It would probably be better if certain people kept their self-absorption to themselves. It's kinda self-defeating when it's shared, don't you think?

jamest wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:If there's someone involved who's having trouble understanding what's going on, it's most definitely you. Though you could argue I'm retarded because part of me still somehow believes you actually will express yourself clearly and sufficiently one day.

In any conversation which occurs between two parties, the retarded one is generally the one with the least experience and hence the smallest vocabulary. I'm not like you, as I haven't lived in one mental place all of my life, as you [seemingly] have. As I said earlier tonight, the bulk of my life (about 2/3rds) was spent as an agnostic/atheist (certainly, not as a theist). I'm a well-travelled man of the mind. Therefore, I refuse to be the one held responsible here for our difficulties in conversing with one another.

If anyone here needs to make any special efforts, it's you. You see, having lived your mindset for 2/3rds of my life, I speak your lingo well. Whereas you've never been to my land of the mind. Therefore, shake off your sloth and up your game, squire.

If you are seeking medical diagnosis for your mental condition that's a post to pass on to the doc.

surreptitious57 wrote:The only thing I can change is myself. So that is all I focus on

It seems you are the anti-jamest in that he identifies as the One unchanging God and preaches to others to "up their game squire" or face a torment of badgers, while taking none of responsibility for others that his philosophy implies.

SafeAsMilk wrote:

GrahamH wrote:My question for jamest is:

Did you actually think you would get "serious questions" here with an OP like that?

Are you implying some sort of lack of comprehension about how his posts will be perceived?

If his OP was sincere then yes. with a whinging, boastful, taunting OP like that he set this topic up for epic fail. He made it to post #3 before mentioning badgers. How serious is that?
But I take this topic to be a joke, some frivolous entertaining rant with nothing serious about it.

To what extent are squires upping their game an orchestration of God? To what extent are such orchestrations the will of God? To what extent is upping one's game dependent upon an individual squire's free will? To what extent is an individual squire God? To what extent is God responsible for God's own experiences of upping God's own game, in that God is in fact the squires for which God has to up the game of? To what extent is God choosing to experience the world through a squire whose game needs to be upped?

ETA

To what extent has God decided to foist the experience of badger-requiring squires upon the experienced world of jamest? And, to what extent is jamest responsible for this himself, being God?

How do you as an idealist understand map-territory errors? How would you explain the issue to someone? Assuming there was no pressure to defend your explanation, just to state it.

I ask because I don't consider myself a physicalist or an idealist because I don't think we can really escape the issue well enough to make any sort of conclusions about reality at some ultimate level. I just figure engineering seems to produce predictable results and for some aspects of life, that seems to matter so it's a decent pragmatic assumption. But when I describe map-territory errors, I tend to slant them in such a way as to make the territory into sensory perception and the map into expectations of those perceptions which many people then make the leap to assume is a physical grounding even though that's not really how I see it.

Graham wrote:
But I take this topic to be a joke

He specifically requested the thread contain intelligent posts and so even though it is a joke in places
it is not his fault. Because as soon as someone posted something silly virtually everyone else joined in
I can easily understand why he has such a low opinion of most of you if you are always taking the piss

surreptitious57 wrote:

Graham wrote:
But I take this topic to be a joke

He specifically requested the thread contain intelligent posts and so even though it is a joke in places
it is not his fault. Because as soon as someone posted something silly virtually everyone else joined in
I can easily understand why he has such a low opinion of most of you if you are always taking the piss

Virtually everyone was taking the piss because the OP was ridiculous. You can't blame readers for having a silly response to a silly OP.

For me, I don't really care what his opinion is of anyone. If he's tired of having people take the piss out of his ridiculous posts, he should take into consideration how people generally respond to his posts and adjust them accordingly. That's what someone who was actually interested in communicating would do. I've tried plenty of times over the years to give him the benefit of the doubt, but it's never payed off. All that's left is to have some fun pointing out how ridiculous the things he says are, and how little awareness he seems to have about it.

I so nearly studied philosophy at uni but my cousin had already graduated from oxbridge with a degree in it and was/is lecturing in the states on it so I felt I needed an original field for our family/generation so studied psychology/economics instead. Thank fuck for that.

BWE wrote:How do you as an idealist understand map-territory errors? How would you explain the issue to someone? Assuming there was no pressure to defend your explanation, just to state it.

I ask because I don't consider myself a physicalist or an idealist because I don't think we can really escape the issue well enough to make any sort of conclusions about reality at some ultimate level. I just figure engineering seems to produce predictable results and for some aspects of life, that seems to matter so it's a decent pragmatic assumption. But when I describe map-territory errors, I tend to slant them in such a way as to make the territory into sensory perception and the map into expectations of those perceptions which many people then make the leap to assume is a physical grounding even though that's not really how I see it.

Why the fuck do you think that this question is significant? For me, it's on a par with asking me about our weather predictions.

I cannot be arsed with this shit unless you make it worth my while.

Keep It Real wrote:I so nearly studied philosophy at uni but my cousin had already graduated from oxbridge with a degree in it and was/is lecturing in the states on it so I felt I needed an original field for our family/generation so studied psychology/economics instead. Thank fuck for that.

Yeah, cuz look at the benefits that education has gotten you.

SafeAsMilk wrote:

surreptitious57 wrote:

Graham wrote:
But I take this topic to be a joke

He specifically requested the thread contain intelligent posts and so even though it is a joke in places
it is not his fault. Because as soon as someone posted something silly virtually everyone else joined in
I can easily understand why he has such a low opinion of most of you if you are always taking the piss

Virtually everyone was taking the piss because the OP was ridiculous. You can't blame readers for having a silly response to a silly OP.

