Replies so that I do not disrupt a conversation

Quote :

Quote :

ROFL Lazy how would having time to explore the world and learn be lazy, how would taking that education and assisting others be lazy?

Quote :

If I recall correctly, then it was *YOU* who were the one complaining about a lack of time.

That signals to me that you are just too lazy to make the appropriate sacrifices to do what you desire.

You tied yourself to your personal obligations, nobody else made that choice for you, did they???

Ah, i see a romantic point of view, sacrifice. If i sacrifice my family to serve myself and others is that honorable is that ethically or morrally correct? Or would it be selfish because it is a desire? Push aside those that need me in order to serve desire is not ethical nor moral. Perhaps you do not understand love only selfish desire and lust.

Quote :

kriswest wrote:
If I had started exporing and truly learning this world when I was born i would still be in Southern South America if that was my starting point. 45 yers is not long enough a life time is not long enough. To learn all I can about earth sociology anthropopology philosophy and bring it to a point where it is useful would take many life times. All the great minds you talk about above have such a tiny perspective on humanity. Each is only a small part of what is. It is merely the beginning of the puzzle. to apply such small perspectives to life with out understanding that they are mere pieces warps your own life. Use them but do not abuse them.

You are the one who abuses these voices, by discounting them, and labeling them as "small".

No two minds are alike. As such, some men possess the Mental Power to account for hundreds, thousands, or even *BILLIONS* of other men.

If one man, a Philosopher, can as such change the course of Human History so decisively, then I shall say he is indeed a Man of Intellect, nothing more or less.


But you, Kriswest, would call such men "small" and "tiny" because you-yourself are jealous of abilities you cannot possess or comprehend.

Delightful attempt at manipulating but it fails. i never called them small or tiny, I said their knowledge was but a small tiny portion of what is out there. A small and tiny perspective of what acutally is. Just because one small perspective changes course of history does not mean it is all that will be or is. It is but a mere change in course, one that can change again and again.
I could never be jealous of something that is not mine to have or hold, you should know by now I am not so petty or shallow. jealousy arises from lust or unquenchable uncontrolled irrational desire. Knowing reality does not give rise to jealousy. In fact it allows you to applaud others for their achievements. I do not malign their achievements i just put them in their place as far as reality goes in a larger scope of it.

Quote :

kriswest wrote:
If you had read and paid attention to what you read from the Dr. you would understand there were no idealogies as such but social philosphies for young minds to grasp. No manipulation is in them UR just life lessons.
Green eggs and ham: With out fleshing them out ,the main philosphical point in that one is: Fear by association can be a trap.. The minor ones are trust issues and persistance /stubbornness when dealing with others.

That is incorrect.

"Dr. Seuss" was a Sophist, much like many other famous Philosophers, who wanted to make a quick-dollar off his ideas, and did so.

But it is too easy for Philosophers to become Sophists. The Genuine Thinkers are defined by Purpose, and not Money.

But since you are a materialistic woman; I would not expect you to know anything about this Concept.

Oh so a mechanic should not make money of their talent? A phsycian should only treat people for free and starve themselves to death? An educator should do the same?
Purpose and money are not exclusive, each needs the other. Without money one cannot move forward. That does not make them sophists or materialists it makes them a human in a human society. Pedastals are for flights of fancy and you are building one for an ideal. That which is on a pedestal will fall or come down enventually.

Quote :

kriswest wrote:
Is that trite? No not hardly, its not even close to idealogy nor manipulation of young heads, it is simply philosophical truths that all humans should learn. If you read them you learned them wether you know it now or not.

"all humans should learn"???

According to who??? According to what Moral Authority??? You, Kriswest???

I apologize but I do not bow before your Socialist propaganda, Kris. I am beyond this programming.

Dr. Seuss wrote books with pretty pictures. There is not much else there. Good parents are the Parents here, not socialist propaganda.

Goodness your rebuttals are quite emotional for a man, rather than rebutt with reason that you claim to have you rebutt with opinionate emotional rhetoric.

All humans should learn basics in order to communicate and grow within the human societies. It is merely a tool thats all should have. Why make it into something it is not? For your propaganda purpose? Propaganda is a word used when someone opposes another's ideas, it is a word that serves the same purpose as calling somebody a foul name. In other words it is basically calling someone a shithead. its not rebuttal it is a flailing out in an emotional response.
Above you infer I am lazy and selfish,, now you claim I am a socialist working for a human purpose,,,, dude pick one and stick with it.
If you do not see anything else beyond pretty pictures then perhaps you are not trying to learn as mush as you claim to.

Quote :

kriswest wrote:
All philosphers are out to educate and change minds,

Is that a fact...?

And what motivations do Philosophers have to *DESIRE* to "help educate" armies of followers (children) or to "change minds" (through propaganda)?

The sacrifice for Philosophical Knowledge, and thus Power, is a killing of your mortal desires, lest you go insane under the weight of Purely Reasoned Inquiry.

Count to infinity and tell me how far you get before you give up, woman. Now imagine that you had kept on going, without food, water, or a pat on the back.

Why get published or voice your findings if you are not out to change and educate minds? there is no other purpose other than pure ego.

