Sociology great, philosophy shit?

[kyser_soze]

So, you have absolutely accepted in that sentence that i am consistent on this website, having just a few minutes previously stated that i can't debate due to a lack of consistency.

Can it be made up?

Having changed your tune about my consistency, perhaps you might change you tune about my being wrongfully consistent? Perhaps i'm consistently right?

Which is not what I've said. In any way.

 

[Dillinger4]

Which is not what I've said. In any way.

No, I can't see that either.

 

[fela fan]

What are the odds on Fela calling me a 'closed mind' or a 'slave' in his reply?

You've lost big time. I've not even said either yet!

You really need to read more carefully.

 

[Refused as fuck]

I never said anybody was a slave, more reading problems for you. I said they were slaves to their past.

Huge difference to anybody, never mind anyone with pretensions to philosophy. I feel you need to learn a few more skills in the art of critical reading. At least if you wish to progress along the path...

If you can explain what you mean by "slaves to the past" without looking a pillock, I will give you a fiver.

 

[Dillinger4]

What are the odds on Fela calling me a 'closed mind' or a 'slave' in his reply?

You've lost big time. I've not even said either yet!

You really need to read more carefully.

*reads more carefully*

You can't see it. Fair enough.

Anybody who has an open mind will not react to somebody's opinions with a judgment that it is 'nonsense'. Never will they do that.

Evidence that you're operating on this thread with a closed mind.

If that's what's in your mind, then that must be correct.

Your skills of debate will necessarily take a tumble when your thinking processes have been hijacked by an obsession with the debater rather than the debate itself. Your apparent need to disparage others with views you don't like or don't accept is interesting. Decent debaters argue the topic, not the people who are debating.

You are a slave too dillinger.

See, this in a nutshell is your weakness. You saw my name, and simply failed to read properly because your mind is already closed.

I did not say that at all. I said question the answers.

And that means quite a lot to anybody prepared to read it with an open mind, not a mind that has been closed immediately upon seeing who is contributing to the debate.

Your loss mate.

oops! so are you a liar or an idiot?

Same old nonsense.

Cue Fela talking about us as 'slaves' whilst he is living in some kind of imagined enlightened freedom.

Cue Fela accusing everybody of having 'closed minds' when he claims to have the only 'open mind' even though he displays a quite solidly closed belief system outside of which everything is wrong and he is right.

Cue Fela making intonations about how much more enlightened he is, whilst displaying his arrogance.

Cue Fela claiming to have 'won' an argument that exists entirely in his own head, with its own winners (himself) and losers (everybody who thinks he is talking empty nonsense)

And on and on.

 

[Dillinger4]

If you can explain what you mean by "slaves to the past" without looking a pillock, I will give you a fiver.

Forget it. Us slaves couldn't understand the plane of enlightenment that Fela thinks he exists on. You need to live in Thailand for a start. It is the only way.

 

[fela fan]

Which is not what I've said. In any way.

Having leveled the judgment at me that i can't debate properly because i'm not consistent, you've quickly recognised after my reply that i can indeed be consistent.

Which is kind of ironical considering your rapid about-turn, your rapid u-turn, your rapid inconsistency...

Face it mate.

 

[Dillinger4]

Not just lack, but spectacularly lack. Good tabloid style that kyser.

I think you're calling for me to have a consistent position on urban. And of course i cannot do that. How can i be fixed in my opinions?? Only those that think they have learnt it all remain resistant to u-turns and changes of mind.

But i think i'm fairly consistent within individual threads that call upon individual, specific debating topics. I think if you read all my contributions to this thread you'll find i've been most consistent.

That is of course if 'consistency' is considered to be a good trait.

I don't think it is personally. Change is our only constant bedfellow between birth and death. Accepting it or fighting it is the choice.

Having leveled the judgment at me that i can't debate properly because i'm not consistent, you've quickly recognised after my reply that i can indeed be consistent.

Which is kind of ironical considering your rapid about-turn, your rapid u-turn, your rapid inconsistency...

Face it mate.

Face it mate.