There was nothing silly about my OP. It's the finger up version, is all, because few of you around here deserve anything better. All arrogant sorts who take nothing serious except their own retarded views. Well, fuck that shit.

If you want to be treated like Lords then treat everyone else the same way. Truth be known, I've never encountered a bigger group of witch hunters in my life. And guess how scared I am? Go on, make my day.

I don't give two fucks for this establishment, but if I hear one more post suggesting that I'm a bigger dick than you've all here been, collectively, then I'll shove my fucking freezer where the sun don't shine, least of all my collection of badgers therein.

Numptysville.

James, do you consider yourself a Deist? If not, how would you categorize or describe your brand of theism? Do you believe in a personal deity? Can and does it intervene in human affairs, or is it more of a watchmaker?

jamest wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:

surreptitious57 wrote:

Graham wrote:
But I take this topic to be a joke

He specifically requested the thread contain intelligent posts and so even though it is a joke in places
it is not his fault. Because as soon as someone posted something silly virtually everyone else joined in
I can easily understand why he has such a low opinion of most of you if you are always taking the piss

Virtually everyone was taking the piss because the OP was ridiculous. You can't blame readers for having a silly response to a silly OP.

There was nothing silly about my OP. It's the finger up version, is all, because few of you around here deserve anything better. All arrogant sorts who take nothing serious except their own retarded views. Well, fuck that shit.

It's funny to see you whine about arrogance given you're admitted problem with humility. What's next, you're going to accuse people here who go by the evidence that they've got nothing to back up their view?

If you want to be treated like Lords then treat everyone else the same way. Truth be known, I've never encountered a bigger group of witch hunters in my life. And guess how scared I am? Go on, make my day.

I was wondering why you were shining the steps up to your cross this morning...

I don't give two fucks for this establishment, but if I hear one more post suggesting that I'm a bigger dick than you've all here been, collectively, then I'll shove my fucking freezer where the sun don't shine, least of all my collection of badgers therein.

If you didn't give two fucks for this establishment, you wouldn't be here. You seriously can't blame the people here for your treatment, it's all because of the way you post, which is often dickish and typically for no apparent reason, like you just did with BWE. The big difference is you're the one pretending to have all the answers to life and happiness, which makes your posts even more ridiculous.

jamest wrote:

Keep It Real wrote:I so nearly studied philosophy at uni but my cousin had already graduated from oxbridge with a degree in it and was/is lecturing in the states on it so I felt I needed an original field for our family/generation so studied psychology/economics instead. Thank fuck for that.

Yeah, cuz look at the benefits that education has gotten you.

It's not about me Darren; and it's not about you either...well, it is a tiny little bit about us but you take my point I hope.

My two all time closest male friends both took degrees in philosophy. What a fucking waste.



Naval gazing.

jamest wrote:Well, fuck that shit.

You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? . . . [Jesus’] winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the granary, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire (Mt 3:7-12).

Do you really think you've cloaked the sources of your narrative in some sort of fucking mystery?

jamest wrote:

BWE wrote:How do you as an idealist understand map-territory errors? How would you explain the issue to someone? Assuming there was no pressure to defend your explanation, just to state it.

I ask because I don't consider myself a physicalist or an idealist because I don't think we can really escape the issue well enough to make any sort of conclusions about reality at some ultimate level. I just figure engineering seems to produce predictable results and for some aspects of life, that seems to matter so it's a decent pragmatic assumption. But when I describe map-territory errors, I tend to slant them in such a way as to make the territory into sensory perception and the map into expectations of those perceptions which many people then make the leap to assume is a physical grounding even though that's not really how I see it.

Why the fuck do you think that this question is significant? For me, it's on a par with asking me about our weather predictions.

I cannot be arsed with this shit unless you make it worth my while.

I see. Well. Toss back another gin I guess.

BWE wrote:

jamest wrote:

BWE wrote:How do you as an idealist understand map-territory errors? How would you explain the issue to someone? Assuming there was no pressure to defend your explanation, just to state it.

I ask because I don't consider myself a physicalist or an idealist because I don't think we can really escape the issue well enough to make any sort of conclusions about reality at some ultimate level. I just figure engineering seems to produce predictable results and for some aspects of life, that seems to matter so it's a decent pragmatic assumption. But when I describe map-territory errors, I tend to slant them in such a way as to make the territory into sensory perception and the map into expectations of those perceptions which many people then make the leap to assume is a physical grounding even though that's not really how I see it.

Why the fuck do you think that this question is significant? For me, it's on a par with asking me about our weather predictions.

I cannot be arsed with this shit unless you make it worth my while.

I see. Well. Toss back another gin I guess.

He's right, this time 'round. How do you impart the concept of a map to an idealist? To jamest, maps are just pretenses of physicalists. You, BWE, can have interesting quarrels only with physicalists, and what folks like you call their 'map-territory errors'. You've got the same pretense jamest does: That your shit is cloaked in some sort of mystery. Toss back another gin, indeed. Fuck mystery unless you've got your own storefront with robes and sandals and come ready to sing some poetry.

Map-territory error? What's a metaphor, BWE? Is it a map? If so, does it describe a territory? No, it fucking does not. In the worst-case scenario, what does brain damage really threaten? When we die, what is it with which we lose touch? Is the map or is it the territory? Guess which one you can give up voluntarily.

surreptitious57 wrote:

Graham wrote:
But I take this topic to be a joke

He specifically requested the thread contain intelligent posts and so even though it is a joke in places
it is not his fault. Because as soon as someone posted something silly virtually everyone else joined in
I can easily understand why he has such a low opinion of most of you if you are always taking the piss

No, I mean jamest is having a joke by posting it. The tone of the OP is not serious. He does not seem to me to be sincere. And look at his replies. They cannot be taken seriously.