Money is a concept known. A known concept has never been seen except in the dream of things known.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 2:56 pmYou to cashier: Where's my change? You gave me nothing.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 8:25 am Consciousness is just another word for nothing, and nothing is just another word for everything.
Nothing and Everything is one without a second.
No word can define one without a second, yet, every word defines one without a second.
Just THIS... UNKNOWN knowing.
Cashier to you: I gave you everything. Nothing is just another word for everything.
Suddenly, dawn breaks on Marblehead.
Consciousness
Re: Consciousness
Re: Consciousness
Bye the way, if a cashier doesn't give the customer it's change, then it's doing a lousy job of it's job, and needs to get out of that business.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 2:56 pm You to cashier: Where's my change? You gave me nothing.
Cashier to you: I gave you everything. Nothing is just another word for everything.
- RCSaunders
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Consciousness
You to cashier: Where's my change?Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 3:05 pmMoney is a concept known.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 2:56 pmYou to cashier: Where's my change? You gave me nothing.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 8:25 am Consciousness is just another word for nothing, and nothing is just another word for everything.
Nothing and Everything is one without a second.
No word can define one without a second, yet, every word defines one without a second.
Just THIS... UNKNOWN knowing.
Cashier to you: I gave you everything. Nothing is just another word for everything.
Suddenly, dawn breaks on Marblehead.
Cashier to you: Three dollars and seventy five cents.
You to cashier: But I don't see any change?
Cashier to you: Money's just a concept. That's what I gave you. Have a nice day!
Last edited by RCSaunders on Sat Mar 05, 2022 4:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Consciousness
That's good example of everyday language. Philosophical jargon is explicit and precise. Academic disciplines usually have their own jargons.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 2:56 pmYou to cashier: Where's my change? You gave me nothing.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 8:25 am Consciousness is just another word for nothing, and nothing is just another word for everything.
Nothing and Everything is one without a second.
No word can define one without a second, yet, every word defines one without a second.
Just THIS... UNKNOWN knowing.
Cashier to you: I gave you everything. Nothing is just another word for everything.
Suddenly, dawn breaks on Marblehead.
Re: Consciousness
Change is just a concept known in this conception. In reality, nothing never changes.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 3:54 pmYou to cashier: Where's my change?Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 3:05 pmMoney is a concept known.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 2:56 pm
You to cashier: Where's my change? You gave me nothing.
Cashier to you: I gave you everything. Nothing is just another word for everything.
Suddenly, dawn breaks on Marblehead.
Cashier to you: Three dollars and seventy five cents.
You to cashier: But I don't see any change?
Cashier to you: Money's just a concept. That's what I gave you. Have a nice day!
That which appears to know, never knows except in this conception that nothing never conceived.
- RCSaunders
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Consciousness
Jargon does not excuse saying what is not true.Belinda wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 4:05 pmThat's good example of everyday language. Philosophical jargon is explicit and precise. Academic disciplines usually have their own jargons.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 2:56 pmYou to cashier: Where's my change? You gave me nothing.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 8:25 am Consciousness is just another word for nothing, and nothing is just another word for everything.
Nothing and Everything is one without a second.
No word can define one without a second, yet, every word defines one without a second.
Just THIS... UNKNOWN knowing.
Cashier to you: I gave you everything. Nothing is just another word for everything.
Suddenly, dawn breaks on Marblehead.
I'm very familiar with academic, "jargon." It is all intentional obscurantism and obtuse language intended to sound profound, but it is only obfuscation couched in undefined and meaningless words that one, "kinda sorta," understands, all meant to put over some nonsense called philosophy or some social/political abomination. Academic jargon is the exact opposite of scientific jargon. The purpose of scientific jargon is to make it possible to identify and explicate the unique concepts of science. The purpose of academic jargon is create pseudo-concepts with intentionally obscure and confusing meanings that can be used to put over just anything.
The moment you begin to read or hear something infected with academic jargon, such as, "paradigm," "dialectic," "trope," "egoism," "core commitments," "synergy," "emergence," "holism," "gestalt," "hegemony," "coherence," "critical thinking," "model," "mode," "perception," "peer review," "rubric," "transcend," "normative," "altruistic," "heteronormative," "nadir," "telelogical," "gestalt," "predicated," "redolent of," "kitsch," "post modern," "neoclassic," "gouache," "homiletics," "linguistics," or "paleo...." you know what you are reading is either a lie or worthless.