 

[fela fan]

Forget it. Us slaves couldn't understand the plane of enlightenment that Fela thinks he exists on. You need to live in Thailand for a start. It is the only way.

You're all fela fan, thailand, anything else you've projected onto me with your own mind.

You're a slave to your past dillinger. You often seem to operate with a closed mind.

I've not referred to you as either, just that operate under such conditions. But you can't see this can you? Learn to read dear boy.

 

[Dillinger4]

You're all fela fan, thailand, anything else you've projected onto me with your own mind.

You're a slave to your past dillinger. You often seem to operate with a closed mind.

I've not referred to you as either, just that operate under such conditions. But you can't see this can you? Learn to read dear boy.

I am speechless.

 

[Dillinger4]

Nobody can debate with you because you have already decided that you are right. Any criticism is the criticism of 'slaves' with 'closed minds'.

 

[fela fan]

If you can explain what you mean by "slaves to the past" without looking a pillock, I will give you a fiver.

You won't, how ya gonna get a fiver to me across the world?

What i mean by 'slaves to the past' is that one reacts without enough considered thinking. The incoming signal (ie the language) is distorted by one's past experiences. We derive meaning from two simultaneous processes: from the language itself, and all our knowledge about the context of the communicating.

You unconsciously have been relying too much on your previous experiences (ie your past) to get a meaning from what i've been saying.

You have also seen fit to enjoy the ridiculing of somebody for opinions you don't like, rather than fight the opinions, or try to understand them better.

Those that wish to learn do not depend on their past to inform them of their reactions to all incoming messages.

 

[fela fan]

Nobody can debate with you because you have already decided that you are right.

Have I?

News to me.

Since i have come to recognise i know nothing, what's interesting is how you've come to believe the opposite.

 

[Dillinger4]

You won't, how ya gonna get a fiver to me across the world?

What i mean by 'slaves to the past' is that one reacts without enough considered thinking. The incoming signal (ie the language) is distorted by one's past experiences. We derive meaning from two simultaneous processes: from the language itself, and all our knowledge about the context of the communicating.

You unconsciously have been relying too much on your previous experiences (ie your past) to get a meaning from what i've been saying.

You have also seen fit to enjoy the ridiculing of somebody for opinions you don't like, rather than fight the opinions, or try to understand them better.

Those that wish to learn do not depend on their past to inform them of their reactions to all incoming messages.

So you've just discovered an ability that man immemorial has been trying to obtain? You've been able to get inside another's mind to be able to categorically state what that person is?

It would be easy to view this is as some kind of unconscious arrogance.

Hypocrisy of the highest order.

 

[fela fan]

I am speechless.

No you're not. You're lying.

You've plenty of speech left in you. You're just a slave to your reactions, which are based on your whole past.

When are you going to get clarity dillinger?

 

[Dillinger4]

The best philosophy is your own from your own experiences in life. Forge your own way i say.

Bit late for anyone who went to uni to study it mind.

Either it's a tool to use on one's own personal journey in life, or it's reading up on others' efforts to do the same thing.

Or it can be both, and the order in which one does it will influence each option.

The whole purpose of philosophy from where i look is to let it go to the nth degree, then drop it all. Coz it basically burns itself out. It has to when the grand answer arrives to the question 'what is the meaning of life?'.

Drop the question. Drop the questions. But you can't drop what you don't have, and therefore that's why philosophy is a necessary requirement by its own inherent nature.

Don't answer the questions, question the answers...

Have I?

News to me.

Since i have come to recognise i know nothing, what's interesting is how you've come to believe the opposite.

More hypocrisy. Plus nonsense.

 

[Dillinger4]

No you're not. You're lying.

You've plenty of speech left in you. You're just a slave to your reactions, which are based on your whole past.

When are you going to get clarity dillinger?

Pure arrogance.

 

[fela fan]

Hypocrisy of the highest order.

You are inadvertently providing evidence for what i'm saying about your postings here.

You are selecting out bits of what i say and putting them in bold, indicating the bits you deem important to connect with.

