Arising_uk wrote:SpheresOfBalance wrote:
No! Bill should do as Bill wants to do, who do you think you are to tell Bill what he 'should' do.
I don't, I tell him what I think about what he's doing.
Liar!
I'm also confused that apparently you think you can tell me what I shouldn't be doing?
Pay attention, I treat in kind my friend, I treat in kind!
I could care less of your jokes, say what you mean and mean what you say.
I pretty much do and in clearer terns than you in the main but a joke is a joke, it either speaks to you or it doesn't. I tend to forget that for other nations a sense of humour is optional whereas for the British its obigatory(it's a joke!!).
Again, Liar! Rather it's a means to elevate self above others, always the case with many Brits, it surely seems.
I think you should leave it to Bill to say what he is or is not, again who do you think you are?
Someone on a Philosophy forum who reads others words and responds and I've being doing this with Bill for a fair old time now.. Bill is a ex-theist atheist, I'm a rare bird, a lifelong atheist and as such I can hear the theism in his thoughts. He appears not able to and that is understandable given what religious education is.
There is so called theism in everyone's thoughts, as everyone 'believes' in something greater than the whole of us, it's just that usually atheists believe that 'something' is them selves. A very common problem indeed with those predisposed to atheism. You seem to be the Queen of such evidence! 
There you go again, professing to know someone better than they do.
Lmao! You've obviously not been following what Bill says.
I have no problem with Bills journey, as at least he doesn't try and project it upon others, such as some people around here, "Arising UK." Your words have always been clearly a testament of your warped superiority complex! A fools game indeed!
From day to day we change, and we are not always sure, again who do you think you are to try and define Bill?
Is my definition of him wrong? Is he not an ex-theist?
It's not that, it's that you try and frame him from your conceptual truisms as if they are certainly the case, yet you cannot know that they are, and in so doing you often attempt to belittle him in the process. Again a fools game!
Incorrect there is no common consensus amongst philosophers. Which is it, the Correspondence, Coherence, Constructivist, Consensus, Pragmatic, or Minimalist (deflationary), i.e., Performative or redundancy theories? All we get is a percentage of belief amongst philosophers. And so it goes with topics other than truth. "We," as if you speak for the one true belief. Get off your imaginary high horse, it makes you look small.
You're the idiot who thinks conclusions means a singular answer in Philosophy and that's because you've not bothered to study any but have much to wiki say about it. Philosophy has and is all about definitions and refining them, that you find this abhorrent or elitist is your cultural issue.
That you project your delusions upon me is quite expected indeed. It's you that thinks you're the cats meow in terms of philosophy, you've indicated as much in this response of yours. So it would seem that your idiot is merely your reflection projected upon all that oppose you.
Yet you speak from an athiest's position.
Because I've yet to hear a philosophically sound argument to support the theists claims.
Your mistake is giving the age old archaic stories of theism any clout what-so-ever, (I don't), in terms of any truth that may be at the heart of the actual theist argument, whether they're oblivious or not. Using their silliness as a case for your argument against something they've only believed they've understood, makes you just as silly. Which doesn't mean there is no mindful creator, rather that no one's actually understood such an entity, if such an entity exists. I only say, "We exist, why not something much older, that is able to create as we can! Our existence and capabilities certainly seem to plead the case of possibility, albeit on a much grander scale, and isn't everything about human understanding to do with relativity? That is once we break it down, relativity is to do with everything we believe we understand."
At least you's be asking for his words, instead of always trying to put them in his mouth.
Your shinning armour blinds you.
Nope, my assessment of your intentions is pretty damned accurate, considering what your words have 'proven' to me these four plus years. I came here with an empty slate as to everyone's intentions, their proof has been contained within each individuals words, demeanor, habits, etc. Not everyone uses their 'knowledge' as a weapon, I'm reminded of Ginkgo and Ron as well as a few others! Those that I'm reminded of are far better philosophers than you are! As they are much more aware/tolerant of the every varying human condition, that each individual human portrays, dependent upon the ever varying particular set of unique environmental conditions, they had to come to terms with. You judge people oblivious of such things, you in your 'relative' ivory tower!