Sure, most of those words have legitimate meanings and uses outside academia, but when they come from some academic's mouth, pen, or keyboard, they are devoid of meaning and have no other purpose than to make some absurd, inane, or insipid nonsense sound or look profound or important.
Last edited by RCSaunders on Sat Mar 05, 2022 9:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- RCSaunders
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Consciousness
Seriously, I suggest you take an adult with you whenever you go shopping. You are a born mark.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 5:37 pmChange is just a concept known in this conception. In reality, nothing never changes.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 3:54 pmYou to cashier: Where's my change?
Cashier to you: Three dollars and seventy five cents.
You to cashier: But I don't see any change?
Cashier to you: Money's just a concept. That's what I gave you. Have a nice day!
That which appears to know, never knows except in this conception that nothing never conceived.
Re: Consciousness
Whereas I would agree that academics are prone to use most of the examples given in order to artificially inflate their importance - academic philosophy being as useless as poetry - most of these words, though a few may sound abstract, do have very precise meanings when considered etymologically and unavoidable in many conversations not considered philosophical or only partly so. A number of words you pointed out as examples are in fact quite common in normal usage; others, less so.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 9:36 pm
The moment you begin to read or hear something infected with academic jargon, such as, "paradigm," "dialectic," "trope," "egoism," "core commitments," "synergy," "emergence," "holism," "gestalt," "hegemony," "coherence," "critical thinking," "model," "mode," "perception," "peer review," "rubric," "transcend," "normative," "altruistic," "heteronormative," "nadir," "telelogical," "gestalt," "predicated," "redolent of," "kitsch," "post modern," "neoclassic," "gouache," "homiletics," "linguistics," or "paleo...." you know what you are reading is either a lie or worthless.
Sure, most of those words have legitimate meanings and uses outside academia, but when they come from some academic's mouth, pen, or keyboard, they are devoid of meaning and have no other purpose than to make some absurd, inane, or insipid nonsense sound or look profound or important.
- RCSaunders
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Consciousness
Yes, of course. It's what my second paragraph refers to: "most of those words have legitimate meanings and uses outside academia ...." Perhaps I should have emphasized it more, but your good comment accomplishes the purpose. Thanks!Dubious wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 11:37 pmWhereas I would agree that academics are prone to use most of the examples given in order to artificially inflate their importance - academic philosophy being as useless as poetry - most of these words, though a few may sound abstract, do have very precise meanings when considered etymologically and unavoidable in many conversations not considered philosophical or only partly so. A number of words you pointed out as examples are in fact quite common in normal usage; others, less so.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 9:36 pm
The moment you begin to read or hear something infected with academic jargon, such as, "paradigm," "dialectic," "trope," "egoism," "core commitments," "synergy," "emergence," "holism," "gestalt," "hegemony," "coherence," "critical thinking," "model," "mode," "perception," "peer review," "rubric," "transcend," "normative," "altruistic," "heteronormative," "nadir," "telelogical," "gestalt," "predicated," "redolent of," "kitsch," "post modern," "neoclassic," "gouache," "homiletics," "linguistics," or "paleo...." you know what you are reading is either a lie or worthless.
Sure, most of those words have legitimate meanings and uses outside academia, but when they come from some academic's mouth, pen, or keyboard, they are devoid of meaning and have no other purpose than to make some absurd, inane, or insipid nonsense sound or look profound or important.
Re: Consciousness
I already know that 2+2=4 is a sure fact.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 9:38 pm Seriously, I suggest you take an adult with you whenever you go shopping. You are a born mark.
I think I will be ok when I go shopping alone, but thanks for the advice.
Now, remind me again, what are we actually talking about, was it consciousness by any chance?
Funny how all sorts of weird jaron fueled stories just seem to bubble up out of absolutely nowhere when discussing ways of pointing to consciousness.
