Hi I'm new too.

Tell us a little about yourself.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Hi I'm new too.

Post by bobevenson »

Please, anybody without an ax to grind will agree with me 100%.
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Hi I'm new too.

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

bobevenson wrote:Please, anybody without an ax to grind will agree with me 100%.
Nobody ever has, and using my prophetic powers, nobody ever will.

PhilX
bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Hi I'm new too.

Post by bobevenson »

Please, you all have axes to grind.
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Hi I'm new too.

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

bobevenson wrote:Please, you all have axes to grind.
Which contradicts what you've just posted ahead of this post. And also means you're admitting nobody will ever agree with you. :lol:

PhilX
bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Hi I'm new too.

Post by bobevenson »

I'm talking about the people in this godforsaken forum!
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Hi I'm new too.

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

bobevenson wrote:I'm talking about the people in this godforsaken forum!
So am I. They will never follow you.

PhilX
bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Hi I'm new too.

Post by bobevenson »

Nobody in this forum except me has the ability to look at mystical evidence with an open mind.
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Hi I'm new too.

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

bobevenson wrote:Nobody in this forum except me has the ability to look at mystical evidence with an open mind.
Your misinterpretation. Your self-referential pronouncements hold no weight in this philosophical forum. My prophecy says you will fail in your mission to convert and I'll be awaiting your next false prophecy.

PhilX
bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Hi I'm new too.

Post by bobevenson »

Misinterpretation? Please, you don't have the slightest idea what the word even means, numbknob!
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Hi I'm new too.

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

bobevenson wrote:Misinterpretation? Please, you don't have the slightest idea what the word even means, numbknob!
Back to your usual name calling which occurs when you know you lost the argument. My prophecy says you will respond to this post too, but will keep on losing.

PhilX
bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Hi I'm new too.

Post by bobevenson »

Prophecy is another word you don't have the slightest idea of what it means even though I've told you the definition over and over again.
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Hi I'm new too.

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

bobevenson wrote:Prophecy is another word you don't have the slightest idea of what it means even though I've told you the definition over and over again.
Still trying to win this argument when you have lost. No power to prophesize, no mystical credentials, just shooting off your mouth again. You lose.

PhilX
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Hi I'm new too.

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

David Swift wrote:Ok, first let me say thanks for the interest and the posts. I didn’t expect such a lively bunch. I guess almost everyone disagrees with me, so we’re in for some lively discussion. Let me respond to each of you.
Bobevenson: Do you mean to say that you’re interested in visual and auditory hallucinations and automatic writing? This sounds like psychology and that’s fine, a little beyond where I am right now, but I’m interested in any theories you might have.
Immanuel Can: I believe we are on opposite sides of this debate. I’m a scientific materialist. The Epicurean concept sees the mind as a system of organs, much like the digestive system. It includes the brain, nerves, sense organs, and muscles. It functions as a behavior selection or control system. The mind as a function of the soul comes to us through Plotinus, the Roman Platonist, and St. Augustine. Like I said, I’m a materialist, but glad to listen to any argument you might care to make.
P.S. Clever moniker.
ken: Very interesting. Do you mean that there is one universal mind? How would that work? Do we have separate identities?
thedoc: Ok, we seem to be more on the same page. I too believe that the mind is a biological function, but Epicurus said “the eye not the brain is what sees.” I take that to mean that consciousness is centered in the sense organs, not the brain. The conscious brain concept comes to us from Galen and Hippocrates of Cos and seems to me to be the result of faulty logic. Epicurus seems to have understood something I call the stereoscopic illusion. The idea that we see things where they are instead of in our eyes. In reality, only drunks see things as they really are: two, two dimensional images of the same thing from slightly different perspectives. They see double; the rest of us compensate for double vision using the stereoscopic illusion to accurately touch and grasp things within our reach. I believe the illusion is the result of the brain’s editing system and points to the part our brains play in the operations of our minds.
Please don't be put off by our two American Crazies; the double act Bob & Phil.
We are not all like that. Some of us want a philosophical discussion.
bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: Hi I'm new too.

Post by bobevenson »

Let's see, a Hobbes' Choice is no choice at all, right?
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Hi I'm new too.

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
David Swift wrote:Ok, first let me say thanks for the interest and the posts. I didn’t expect such a lively bunch. I guess almost everyone disagrees with me, so we’re in for some lively discussion. Let me respond to each of you.
Bobevenson: Do you mean to say that you’re interested in visual and auditory hallucinations and automatic writing? This sounds like psychology and that’s fine, a little beyond where I am right now, but I’m interested in any theories you might have.
Immanuel Can: I believe we are on opposite sides of this debate. I’m a scientific materialist. The Epicurean concept sees the mind as a system of organs, much like the digestive system. It includes the brain, nerves, sense organs, and muscles. It functions as a behavior selection or control system. The mind as a function of the soul comes to us through Plotinus, the Roman Platonist, and St. Augustine. Like I said, I’m a materialist, but glad to listen to any argument you might care to make.
P.S. Clever moniker.
ken: Very interesting. Do you mean that there is one universal mind? How would that work? Do we have separate identities?
thedoc: Ok, we seem to be more on the same page. I too believe that the mind is a biological function, but Epicurus said “the eye not the brain is what sees.” I take that to mean that consciousness is centered in the sense organs, not the brain. The conscious brain concept comes to us from Galen and Hippocrates of Cos and seems to me to be the result of faulty logic. Epicurus seems to have understood something I call the stereoscopic illusion. The idea that we see things where they are instead of in our eyes. In reality, only drunks see things as they really are: two, two dimensional images of the same thing from slightly different perspectives. They see double; the rest of us compensate for double vision using the stereoscopic illusion to accurately touch and grasp things within our reach. I believe the illusion is the result of the brain’s editing system and points to the part our brains play in the operations of our minds.
Please don't be put off by our two American Crazies; the double act Bob & Phil.
We are not all like that. Some of us want a philosophical discussion.
In fact, it's amazing if you do philosophy which is about as often as Bob. :lol:

PhilX
Post Reply