Skepick's and tillingborn's mental mastication thread.

General chit-chat

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.

Post by attofishpi »

Skepdick wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:16 pm
tillingborn wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:14 pm You really are a whiny little dick. If you want to know the answer, ask the question.
I want to know the answer. I've already asked the question.A bunch of times.

You really are an obscurantist, aren't you?
..well u, u, u r just an obscurantipants.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.

Post by attofishpi »

Time for everyone to calm down, chill out and post a riddle..oui?
tillingborn
Posts: 1314
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.

Post by tillingborn »

Skepdick wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:16 pmI want to know the answer. I've already asked the question.A bunch of times.

You really are an obscurantist, aren't you?
It's Brandolini's law. It was a bullshit question that didn't relate to anything I said. This is your opportunity to make up a relevant question and pretend that is the one you were asking all along. If it is about something I have said, I will answer it. Or fuck off then.
Skepdick
Posts: 14365
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.

Post by Skepdick »

tillingborn wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:26 pm It's Brandolini's law. It was a bullshit question that didn't relate to anything I said.

Brandolini's law is not about questions. It's about the cost of dispelling bullshit that has already been disseminated.

I haven't disseminated anything, because questions aren't dissemination of information. They are requests for the dissemination of information.

So quit fucking stalling.
tillingborn wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:26 pm This is your opportunity to make up a relevant question and pretend that is the one you were asking all along. If it is about something I have said, I will answer it. Or fuck off then.
Translation: Jump, monkey!
tillingborn
Posts: 1314
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.

Post by tillingborn »

Skepdick wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:30 pmTranslation: Jump, monkey!
Or don't. Be quick, I'm getting bored.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.

Post by attofishpi »

Fling some poo, both of U.
tillingborn
Posts: 1314
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.

Post by tillingborn »

I think this pretentious drivel is where it all went wrong Skepdick:
Skepdick wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 6:50 amOh. You are still pursuing ideas for their uniqueness? As if that's a heuristic for anything of value.

Indeed, that is an ignorant pursuit. Alas go forth with the neomania.

Ideas are instruments for solving problems. If you don't have any problems - you don't need any ideas. Yes, the instrumentalists said that already - yet you are busy re-discovering it.
I said at the time that I don't pursue ideas for their uniqueness and I have said all along that ideas are adopted for reasons that, when broken down into their finest constituents, turn out to be 'it feels good'. That mother of invention thing goes back to Plato and is demonstrably not true: you do not have to believe in God, you do not have to believe in matter, you do not have to believe there is a world out there; people believe all sorts of things because they like the idea.
Skepdick
Posts: 14365
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.

Post by Skepdick »

tillingborn wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 11:45 am I said at the time that I don't pursue ideas for their uniqueness and I have said all along that ideas are adopted for reasons that, when broken down into their finest constituents, turn out to be 'it feels good'. That mother of invention thing goes back to Plato and is demonstrably not true: you do not have to believe in God, you do not have to believe in matter, you do not have to believe there is a world out there; people believe all sorts of things because they like the idea.
Lets see about the "demonstrability" of that non-truth....

Do you believe in belief? You must, since you are talking about "believing in..." a bunch of stuff.
Do you believe in belief for aesthetic reasons, or is there more to it?

Maybe in your book of know-what it says which Philosopher said what about self-application/recursion.
tillingborn
Posts: 1314
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.

Post by tillingborn »

Skepdick wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:13 pmDo you believe in belief? You must, since you are talking about "believing in..." a bunch of stuff.
Do you believe in belief for aesthetic reasons, or is there more to it?

Maybe in your book of know-what it says which Philosopher said what about self-application/recursion.
Not off the top of my head. The logical positivists never really recovered from it being pointed out that the verification principle isn't verifiable in the way they insisted everything else should be. But you are talking your usual gibberish; you don't have to believe you believe to believe, it's quite enough to believe. I believe in belief, because people tell me they believe things, and I believe them.
Atla
Posts: 6675
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.

Post by Atla »

tillingborn wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 10:02 am Skepdick; if you have anything to say to me, do so here.
You know, 999 out of 1000 people have something to say. In general, at least. That is, their brains work in such a way that they are capable of making sense, able to say things that make sense. It may not be much, maybe they are total nutjobs but when you try long and hard enough, you can pull a little bit of sense out of them.
And then one day, when the universe has decided that the time is ripe, you meet that fabled 1000th person, that mystical creature.
Last edited by Atla on Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Skepdick
Posts: 14365
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.

Post by Skepdick »

Atla wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:38 pm You know, 999 out of 1000 people have something to say. In general, at least. That is, their brains work in such a way that they are capable of making sense, able to say things that make sense.
And then one day, when the universe has decided that the time is ripe, you meet that fabled 1000th person, that mystical creature.
The 1000th person keep pointing out that "saying things in general" is a fallacy.

If you think generalities make sense you probably have shit for brains...
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8534
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.

Post by Sculptor »

tillingborn wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:33 pm
Skepdick wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:13 pmDo you believe in belief? You must, since you are talking about "believing in..." a bunch of stuff.
Do you believe in belief for aesthetic reasons, or is there more to it?

Maybe in your book of know-what it says which Philosopher said what about self-application/recursion.
Not off the top of my head. The logical positivists never really recovered from it being pointed out that the verification principle isn't verifiable in the way they insisted everything else should be. But you are talking your usual gibberish; you don't have to believe you believe to believe, it's quite enough to believe. I believe in belief, because people tell me they believe things, and I believe them.
I think it is only valid to believe that people believe.
Nothing contained within beliefs are necessarily true. In fact in most cases the words "believe" and "belief" most commonly tend to be applied to POVs about which no rational or evidential basis is applied.
Belief is, then, generally a choice, or (would the believer accept it) nothing more than an aspiration that such a thing ought to be true.

For these reasons I rarely use the term about myself except for things that I know are not the case but I would wish them to be so such as justice, democracy and equality. I believe in a fair tax system; but this is not to say that I think such a thing exists anywhere on earth.
Skepdick
Posts: 14365
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.

Post by Skepdick »

tillingborn wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:33 pm Not off the top of my head. The logical positivists never really recovered from it being pointed out that the verification principle isn't verifiable in the way they insisted everything else should be.
The philosophers never really recovered from anyone asking how they deduced the truth of any of their premises either.

tillingborn wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:33 pm But you are talking your usual gibberish; you don't have to believe you believe to believe, it's quite enough to believe. I believe in belief, because people tell me they believe things, and I believe them.
I am not asking you if you believe in other people's beliefs. I am asking you if you believe in your own beliefs.

That should be a testable/falsifiable hypothesis, no? You have access to all the information.
tillingborn
Posts: 1314
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:15 pm

Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.

Post by tillingborn »

Skepdick wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 2:11 pmI am asking you if you believe in your own beliefs.
For all I know it's turtles all the way down, but since believing that I believe that I believe that I believe serves no worthwhile function, I don't bother.
Skepdick
Posts: 14365
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.

Post by Skepdick »

tillingborn wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 2:21 pm For all I know it's turtles all the way down, but since believing that I believe that I believe that I believe serves no worthwhile function, I don't bother.
Ironically, that's precisely what I was asking you.

Is the function of your beliefs (or your belief in beliefs) merely aesthetic, or is there more to it?
Post Reply