jamest wrote: I shit you not.

Truth mill fail right there.

SafeAsMilk wrote:

jamest wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:Glad I'm not the only one who can't even tell what he means by truth mill. I mean, if it boils down to processing information with reference to currently held ideas, this is what everyone everywhere does, including jamest. What's the alternative, not processing information at all?

You finally contributed something significant to a philosophy thread, by asking a significant question.

Oh boy, you're finally going to attempt a serious answer instead of just calling names!

Stop acting the cunt.

Oh. Well, so much for that. Moving on...

Take a look at 'me'. How the fuck do you think that a 'person' like me can possibly exist except as "an alternative"?

I know that you think believing outlandish things makes a person special. I'm not sure why, because believing outlandish things isn't uncommon. I mean, dime a dozen, really. I'm not sure what you think you're an alternative to, and I'm not sure if you're trying to say you don't process information.

I frequent no church. All scientists apparently hate me. I think that all politicians are corrupt wankers. Art is a distraction, so artists won't like me either.

He's a loner Dottie, a rebel.

Don't bullshit me about not understanding what a truth mill is. I'm quite convinced that the concept is simple to umderstand and has been defined anyway on page one.

You certainly wrote some words, at any rate.

I like you, since I like banter, but you also do often act the cunt. I mean, I don't actually hate anyone here, which is THE irony considering my unpopularity here.

Never mind, enjoy your weekend squire.

Fenrir wrote:

jamest wrote: I shit you not.

Truth mill fail right there.

Don't be a predictably boring cunt, please. It's having no effect upon me and only a minimal effect upon the retards here.

I've been working the atheism forums for close to two decades and yet there are still dicks here who think I will crumble when they retort with a negative mantra.

I don't like condemning anyone here unless I deem it a 'political' necessity, though I do obviously need to reiterate that I'm neither naive, stupid, unintelligent, nor worried.

jamest wrote:
I like you, since I like banter, but you also do often act the cunt.

What can I say, the intensely stupid things you post just brings it out in me.

I mean, I don't actually hate anyone here, which is THE irony considering my unpopularity here.

Honestly, I'm pretty sure nobody here cares enough to hate you. I certainly don't. You're just some guy writing goofy shit on the internet. Welcome to the club.

Never mind, enjoy your weekend squire.

It's Monday.

jamest wrote:I've been working the atheism forums for close to two decades and yet there are still dicks here who think I will crumble when they retort with a negative mantra.

I'm pretty sure at this point nobody expects any sort of attempt to change anything you do or think will be successful. Referring to anything you dislike as a "negative mantra" does feed into this.

Anyway, if you had to summarize this "negative mantra" into a short sentence, what would it be?

I don't like condemning anyone here unless I deem it a 'political' necessity,

What are you talking about? You condemn all the time!

though I do obviously need to reiterate that I'm neither naive, stupid, unintelligent, nor worried.

It's not at all obvious why you need to reiterate that.

jamest wrote:Why did you report my post, Richard, having only (by your owm admission) read a fraction of it?

Because that's where all the rants are supposed to go. A man who proclaims to be neither naive, stupid nor unintelligent shouldn't even have to ask.

Your sour tone underlying your question is a surprise for the same reason. You should be grateful. Once your ranty post has been removed, the brilliance that is your concept of Truth Mills will really shine. Yes, I really mean that. The thesis that the output is not contingent upon the input is truly revolutionary, and the clarity with which you explain why this is so is unsurpassed. Cognitive and neuroscientists will make progress in their respective fields at last, if only they can be persuaded to read all about it and are not distracted by that one sustained false note. You should be really, really grateful for me having reported that post. It was an act of kindness and support.

By the way, I have reported the post I am replying to as well. Like the other one it distracts from rather than contributes to the valuable thesis you have developed. No need to thank me. Just appreciate my action for what it is: constructive.

jamest wrote:You guys aren't taking this problem seriously.

So, in the period since you wrote this post. How seriously do you think you've taken the "problem"?

By my reckoning, this is everything you've written, since telling us how seriously you take this:

jamest wrote:I started the thread. I've had nothing other than bullshit from you all, especially you.

jamest wrote:Notwithstanding the fact that the aforementioned concept has been used by me for several years and seems readily understandable, I gave a definition thereof in post 12 of page 1.

Though I have my moments of taking the piss and banter etc., to be accused of not taking philosophy seriously is ludicrous. When are you ever going to become genuine, if ever?

You suddenly seem (within the last year or two) to have turned into the Donald Trump of ratskep. I shit you not.

jamest wrote:You finally contributed something significant to a philosophy thread, by asking a significant question.

Take a look at 'me'. How the fuck do you think that a 'person' like me can possibly exist except as "an alternative"?

I frequent no church. All scientists apparently hate me. I think that all politicians are corrupt wankers. Art is a distraction, so artists won't like me either.

Don't bullshit me about not understanding what a truth mill is. I'm quite convinced that the concept is simple to umderstand and has been defined anyway on page one. Stop acting the cunt.

jamest wrote:I genuinely think that Thommo has been acting the cunt for the last couple of years. You won't have experienced it since he has no beef with you, but I have. I mean, I've been interacting with him for many years, but in the last year or so he's made a special effort to piss me off and undermine me. What was also noteworthy for me was that just this week a member was suspended for more-or-less wishing him dead. That was KIR, who as we all know has his own problems. Indeed, he even thinks that I'm a wanker now. I'm a controlling theist, apparently, though in spite of all that he's never ever once threatened me.