Re: Consciousness
Whether you like it or not many good men work in academia, and try to make the world a better place, and precisely are ranged against obscurantism.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 9:36 pmJargon does not excuse saying what is not true.Belinda wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 4:05 pmThat's good example of everyday language. Philosophical jargon is explicit and precise. Academic disciplines usually have their own jargons.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 2:56 pm
You to cashier: Where's my change? You gave me nothing.
Cashier to you: I gave you everything. Nothing is just another word for everything.
Suddenly, dawn breaks on Marblehead.
I'm very familiar with academic, "jargon." It is all intentional obscurantism and obtuse language intended to sound profound, but it is only obfuscation couched in undefined and meaningless words that one, "kinda sorta," understands, all meant to put over some nonsense called philosophy or some social/political abomination. Academic jargon is the exact opposite of scientific jargon. The purpose of scientific jargon is to make it possible to identify and explicate the unique concepts of science. The purpose of academic jargon is create pseudo-concepts with intentionally obscure and confusing meanings that can be used to put over just anything.
The moment you begin to read or hear something infected with academic jargon, such as, "paradigm," "dialectic," "trope," "egoism," "core commitments," "synergy," "emergence," "holism," "gestalt," "hegemony," "coherence," "critical thinking," "model," "mode," "perception," "peer review," "rubric," "transcend," "normative," "altruistic," "heteronormative," "nadir," "telelogical," "gestalt," "predicated," "redolent of," "kitsch," "post modern," "neoclassic," "gouache," "homiletics," "linguistics," or "paleo...." you know what you are reading is either a lie or worthless.
Sure, most of those words have legitimate meanings and uses outside academia, but when they come from some academic's mouth, pen, or keyboard, they are devoid of meaning and have no other purpose than to make some absurd, inane, or insipid nonsense sound or look profound or important.
You are deliberately limiting your options by condemning jargons. You yourself could learn jargons if you wanted to, and then you could argue with specialists.
I don't know what you work at but most specialisms including manual ones use jargons.
- RCSaunders
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Consciousness
I was. I have no idea what you are talking about.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Mar 06, 2022 7:32 amI already know that 2+2=4 is a sure fact.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 9:38 pm Seriously, I suggest you take an adult with you whenever you go shopping. You are a born mark.
I think I will be ok when I go shopping alone, but thanks for the advice.
Now, remind me again, what are we actually talking about, was it consciousness by any chance?
Re: Consciousness
Ditto, lets call the whole thing off.
- RCSaunders
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Consciousness
Unfortunately the term, "academia," is a huge umbrella and a great deal falls under it, including those institutions that specialize in STEM disciplines (a "jargon," acronym for Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) which are not what I'm referring to as, "academia." I'm sure there are many, "good men," involved in the stem areas of education.Belinda wrote: ↑Sun Mar 06, 2022 11:49 amWhether you like it or not many good men work in academia, and try to make the world a better place, and precisely are ranged against obscurantism.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 9:36 pmJargon does not excuse saying what is not true.
I'm very familiar with academic, "jargon." It is all intentional obscurantism and obtuse language intended to sound profound, but it is only obfuscation couched in undefined and meaningless words that one, "kinda sorta," understands, all meant to put over some nonsense called philosophy or some social/political abomination. Academic jargon is the exact opposite of scientific jargon. The purpose of scientific jargon is to make it possible to identify and explicate the unique concepts of science. The purpose of academic jargon is create pseudo-concepts with intentionally obscure and confusing meanings that can be used to put over just anything.
The moment you begin to read or hear something infected with academic jargon, such as, "paradigm," "dialectic," "trope," "egoism," "core commitments," "synergy," "emergence," "holism," "gestalt," "hegemony," "coherence," "critical thinking," "model," "mode," "perception," "peer review," "rubric," "transcend," "normative," "altruistic," "heteronormative," "nadir," "telelogical," "gestalt," "predicated," "redolent of," "kitsch," "post modern," "neoclassic," "gouache," "homiletics," "linguistics," or "paleo...." you know what you are reading is either a lie or worthless.
Sure, most of those words have legitimate meanings and uses outside academia, but when they come from some academic's mouth, pen, or keyboard, they are devoid of meaning and have no other purpose than to make some absurd, inane, or insipid nonsense sound or look profound or important.