Quote :

kriswest wrote:
a young mind is not any more vunerable to words as such than an older mind desperately reaching out to understand.

This is one of the most ignorant statements I have ever heard in my adult life.

Give me your child, at age 2, and see how much influence I have on him instead of if he were given to me at 18.

Your socialist propaganda, and your "education" Kriswest, have already dominated the weak minds of your children.

I have no doubt you have grown fine slaves to be utilized to The Machine you pay homage to.

Oh here we go again do not bother to read what i wrote just slpa something on the page. A young mind a a desperate mind are equally vunerable to machinations. Geez UR get those sunglasses off you can't seem to be able to read.

Quote :

kriswest wrote:
As you both have admitted to doing.

And you ignore the difference between a child and an Adult Male...

So be it; that is your mistake and failure to understand

And you ignore the similarities between a young mind and a desperate one be it male or famale. The failure is that your beloved male ego blinds you. You so love your maleness to the point that you will not allow yourself to be human and learn all that you can. You taint your education with your need to feed your maleness and your ego. To me that is sad, you have a fine flexible educated mind, yet you hide behind a youthful wall of ego. Quite the change from when I first met you. You have become quite pedantic and closed.

SH, I will reply to you later.

kriswest wrote:

SH, I will reply to you later.

I'm not going anywhere baby...take your time.

Thanks darlin, in the mornin hopefully, I have to check on email downloadings now for pics, that takes forever on dial up. My step dad has become a father to a boy from a Islaamic Catholic Philippine woman( talk about interesting upbringing) ,,,,,20 years my junior,( that is an interesting situation in her view his view and mine Oooh boy relations can get interesting) she is a wonderful young lady, it has been my honor to speak with her over the phone . Although I think she needs some female education.

Gads, the world has become small, I never thought I would have contacts in the world like this.

Well I will look forward to it. Like Unreasonable I have been bored out of my mind...so as soon as you can would be nice.

I was nearly compelled to respond to this post you wrote to him because I'm so fucking bored, but since it's directed to him, I'll leave him to deal with it.

He seems to be taking his sweet time to respond to my post...oh well.

SH, the last part of your last reply to me needs to be addressed IMO first before we go further. I have been mulling it over and trying to come up with a short but to the point reply. Not easy.
You view Philosophy differntly than I do, that accounts for some misinterpretation of intent. We probably have catagorized each other so that accounts for more misinterpretation.
I see philosophy not for understanding how the mind work and why but, for learning about living life with in this world,universe, within in society within our selves. It is a tool that gives us ideas on how to handle life experiences, thoughts or ideas. To evolve and grow mentally.
Yours is more Western and mine would probably be considered an Eastern aproach. Yours to me is more about physchology than philosophy.
Yours is not wrong nor is mine they are just different. Which gives rise to misunderstanding and conflict. Example: You used the word hectic, I used the word busy. You said how could I find time to be online if my life was so hectic. My life is not hectic it is a scheduled busy long day. I do get some breaks if I did not you would agree I would probably work myself to physical illness right? I figured you would have understood that, I am not sure why you think I meant hectic. But, I do think it has to do with how you have catagorized me in your head. Or,,, you are just plain ornery

I do know what Sigmund did that benifits physchanalytical studies. But, it does not take away from the fact that man did fraudulent studies because of his obsession. Many of his findings were tainted by his views and obsession on sexuality, they were not unbiased as such studies should be. Folks believed him because of his standing. Now his work, his conclusions are being dismissed more and more. The man did not leave his emotions out of it, he did not set his bias aside as a scientist should have. His good work is tainted by his lousy work. The guy was twisted about sex. Such is life, you screw up and that is what shows up. I doubt you and I will ever agree on this. it might be interesting to try though

kriswest wrote:

SH, the last part of your last reply to me needs to be addressed IMO first before we go further. I have been mulling it over and trying to come up with a short but to the point reply. Not easy.
You view Philosophy differntly than I do, that accounts for some misinterpretation of intent. We probably have catagorized each other so that accounts for more misinterpretation.
I see philosophy not for understanding how the mind work and why but, for learning about living life with in this world,universe, within in society within our selves. It is a tool that gives us ideas on how to handle life experiences, thoughts or ideas. To evolve and grow mentally.
Yours is more Western and mine would probably be considered an Eastern aproach. Yours to me is more about physchology than philosophy.
Yours is not wrong nor is mine they are just different. Which gives rise to misunderstanding and conflict. Example: You used the word hectic, I used the word busy. You said how could I find time to be online if my life was so hectic. My life is not hectic it is a scheduled busy long day. I do get some breaks if I did not you would agree I would probably work myself to physical illness right? I figured you would have understood that, I am not sure why you think I meant hectic. But, I do think it has to do with how you have catagorized me in your head. Or,,, you are just plain ornery

Kris, let me go over philosophy with you...

