I say Hello

Ron de Weijze · Post by **Ron de Weijze** » Tue Jul 26, 2011 1:29 pm

I am 54, a philosopher and a programmer, from Amsterdam and hopefully one day I will live in the USA. I develop my philosophy online and have been doing so for a long time. The software is not developed by me for the most part but recently I have been doing it myself. Feedback is very welcome, both on the philosophy and the application. You can find all my stuff at http://crpa.co

chaz wyman · Post by **chaz wyman** » Fri Jul 29, 2011 1:53 am

Ron de Weijze wrote:I am 54, a philosopher and a programmer, from Amsterdam and hopefully one day I will live in the USA. I develop my philosophy online and have been doing so for a long time. The software is not developed by me for the most part but recently I have been doing it myself. Feedback is very welcome, both on the philosophy and the application. You can find all my stuff at http://crpa.co

I thought I should just mention that CRPA is an anagram of CRAP, which in English is not very nice.
People might think you are a hoax.

Ron de Weijze · Post by **Ron de Weijze** » Sat Jul 30, 2011 12:41 am

I hope that at most it will be a reason for people to check it out for themselves. And yes I considered that because starting a site like that is a lot of work and reasons to use that acronym must be really strong to go ahead with it anyway. If that is the criterion people use and they refuse to look any further, I will be happy to NOT have them as a visitor, so the (same) name for the site, philosophy, software and blog might just be a fine demarcation criterion I don't mind having.

Thanks Chaz.

Arising_uk · Post by **Arising_uk** » Mon Aug 01, 2011 12:03 am

Hi Ron,
Thats an interesting tool you've built and I can appreciate the obvious work that has gone into it.

What's it for? As far as I can understand it appears to be a way of tracking and relating conversations, discussions, thoughts, etc. Is the idea that it'd be useful for those that have multiple conversations across the web? A way of keeping track and cross-references?

On another point, what do you mean by 'intuit'? I see the words, "to sense what we know", but I'm unsure what 'sense' you mean when you say this?

chaz wyman · Post by **chaz wyman** » Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:17 am

Ron de Weijze wrote:I hope that at most it will be a reason for people to check it out for themselves. And yes I considered that because starting a site like that is a lot of work and reasons to use that acronym must be really strong to go ahead with it anyway. If that is the criterion people use and they refuse to look any further, I will be happy to NOT have them as a visitor, so the (same) name for the site, philosophy, software and blog might just be a fine demarcation criterion I don't mind having.

Thanks Chaz.

I realise that it is difficult to judge an emotional tone from text, but...
DO you think you might be taking yourself too seriously?

Is the program MAC compatible?

chaz wyman · Post by **chaz wyman** » Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:36 am

I've spend some time looking through your web-site.
I read "special" philosophy section and regard it as contentless; a litany of graphical platitudes, superficial and obvious lurching from a set of hopeless generalisations to irrelevant reflections - what are you trying to get at?
I hope your program is not a solution looking for a problem.

Ron de Weijze · Post by **Ron de Weijze** » Mon Aug 01, 2011 6:50 am

Arising_uk wrote: What's it for? As far as I can understand it appears to be a way of tracking and relating conversations, discussions, thoughts, etc. Is the idea that it'd be useful for those that have multiple conversations across the web? A way of keeping track and cross-references? On another point, what do you mean by 'intuit'? I see the words, "to sense what we know", but I'm unsure what 'sense' you mean when you say this?

Hi Arising_uk. You are right about your assumptions. Features are also: creating and navigating your network simultaneously, integrating perspectives and finding overlap, logical forward- and backward-chaining. Fields are also: research/investigation, information analysis, life-long learning. By 'intuit' I mean 'sensing or experiencing what you or the other knows', after you (believe you) know what you sense. I see it as the opposite of realizing or 'knowing what you or the other sense(s)'. Intuition and realization should independently confirm each other just like sensing and knowing.

Ron de Weijze · Post by **Ron de Weijze** » Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:10 am

chaz wyman wrote:I realise that it is difficult to judge an emotional tone from text, but... DO you think you might be taking yourself too seriously? Is the program MAC compatible? I've spend some time looking through your web-site. I read "special" philosophy section and regard it as contentless; a litany of graphical platitudes, superficial and obvious lurching from a set of hopeless generalisations to irrelevant reflections - what are you trying to get at? I hope your program is not a solution looking for a problem.

If I am taking myself too seriously, not providing content but platitudes, then I would like to help you making that clear and distinct for all to independently confirm the verdict. It is important to always be critical about any claim that cannot be independently confirmed. I see strong parallels with postmodern deconstruction into nihilism and nothingness of ideas like God, Truth, self or reality, however you may not be as you seem.

The program is not Mac compatible.

Thanks Chaz.

Arising_uk · Post by **Arising_uk** » Sun Aug 14, 2011 12:43 am

Ron,
What do you mean by 'significant other'?

Ron de Weijze · Post by **Ron de Weijze** » Sun Aug 14, 2011 1:35 am

Arising_uk wrote:Ron,
What do you mean by 'significant other'?

I hope I mean what it means in the wikipedia Arising. Thank you for asking. I did not realize this term may be uncommon to those who did not study social psychology. The concept is as important to my theory as she who is my SO means everything to me for real.

Arising_uk · Post by **Arising_uk** » Sun Aug 14, 2011 3:09 am

Ah! Haven't heard that phrase in a long while. Thank you. Although I've always thought "partner" did a good enough job.

Ron de Weijze · Post by **Ron de Weijze** » Sun Aug 14, 2011 3:42 am

Arising_uk wrote:Ah! Haven't heard that phrase in a long while. Thank you. Although I've always thought "partner" did a good enough job.

You are quite right in saying that. It is only because the concept of "other" has a special place in philosophy, to which "significant other" is understandably close, that I wanted to use it myself.

Arising_uk · Post by **Arising_uk** » Sun Aug 14, 2011 10:39 am

I was wondering if you meant the Other but could not understand what was significant apart from them being such. Overthinking.

Arising_uk · Post by **Arising_uk** » Sun Aug 14, 2011 10:59 am

So is Bill correct and your CR is like Socrates idea of knowledge as remembering rather than the construction of something new?

Ron de Weijze · Post by **Ron de Weijze** » Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:54 pm

Arising_uk wrote:So is Bill correct and your CR is like Socrates idea of knowledge as remembering rather than the construction of something new?

Bill is right that it can be sex, or religion, I might add. The central part of our being recollects something old from the past that is useful to "knit" something new, which better suits the future.

Philosophy Now Forum

I say Hello

I say Hello

Re: I say Hello

Re: I say Hello

Re: I say Hello

Re: I say Hello

Re: I say Hello

Re: I say Hello

Re: I say Hello

Re: I say Hello

Re: I say Hello

Re: I say Hello

Re: I say Hello

Re: I say Hello

Re: I say Hello

Re: I say Hello