to tell. I can't bear to read another post by her. Such little worthless fragments, just little burps from a drunken overweight fairy.

Aaron,

You fell for the bait! Gotcha!

LOL - - scott! that was a good laugh, you devil!

Aaron Mathis wrote:Nick,

It is a bit of a painting, this thread. My character on this thread is an exagerated mythological lop-sided hero, not really the realistic me. I wanted to paint the strange tongued hero -- and so I picked a way of talking that I felt embodied a sort of idiotic genius, a sort of autistic, primitive childlike savant, a prometheus.

Do you use this character often? You seem to have practiced a lot with it. Perhaps an alter-ego? Although, as entertaining as it can be to read something written in the same manner you were writing it left me a bit more puzzled about you than you might have intended. I guess seeing someones "true character" intrigues me a bit more than their "play characters". Never-the-less you sparked my curiosity.

Aaron Mathis wrote:You have to admit, there have been moments on this thread where my writing truly has approached genius. That's really what it all boils down to. Yeah, there was alot of water, but you boil it away and you have cooked potatoes and carrots of genius. I think some of the negative reactions are rooted in a bit of jealousy. They are jealous of my freedom.

Alright I'm not quite understanding you here. Do you feel I have insulted you in some way?

Aaron wrote:

Suergaz wasnt even scoundrally. He was such a girlish sort of fellow. For all I know Suergaz was a she. It was hard to tell. I can't bear to read another post by her. Such little worthless fragments, just little burps from a drunken overweight fairy.

That almost makes me want to turn the emoticons back on :)

Aaron: You have to admit, there have been moments on this thread where my writing truly has approached genius. That's really what it all boils down to. Yeah, there was alot of water, but you boil it away and you have cooked potatoes and carrots of genius. I think some of the negative reactions are rooted in a bit of jealousy. They are jealous of my freedom.


Nick: Alright I'm not quite understanding you here. Do you feel I have insulted you in some way?

no, no, not at all Nick. You were one of the few respondants who showed a certain noble quality.

I was just trying to get the fools worked up.

There is a certain Lake in Ontario that has been overrun by an undesirable fish.

The environmentalists, in order to estimate how many fish are in a little cove, apply an electrical shock to the water.

The fish start jumping out of the water like crazy!

Likewise, there are certain comments a person can make that really help one determine the fools from the wise.

The wise are not in the water, therefore they don't feel the electric shock.

The wise are birds above the water, looking down on the fisherman or the man who is applying electricity to the water.

The fools are fish, looking down on the fishermens bait!

Or they are the fish, reacting to the shock.


You appear to me as someone who is out of the water, unaffected by my electric shock and un-effected by the bait.

Nice calm questions mark the wise.

So what was the purpose of getting the fools worked up? Was it to get a feel for the crowd, or just for fun, or both?

Nick,

The thread is just me living. I live for only the sake of the great coin. The great value.

On one side of the coin is learning, on the other side is teaching.

I live only for the sake of learning and teaching.

I wrote this thread not only to learn!

But from this thread I have learned.

Aaron, I think you just annoy the SCUBA divers when you apply electricity to the water. You're not fishing here. You're dealing with other people who are dealing with different problems than you.

Your problem is with the fish. You're trying to zap them for some unknown reason -- and you still haven't told me your intentions. It's doubly irritating because I study them.

Now, get off your fucking boat...

...stop talking in dumb metaphors...

...and say something honest for once.

You have said nothing new or impressive yet. You sound like a bad imitation of Nietzsche that doesn't even write in his style for any real reason. Do you have any comprehension of why Nietzsche chose his style? In other words: do you understand satire? Does Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" make you laugh, think, change your ways, or struggle to imitate him?

You talked about women, causality, albeit accidentally, and you mentioned an ethical system that seems to value intentions. Further, you clumped me with Eliza and Rory, which totally misinterprets both of them (belief-wise, they don't belong in the same group at all), and shows you separate people based on the style of their writing rather than on content of thought.

At least you realized the power of Dan's thinking. He's quite impressive. But to think I even touched your bait or fell into a hole is downright insulting... there's a lot you can tell about a hunter by studying the type of bait he uses and the type of traps he sets. I examine. Since you have already lied, I have no reason to believe anything you say, ESPECIALLY about where I stand in relation to you.

Is this all you've done? Frankly, I'm not impressed at all.

hmmm...maybe it is Suergaz.

No it isn't. Zagreus is an Aussie. Aaron is a Septic Tank.

Aaron Mathis wrote:Nick,

The thread is just me living. I live for only the sake of the great coin. The great value.

On one side of the coin is learning, on the other side is teaching.

I live only for the sake of learning and teaching.

I wrote this thread not only to learn!

But from this thread I have learned.

So you're using the people of this forum in the same manner you used the act of sexual intercourse with a woman to "learn something". I'm curious about what it is you think you are actually learning from these acts. If one is constantly having to take advantage of children in order to gain something that would make him a child abuser, not wise.

Nick wrote:

So you're using the people of this forum in the same manner you used the act of sexual intercourse with a woman to "learn something".

Women has too many romantic and fanciful ideas about intercourse. Having sex with her is a good way of helping her become a bit more realistic. Give her the sex combined with some mildly truthful words. Yes, she'll be devesated, but the world will be better for it. She'll start thinking more realisitically about life, instead of always dreaming silly dreams.

The faithful/Romeo who tries to fulfill the stereotype that woman has in her head is doing a great injustice. Women never get over those sorts of men.

I think that one is doing a great service for mankind, in particulary, by having sex with fat women in their early twenties or late teens.

It's heroic to have sex with the fat women. I've had my share.

These women need to get over themselves.

Unglamorous and unromantic sex combined with truthful/ruthless words spoke gently, helps women get past the silly notions they have about her self and the world.

Anyways, duping the genius forum fools and revealing to them their mediocrity is a good way of helping them become more aware.

Elizabeth came out of this experience more enlightened. She has come out of the pit and is standing on middle ground.

Rory and Trevor still have some work to do. For now I will leave them down in the pit of ignobility.

if they start to display some respect for truth, then maybe I will them out. But for now they stay down in the pit.

I'm curious about what it is you think you are actually learning from these acts. If one is constantly having to take advantage of children in order to gain something that would make him a child abuser, not wise.

Children are not mature/developed enough to be experiencing matters pertaining to sex and wisdom. Such experiences are in my opinion too overwhelming for a child.

However, these genius forum fools are all adults I assume, and so its time they learned a thing or two.