I've had a lot of conversations with KIR. Indeed, at one point recently we were considering meeting-up. I don't know him well, but I know him well-enough to know that if he's threatening Thommo, that Thommo is acting the serious cunt, even when theism isn't an issue.

jamest wrote:I like you, since I like banter, but you also do often act the cunt. I mean, I don't actually hate anyone here, which is THE irony considering my unpopularity here.

Never mind, enjoy your weekend squire.

jamest wrote:Don't be a predictably boring cunt, please. It's having no effect upon me and only a minimal effect upon the retards here.

jamest wrote:I've been working the atheism forums for close to two decades and yet there are still dicks here who think I will crumble when they retort with a negative mantra.

I don't like condemning anyone here unless I deem it a 'political' necessity, though I do obviously need to reiterate that I'm neither naive, stupid, unintelligent, nor worried.

I've colour coded it, for easy visual reference.
Red = Insult, swearing, invective or personalisation.
Green = offtopic discussion of your own person, ego, or general braggadocio.
Blue = contributing to the topic.

By my reckoning that means we can summarise all those posts with "I provided a definition for truth mill in #12 on page 1" and "I consider the question of what the alternative to processing information to be a significant one {albeit not one I've answered yet}".

ETA: Cunt count = 6, bullshit count = 2, wanker count = 2, shit count = 2, dick count = 1, Trump count = 1, fuck count = 1, retard count = 1. That's 16 words from swearing alone, enough to make the single salient point and have 4 words to spare.

Hermit wrote:

jamest wrote:Why did you report my post, Richard, having only (by your owm admission) read a fraction of it?

Because that's where all the rants are supposed to go. A man who proclaims to be neither naive, stupid nor unintelligent shouldn't even have to ask.

It appears that he believes you've reported him for moderator warning rather than a thread split. Perhaps that accounts for the perceived need for an interrogative reply.

jamest wrote:

Fenrir wrote:

jamest wrote: I shit you not.

Truth mill fail right there.

Don't be a predictably boring cunt, please. It's having no effect upon me and only a minimal effect upon the retards here.

Much like your interminable narcissistic dribble. Which was exactly the point I was making. Well done.

Thommo wrote:

Hermit wrote:

jamest wrote:Why did you report my post, Richard, having only (by your owm admission) read a fraction of it?

Because that's where all the rants are supposed to go. A man who proclaims to be neither naive, stupid nor unintelligent shouldn't even have to ask.

It appears that he believes you've reported him for moderator warning rather than a thread split.

Sorry, Thommo. That is just impossible. James is a sophisticated, smart, intelligent person. He implied as much himself. How on earth could he have misread "suggesting someone move it to "The Rant Thread"" as "suggesting to give James a warning"?

I think if we divorce ourselves from the physicalist shackles of brains and their truth mills, we can enter an epoch wherein thoughts can be massaged and cultivated by the metaphysical purity of logic and reason. I would, at this juncture, like to coin the phrase metaphysical cultivation parlours as the antithesis of the physicalist truth mill.

On the High Street these MCPs will replace Sun Bed operations with ChakRayTM Loungers and Vegetable Smoothing Creams (aka Skinny Flips), all washed down with lashings of Pee-Green Tea. £25 per hour in advance (Max. 4 hours per day @ £97.50) - absolutely no refunds.

I just read through this whole thread. Does that make me eligible for some kind of award?

TopCat wrote:I just read through this whole thread. Does that make me eligible for some kind of a ward?

Fixt . And quite possibly.

TopCat wrote:I just read through this whole thread. Does that make me eligible for some kind of award?

The lolz are their own reward.

SafeAsMilk wrote:

TopCat wrote:I just read through this whole thread. Does that make me eligible for some kind of award?

The lolz are their own reward.

I was thinking two paracetamol and a glass of water.

newolder wrote:On the High Street these MCPs will replace Sun Bed operations with ChakRayTM Loungers and Vegetable Smoothing Creams (aka Skinny Flips), all washed down with lashings of Pee-Green Tea. £25 per hour in advance (Max. 4 hours per day @ £97.50) - absolutely no refunds.

That's really cheap. I read an article about a woman in California (well, where else would it happen?) who built a "Crystal Chakra Bed". It had overhead lights with different crystals for lenses, and you could program it to flash in different patterns and different durations in order to specifically target individual chakras with healing, energizing rays. She charged $200 a session and was booked up weeks in advance.

I'm seeing an opportunity for franchising here. Now, normally one wouldn't charge filthy money to energize chakras, but it doesn't work without a transfer of energy. Money is just a convenient way to transfer energy, thereby making it a value-for-value exchange. TANSTAAFL.

Yes, laklak I've heard mention of these Californian Crystalists and as you say, they need a transfer of energy and using money works for them. ChakRays in differing colours is a pure marketing gimmick though - as any half-decent quantum mechanic will tell you, ChakRays originate in the Dark Sector and are as invisible as a Nun's thong after a hard day's blessing.

On this side of the pond, we're using vacuum energy at zero net cost. Double the vacuum, double the energy as my old mucker Sean Carroll is fond of saying (as catchphrases go, it ain't too bad). This helps keep the overheads to a minimum - Pee-Green tea is harvested at elevated temperature from various old folks' homes, for example. I could pass on the vacuum energy technology at equipment cost price* to an interested Californian.

* Cost price includes a large diameter proton collider and associated gubbins, natch.

Thommo wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:

TopCat wrote:I just read through this whole thread. Does that make me eligible for some kind of award?

The lolz are their own reward.

I was thinking two paracetamol and a glass of water.

I needed that after the first page.

Just out of historical curiosity, and at risk of getting badgered, may I ask if JamesT has ever conceded being wrong in any of the many exchanges like the one in this thread? My headache is bad enough not to want to do my own research, if you get my drift.