You are implicitly ignoring the co-text around the bolded bits. My meaning comes from the whole of my text, yet you derive meaning from part of my text.

It illustrates neatly that you're not reading critically, but rather with a pre-set agenda: fela fan is saying it.

When are you going to learn better mate?

 

[Blagsta]

That would of course be your misguided opinion, or, more likely, just tabloid thinking.

See, i've been here for six years and are you saying that in all that time i've never had consistency? .

You've consistently been a flake tbf

 

[fela fan]

Pure arrogance.

You attract it dillinger. It fits well with you. You are demanding it, so i'm feeding it.

 

[Dillinger4]

You should go and read your own posts that I have quoted.

On one hand you claim to know something, then you claim to know nothing

On one hand, you claim to know a 'considered' reaction then you claim that nobody can know, or something or other.

You claim not to have called anybody a 'closed mind' or a 'slave' and have carried on doing it throughout the thread.

 

[Dillinger4]

You are inadvertently providing evidence for what i'm saying about your postings here.

You are selecting out bits of what i say and putting them in bold, indicating the bits you deem important to connect with.

You are implicitly ignoring the co-text around the bolded bits. My meaning comes from the whole of my text, yet you derive meaning from part of my text.

It illustrates neatly that you're not reading critically, but rather with a pre-set agenda: fela fan is saying it.

When are you going to learn better mate?

Tell me, Fela, why do you always end your posts with a patronising and arrogant statement?

 

[fela fan]

You've consistently been a flake tbf

Ahh, look what's turned up.

A bit slower than usual. You must be getting off pace a bit there blagsta.

 

[fela fan]

Tell me, Fela, why do you always end your posts with a patronising and arrogant statement?

I don't. I've had thousands of posts where i've not done that. But i agree, i probably end many of my posts to you like that.

I wonder why i do that to you? Any ideas?

 

[Dillinger4]

You attract it dillinger. It fits well with you. You are demanding it, so i'm feeding it.

No, you are posting it because you are arrogant. It is arrogant for you to claim you are 'feeding' it to me.

See, your sunny persona drops, and the arrogant self regarding sad old hippy burnout we all know you are is revealed.

 

[Blagsta]

Ahh, look what's turned up.

A bit slower than usual. You must be getting off pace a bit there blagsta.

 

[fela fan]

On one hand you claim to know something, then you claim to know nothing

I think you're getting closer to the crux of philosophy, and its inherent limitations here.

 

[Dillinger4]

I think you're getting closer to the crux of philosophy, and its inherent limitations here.

No, what we are getting closer to is your arrogance.

You keep trying to tell me about getting on the right path and a load of other nonsense.

The implication that you are already on the path of righteousness, that the rest of us are slaves and you have already broken free. Pure, unadulterated arrogance, at odds with the persona you like to project.

 

[fela fan]

No, you are posting it because you are arrogant. It is arrogant for you to claim you are 'feeding' it to me.

See, your sunny persona drops, and the arrogant self regarding sad old hippy burnout we all know you are is revealed.

Yeah, maybe i feel a certain arrogance towards you just right now, and perhaps it's coming out in my posts. It's only coz you unreservedly deserve it. Just go look back at your first post on this thread in reply to me, and all the others. Then tell me you don't deserve to be on the receiving end of some pure arrogance, never mind my more understated variety.

What you give out, inevitably will come back.

 

[Refused as fuck]

You won't, how ya gonna get a fiver to me across the world?

What i mean by 'slaves to the past' is that one reacts without enough considered thinking. The incoming signal (ie the language) is distorted by one's past experiences. We derive meaning from two simultaneous processes: from the language itself, and all our knowledge about the context of the communicating.

You unconsciously have been relying too much on your previous experiences (ie your past) to get a meaning from what i've been saying.

You have also seen fit to enjoy the ridiculing of somebody for opinions you don't like, rather than fight the opinions, or try to understand them better.

Those that wish to learn do not depend on their past to inform them of their reactions to all incoming messages.

Brilliant. You are a condescending pillock. And extremely stupid.