As for everything else that falls under the rubric of academia, it is worse then ignorance which turns much true knowledge into specious nonsense such as sociology, evolutionary psychology (and a host of other [pseudo-sciences], environmentalism [which began as ecology], geo-politics, philosophy, and religion, for example. Those who receive money for promoting such absurdities are not good men.
It's a bit presumptuous to make judgments while admitting, "you don't know," don't you think?
I never repudiated or disparaged the use of jargon at all. Among other things I was a technical writer, and managed technical publications for several IT, Telephony, and electronics firms which required the use of language and terms specific to those fields (i.e. jargon). Such terms are not only well defined and specific, but must be to fulfill the purpose of make the concepts they identified useful.
Every industry and discipline has their own, "jargon," which is valuable to those fields, but much jargon is just the opposite, not intended to make ideas cogent, but to obscure clear understanding or to promote pseud-concepts that mean nothing, like those in theology, most religions, most philosophy, what is wrongly called the, "humanities," and all of academia that is not STEM.
Re: Consciousness
RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sun Mar 06, 2022 3:21 pmUnfortunately the term, "academia," is a huge umbrella and a great deal falls under it, including those institutions that specialize in STEM disciplines (a "jargon," acronym for Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) which are not what I'm referring to as, "academia." I'm sure there are many, "good men," involved in the stem areas of education.Belinda wrote: ↑Sun Mar 06, 2022 11:49 amWhether you like it or not many good men work in academia, and try to make the world a better place, and precisely are ranged against obscurantism.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 9:36 pm
Jargon does not excuse saying what is not true.
I'm very familiar with academic, "jargon." It is all intentional obscurantism and obtuse language intended to sound profound, but it is only obfuscation couched in undefined and meaningless words that one, "kinda sorta," understands, all meant to put over some nonsense called philosophy or some social/political abomination. Academic jargon is the exact opposite of scientific jargon. The purpose of scientific jargon is to make it possible to identify and explicate the unique concepts of science. The purpose of academic jargon is create pseudo-concepts with intentionally obscure and confusing meanings that can be used to put over just anything.
The moment you begin to read or hear something infected with academic jargon, such as, "paradigm," "dialectic," "trope," "egoism," "core commitments," "synergy," "emergence," "holism," "gestalt," "hegemony," "coherence," "critical thinking," "model," "mode," "perception," "peer review," "rubric," "transcend," "normative," "altruistic," "heteronormative," "nadir," "telelogical," "gestalt," "predicated," "redolent of," "kitsch," "post modern," "neoclassic," "gouache," "homiletics," "linguistics," or "paleo...." you know what you are reading is either a lie or worthless.
Sure, most of those words have legitimate meanings and uses outside academia, but when they come from some academic's mouth, pen, or keyboard, they are devoid of meaning and have no other purpose than to make some absurd, inane, or insipid nonsense sound or look profound or important.
As for everything else that falls under the rubric of academia, it is worse then ignorance which turns much true knowledge into specious nonsense such as sociology, evolutionary psychology (and a host of other [pseudo-sciences], environmentalism [which began as ecology], geo-politics, philosophy, and religion, for example. Those who receive money for promoting such absurdities are not good men.
It's a bit presumptuous to make judgments while admitting, "you don't know," don't you think?
I never repudiated or disparaged the use of jargon at all. Among other things I was a technical writer, and managed technical publications for several IT, Telephony, and electronics firms which required the use of language and terms specific to those fields (i.e. jargon). Such terms are not only well defined and specific, but must be to fulfill the purpose of make the concepts they identified useful.
Every industry and discipline has their own, "jargon," which is valuable to those fields, but much jargon is just the opposite, not intended to make ideas cogent, but to obscure clear understanding or to promote pseud-concepts that mean nothing, like those in theology, most religions, most philosophy, what is wrongly called the, "humanities," and all of academia that is not STEM.
I very much approve of explicit and concise language that is aimed at experts, or alternatively aimed at lay people. Professional technical writings are among the best example of good use of English for completing tasks that have projected outcomes.
You must have been unfortunate in chancing upon bad writers in the fields you so disparage. I have had to skip chapters in some books, and even entire books, but whether this was because I am too stupid or the author is a bad writer, I don't know.