Often your so called help, seems to be fitted with barbs.
Only to those who have shown that they are not here to philosophise and a barb only hurts if it is an unacknowledged truth.
Wrong, barbs hurt whether they apply or not, as barbs themselves are only ever born of ignorant falsehood.
But OK, sometimes you actually do try and help him and not yourself, I'll give you that much.[/color]
Honestly I don't need such praise nor your psycho-babble.
And so you show your 'fear,' in being vulnerable to one that's largely believed to be your adversary. It would seem we have that in common. We both feel safer when we're 'under fire.' It's a very common human occurrence, whether one admits it or not, in no way makes it your fearful, "psycho-babble." As a matter of fact your terming things one says as psychobabble is always to do with your fear, that someone might know more about your psyche than you're willing to admit. Denial is a common safety mechanism so as to save face, in this case.
With much work and time, as Rome wasn't built in a day.
With a blueprint things go much quicker but I think this thought the thought of the psychoanalysts who like long - term payment plans.
That one seeks refuge in circumstance doesn't mean that it's actually contrived. That one seeks the shelter of a truism is much nobler than seeking the shelter in something that's counter intuitive to all but the most ignorant.
Maybe and maybe not, they way you sometimes treat him, I'm thinking not.
I'm thinking not because it's really not about change for Bill, he's a gnu at heart.
And like you just attempted to pigeon-hole Bill, I examine your words, attempting to do the same thing! But is it only because you do it, this white knight want's to know what you think? Though I believe I can anticipate your response.
So who the fuck are you to judge him for it, with condescending diatribe? I find you to be extremely insensitive.
I don't care as this is a Philosophy forum not a self-help group for the deluded.
As if you actually know what philosophy is, instead of your weapon to wield at peoples minds.
Bill gives two tosses for what others think as if he did he'd change his posting behaviour given the inumerable requests he's had over the years to do so.
First, as if you could know what he minds, your false logic screams of your selfish preconceptions. Second this proves you're trying to change him, instead of understanding his ideas that challenge yours; fear tactic.
What you fail to understand is Bill spams these posts over every forum he kind find that hasn't yet banned him.
You can 'know' this how? How consumed are you anyway? What, you follow people around? Sheeesh!
Bull shit, that's just you fighting for your right to do what ever you please, no matter how twisted.
Bollocks, it's a fact. What you do is just try to create an entity that you can morally beat others with. But lmao given that you say you ignore your neighbours requests to stop firing your mini-gun.
The law is the law over here, Arising. The neighbor has no right to insist I quit. Should I insist they stop hunting deer during deer hunting season, because I'm a vegetarian? Remember that the state Police came to shut me down, believing me to be an ordinary average everyday Joe doing something illegal, until I showed them my "FEDERAL GUNSMITH LICENSE." Which put the law on my side, not theirs! you have laws, right? Do you obey them? Do you expect others to obey them?
Anyone that tries and speak for someone is a fool, which you often do in Bills case.
Show me where.
You know I won't spend time showing you what you deny, as there is futility in showing you anything, you the dancer around any truth that puts you on the spot.
Get real, It was clearly a metaphor.
Then it needs to be on a poetry site or a psychoanalytic forum or just an English literature site.
You appear to think that people can produce nihilistic metaphors and not be challenged upon the inadequacy of them?
Your opinion, much like your asshole! Guess what? Everyone has both of them. Where's this universal book that shows us they way? There you go spouting your theistic nonsense.
Which has absolutely nothing to do with the 'meaning' of life. And it was obviously a metaphor.
You asked me for fucking facts about our existence!!
And I'm still waiting! And it shall be a very long time before you can provide a widely accepted answer devoid of any possible doubt. And that's the problem with being relatively young, as humans are.
The only metaphor it is is about Bill's wish to be a nihilist gnu.