Philosophy is about this: Dismantling and analyzing every piece/part/component of any idea/context/basis, and applying the skill of reasoning to extract the truth or truths from them. It is a study of logic, not spirit, which is what many many many many *MANY* people simply do not understand. Allah, god, Jesus Christ, Buddha, Tao, heavenly saints, celestial rulers of divine power, *DO NOT* and *WILL* never apply to the study of philosophy. What differentiates philosophy from faith Kris is very simply and succinctly-logic. That will always be the difference, that will always be the determining factor that keeps the intrusive sententious nature of religion at bay, that will always be the reason why philosophy is incompatible with faith!

An accurate example would be as follows: i could debate until I've reached the end of my life, with a Christian that the existence of "God" is relevant only to the nature of an "idea" and therefore ceases to be such a veritable "presence" in the world. Thus, the Christian instead of applying the skill of logic to argue correctly with me, will instead rebuke my statements out of pure self-assurance-nothing more-that he is right and i am wrong. Because his faith is based on nothing more than *BELIEF*, he will fail to prove anything to me, however i will also fail to prove anything to him (not because i cannot), because....his mind is hopelessly and stubbornly attached to his "beliefs", not his "logic"; a child who says "uh uh, uh uh, uh uh," equates to much the same disposition of a Christian saying "There is a god, there is a god, there is a god". But neither the child nor the Christian will ever be any more correct, than i am, presuming i am correct because my logic whether it be correct or not, by principle, places there spiritual accounts and conjectures directly into the gray area of doubt, due to their inability to prove anything to me. Logic allows me to prove "points", people of faith cannot.

Therefore Kris, our differences are not based upon who is absolutely right or wrong, but upon who has the more reasonable point/argument/contention etc, to be reasonably right or wrong. You're digression from my post proves this. This is an attempt to divert my attention away from a discussion that you were clearly in a bad position in to prove anything to me, not much different from someone who says "look, what's that in the sky?" and than runs away when the other person cranes their head. I may view you personally, through my own perception, but concerning logical arguments this doesn't negate that i am right and you wrong.

Quote :

I do know what Sigmund did that benifits physchanalytical studies.

Don't delude yourself Kris.

if this were true you wouldn't have made any false assumptions about him in the first place.

Quote :

But, it does not take away from the fact that man did fraudulent studies because of his obsession.

What "fraudulent studies"?????????????

blatant ignorance.

and you wonder why us males have to treat you so harshly?

because you let you ass do your arguing and not your logic.

Quote :

Many of his findings were tainted by his views and obsession on sexuality, they were not unbiased as such studies should be. Folks believed him because of his standing.

Incorrect!

People believed him because his hypothesis of the human condition, mainly, how it is functional through "desire" and "need", was applicable and accurate to the turbulent time period of the industrial revolution. When vast mechanic manufacturing took precedence over humanity and society, academics and average people alike took his findings of the human condition to make sense, because they made sense in the nature of human affairs. It was his "logic" not his title that merited him.

Quote :

Now his work, his conclusions are being dismissed more and more.

Incorrect.

you know nothing of his work.

Quote :

The man did not leave his emotions out of it, he did not set his bias aside as a scientist should have. His good work is tainted by his lousy work. The guy was twisted about sex. Such is life, you screw up and that is what shows up.

Wrong!!

Do you see my point now Kris???

Because you have no ability to prove anything through reason, you are forced to stamp your feet and proclaim over and over again that you are right! when you never will be!

Quote :

I doubt you and I will ever agree on this. it might be interesting to try though

And why don't we agree kris?????

perhaps because i know what the hell i am talking about, and you don't?

perhaps because i do not make false assumptions, and you do?

perhaps because i am right, and you wrong?

SH you will always be right even when you are wrong because you cannot remove your blinders. Your replies are the irrational ones and filled with emotion that you accuse me of. Yet you cannot see it. Seems to me you are the one stomping your feet not I. My studies come from a different angle or position than you know, so therfore it is wrong. That my friend is as blind as it gets. this happens quite often in many discussions , aperson has a different take on a subject and so that person is wrong. At least you know you are part of a crowd and not so different or special.

I get the idea you only think you know how to reason when it is becoming patently obvious to me that you do not. Resort to your "harshness if it makes you feel better, everyone needs a security blanket even if it is just an attitude. If you are bored then perhaps your arrogance causes it. Lonliness , boredom and arrogance occur together very often. Oh I know this is another emotional rant to you, that is all you will ever see because you prefer to see it so , without reason.

There really is no getting through to your concrete block head is there Kris?

very well, call me arrogant, lonely, bored, it *STILL* won't excuse the fact that I'm right and you wrong.

Like most women, you prefer to simply dismiss everything i say outright on the grounds it is "Male Arrogance". Your see big words that you cannot understand, and exclamations points, and jump to the conclusion that I'm not making sense, because of it, and *STILL* without meeting any of my challenges.

I don't have anything against you personally Kris, what i have against you is your pathetic reasoning. Don't feel bad. Reasoning is not meant for everyone. Philosophy is for the eclectic.

nevertheless...I am right even when I'm wrong. At least you understood that much.

Just keep in mind not to challenge me unless you can reciprocate effectively.

Here's some advice: apply that atrophied and deeply sentimentally clouded mind of yours to some books on logic. Than get back to me. Perhaps THEN, you might be able to prove to me-anything at all.

Until that time, just know i am better than you.