Authenticity: Keeping It Real And Then Some

Post by **Philosophy Now** » Wed May 27, 2015 4:18 am

Leigh Roche says authenticity means expressing your real self, whether in life, art, or skateboarding.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/92/Aut ... _Then_Some

HexHammer · Post by **HexHammer** » Wed May 27, 2015 4:30 am

Leigh Roche says authenticity means expressing your real self, whether in life, art, or skateboarding.

“The only real failure in life is not to be true to the best one knows”
– Buddha

Both are complete retards, aslo the usual low standard of the magazine.

Usually the true self can be very repulsive, therefore it's good to have moral standards to live up to. Should blotters and other sex freaks live out their true self? ..should child molesters have free reign? OFCAUSE NOT!!!!!

You are all a bunch of fucking retards!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SiobhanL · Post by **SiobhanL** » Thu May 28, 2015 7:54 am

Hex, if this magazine is, as you say, of such a low standard, why then do you continue to a) read the articles in said magazine and b) feel the need to so rudely criticise the articles and its readers? You sure do spend an awful lot of time posting remarks that are unnecessarily cruel and contemptuous. Everyone is of course entitled to their opinion, and you clearly have many interesting opinions, but there is no need to be rude and excessive when trying to express yourself. You seem to spend an inordinate amount of time on this site, which makes me think you probably don't have much else to do in your life, other than trying to discredit many decent authors and especially their readers. Feel free to argue and disagree with me, although I might not be back on the forum for a while since I have other things to do...

Cheers.

marjoram_blues · Post by **marjoram_blues** » Fri May 29, 2015 8:34 am

Author: Authenticity is about using a form of expression that comes from within, not just appropriating someone else’s form of expression. Lance Mountain, skateboarding legend, cuts right to the heart of it: “Skateboarding doesn’t make you a skateboarder: not being able to stop skateboarding makes you a skateboarder.”

Talk about 'keeping it real'

Any skateboarder that skateboards is a genuine skateboarder; whether or not the act also involves impressing others/being a 'poseur'.
Not being able to stop skateboarding is being really compulsive; and you can be just as much a 'poseur' as the next guy.
Both are self-expressive.

marjoram_blues · Post by **marjoram_blues** » Fri May 29, 2015 8:54 am

HexHammer wrote:
Leigh Roche says authenticity means expressing your real self, whether in life, art, or skateboarding.

“The only real failure in life is not to be true to the best one knows”
– Buddha
Both are complete retards, aslo the usual low standard of the magazine.

Usually the true self can be very repulsive, therefore it's good to have moral standards to live up to. Should blotters and other sex freaks live out their true self? ..should child molesters have free reign? OFCAUSE NOT!!!!!

You are all a bunch of fucking retards!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HH - Nobody is saying that sex freaks should live out their true selves.
However, it could be argued that their acts are 'authentic'. So, a serial killer is 'genuinely' a serial killer, while a 'copy-cat killer' is not the genuine article - but still very 'real' in another sense.

[ Why do you insist on decrying the magazine and calling people 'retards'?
The magazine does its job, of exploring themes and ideas. Some of the articles can be, and are, heavily criticised. Others can start off a thought process some people might never have gone on...
I think Rick must be grateful to you for genuinely being a main starter of article discussion

]

HexHammer · Post by **HexHammer** » Fri May 29, 2015 12:14 pm

marjoram_blues wrote:[ Why do you insist on decrying the magazine and calling people 'retards'?

If you one day get a million dollar job, you would understand that you can't waste your time doing silly things that leads to nothing, If you have 100 or in the 1000 of employees, it's really a huge grind of money that you waste, having retards asking sub basic questions, and even asking the same utterly stupid questions over and over.

In this philosophy forum, you are deluded by the idea that you "might" discover something important, or just feel "philosophical" by talking about "philosophical" matters, but it's an illusion that you delude yourself with, it's only cozy chat that leads no where, and this site like so many others only waste bandwidth on this uselessness.

If you actually had an ounce of critical sense, you'll see this magazine only like 1:300 article would post something relevant, it's always half assed articles with no value at all. If I read any given science magazine they ALWAYS bring up something informative and relevant.

RickLewis · Post by **RickLewis** » Fri May 29, 2015 11:36 pm

marjoram_blues wrote: [ Why do you insist on decrying the magazine and calling people 'retards'?
The magazine does its job, of exploring themes and ideas. Some of the articles can be, and are, heavily criticised. Others can start off a thought process some people might never have gone on...
I think Rick must be grateful to you for genuinely being a main starter of article discussion ]

Yes! To be honest with you, HexHammer is actually my sock puppet. I thought that if I created a persona of somebody who goes round criticising articles in a vehement but pretty much mindless way, then that might provoke other people to leap in with some actual reasoned arguments for and against. Sometimes this worked, but recently people have pretty much started ignoring HexHammer, which I suppose is understandable. Therefore I've made her comments more and more extreme lately in an attempt to provoke a reaction from other forum users. Generally speaking, this hasn't worked. I suppose people simply don't find "HexHammer" believable. Maybe I'll close her down and create a new persona instead. But congratulations, I was beginning to think that nobody would spot what was going on.