And the only metaphor 'your understanding of philosophy' seemingly illuminates, is your want to be an all knowing gnu so you can dominate others. As you seemingly avoid the ever consequential questions that only ever come with a true study of philosophy, such that you might understand my clinging to that famous quote of Socrates so feverishly.
In the query of which type human you are:
Men are four:
Those that don't know and don't know they don't know;
Those that don't know and know they don't know;
Those that know and don't know they know;
Those that know and know they know.
You are clearly more like type one than any other. While I admit I'm more like type two, hence my clinging to Socrates quote. No human are of type three or four, unless maybe you find someone choosing to live in a cave somewhere, communing with nature. Then maybe, just maybe.
In fact, some of those things you say you know, that you know, shall be falsehoods on some future day. The odds are against you.
The logical tautologies and contradictions will hold for all time.
Thus you should pay more attention to that fact and not espouse such in your judgment of others intent or meaning.
No, I just know human motivation.
Lmao! Now what was it you were saying about not knowing what others think? All you know is your projection of your motivations upon others. If not then you are doing what you say I should not.
And I am doing so as you are doing it! "Anyone in there McFly?" <as SOB knocks on Arising's head.>
So spit this secret of yours out, or you're just blowing hot air.
I've told them to you numerous times but you don't wish to acknowledge them. They are the tautologies and contradictions of propositional Logic and as such they are the boundaries of reason and thought.
That is a generic concept that you have 'yet' to apply to anything specific that anyone here has said. Thus your argument contains nothing but air, your logical fallacy. Prove that this weapon of yours that you cling to so adamantly has ever pertained to any adversaries argument thus proving yours correct. Show your work, lazy one!
Not at all, I know very well where I am, I'm very lucid!
Hallucid I think at times.
OK, everyone has a bad day, and the same goes for you. We are all merely students here, at least I realize!
So you characterize us, so as to demean, which is you problem not mine.
Not a problem for me as I don't have your issues about sparing another's thoughts just because they have them, philosophically speaking that is.
There are better and worse ways to advise one that your thoughts differ, that is if you actually intend to make a difference, instead of just using them as fodder for your cannon firing at your daily frustration and discontent.
I do not talk philosophical nonsense, but of course you'd say so, you're vindictive that way.
Got bugger all to do with your pet psycho-babble and is exactly an example of what I talk about as up-post you claim that I cannot know the other person and yet here you are claiming to know me, philosophical nonsense.
First there are things that humans share, and things that they don't. Second, you tend to try and tell people about those things you cannot know as they are of those things we do not share. I tend to expose those things in another that we share. So is it your confusion or your ploy that you seemingly don't know the difference? Third, keep in mind, I could take on Bill in the exact same way I take you on, the difference is that I don't see Bill trying to force anything down anyone's throat, he doesn't like, like you do! Bill is harmless along his quest, not at all like the goatboy (goatturd).
You mean you have no idea! And I agree! I've often seen words go right over your head. One of your megalomaniacal tendencies, is to assert that it can't be, if you don't understand it. Visions of grandeur?
What you have seen is me not understanding your sage-speak and then you applying your psycho-babble to it.
Seek clarification if seemingly, I assume you know more than you do, as we all differ in our exposures, otherwise your retorts, born of your ignorance of my meaning, may sometimes come under fire, due to the venom they contain. Or just move along, it's that simple.
Hey you're the fool that told me your personality type, don't blame me it's not as grand as you believe it is.
What are you babbling on about now, what personality type are you talking about?
How quickly you pretend to forget. How old are you again, maybe you're really forgetting our previous conversations. You told me your personally type, as if it were somehow glorious, and I pointed out that it could be seen just as flawed as another type might be seen. No, I'll not go searching for the instance. Just do a search for your personality type, you should know it, then search for me referencing it though not necessarily by it's 'four alpha' designation. Otherwise forget about it, you seem to be good at that!
Happy New Year Arising! Or do you have an argument for that too! Something to do with the Chinese or something...