Wyman · Post by **Wyman** » Fri May 29, 2015 11:53 pm

RickLewis wrote:
marjoram_blues wrote: [ Why do you insist on decrying the magazine and calling people 'retards'?
The magazine does its job, of exploring themes and ideas. Some of the articles can be, and are, heavily criticised. Others can start off a thought process some people might never have gone on...
I think Rick must be grateful to you for genuinely being a main starter of article discussion ]
Yes! To be honest with you, HexHammer is actually my sock puppet. I thought that if I created a persona of somebody who goes round criticising articles in a vehement but pretty much mindless way, then that might provoke other people to leap in with some actual reasoned arguments for and against. Sometimes this worked, but recently people have pretty much started ignoring HexHammer, which I suppose is understandable. Therefore I've made her comments more and more extreme lately in an attempt to provoke a reaction from other forum users. Generally speaking, this hasn't worked. I suppose people simply don't find "HexHammer" believable. Maybe I'll close her down and create a new persona instead. But congratulations, I was beginning to think that nobody would spot what was going on.

If you posted 1648 (at last count) fake posts as a crazy Danish IT retiree then HexHammer is who we always thought him to be - an unhinged troll with way too much time on his hands!

marjoram_blues · Post by **marjoram_blues** » Sat May 30, 2015 12:18 am

Wyman wrote:
RickLewis wrote:
marjoram_blues wrote: [ Why do you insist on decrying the magazine and calling people 'retards'?
The magazine does its job, of exploring themes and ideas. Some of the articles can be, and are, heavily criticised. Others can start off a thought process some people might never have gone on...
I think Rick must be grateful to you for genuinely being a main starter of article discussion ]
Yes! To be honest with you, HexHammer is actually my sock puppet. I thought that if I created a persona of somebody who goes round criticising articles in a vehement but pretty much mindless way, then that might provoke other people to leap in with some actual reasoned arguments for and against. Sometimes this worked, but recently people have pretty much started ignoring HexHammer, which I suppose is understandable. Therefore I've made her comments more and more extreme lately in an attempt to provoke a reaction from other forum users. Generally speaking, this hasn't worked. I suppose people simply don't find "HexHammer" believable. Maybe I'll close her down and create a new persona instead. But congratulations, I was beginning to think that nobody would spot what was going on.
If you posted 1648 (at last count) fake posts as a crazy Danish IT retiree then HexHammer is who we always thought him to be - an unhinged troll with way too much time on his hands!

HexHammer · Post by **HexHammer** » Sat May 30, 2015 1:26 am

RickLewis wrote:
marjoram_blues wrote: [ Why do you insist on decrying the magazine and calling people 'retards'?
The magazine does its job, of exploring themes and ideas. Some of the articles can be, and are, heavily criticised. Others can start off a thought process some people might never have gone on...
I think Rick must be grateful to you for genuinely being a main starter of article discussion ]
Yes! To be honest with you, HexHammer is actually my sock puppet. I thought that if I created a persona of somebody who goes round criticising articles in a vehement but pretty much mindless way, then that might provoke other people to leap in with some actual reasoned arguments for and against. Sometimes this worked, but recently people have pretty much started ignoring HexHammer, which I suppose is understandable. Therefore I've made her comments more and more extreme lately in an attempt to provoke a reaction from other forum users. Generally speaking, this hasn't worked. I suppose people simply don't find "HexHammer" believable. Maybe I'll close her down and create a new persona instead. But congratulations, I was beginning to think that nobody would spot what was going on.

OM*G!!!
1) you lack historical knowledge, tho my name is very unusal and require very specific knowledge.

2) as usual you have no idea what ou are talking about.

3) ty for trolling.

4) you should keep quiet ..and stop embarrassing yourself. You clearly don't comprehend my advice I've been giving freely for years, because you don't comprehend them.

5) follow my advice and make the magazine relevant.

RickLewis · Post by **RickLewis** » Sat May 30, 2015 8:48 am

Wyman wrote: If you posted 1648 (at last count) fake posts as a crazy Danish IT retiree then HexHammer is who we always thought him to be - an unhinged troll with way too much time on his hands!

Well, you got me there.

HexHammer · Post by **HexHammer** » Sat May 30, 2015 9:56 am

Wyman wrote:If you posted 1648 (at last count) fake posts as a crazy Danish IT retiree then HexHammer is who we always thought him to be - an unhinged troll with way too much time on his hands!

I'm not an IT guy, quite the contrary.

SiobhanL · Post by **SiobhanL** » Sat May 30, 2015 12:59 pm

RickLewis wrote:
marjoram_blues wrote: [ Why do you insist on decrying the magazine and calling people 'retards'?
The magazine does its job, of exploring themes and ideas. Some of the articles can be, and are, heavily criticised. Others can start off a thought process some people might never have gone on...
I think Rick must be grateful to you for genuinely being a main starter of article discussion ]
Yes! To be honest with you, HexHammer is actually my sock puppet. I thought that if I created a persona of somebody who goes round criticising articles in a vehement but pretty much mindless way, then that might provoke other people to leap in with some actual reasoned arguments for and against. Sometimes this worked, but recently people have pretty much started ignoring HexHammer, which I suppose is understandable. Therefore I've made her comments more and more extreme lately in an attempt to provoke a reaction from other forum users. Generally speaking, this hasn't worked. I suppose people simply don't find "HexHammer" believable. Maybe I'll close her down and create a new persona instead. But congratulations, I was beginning to think that nobody would spot what was going on.

Really? I am so gullible! I was so taken aback by some of those posts and didn't second guess them for a second

. I must be such a pessimist to think that there would actually be someone who would spend all that time posting such extreme things (and yes, I did notice that Hex's comments were getting more aggressive). In any case, I'm kind of relieved to find out that Hex doesn't exist (on this forum, at least)

. Although his/her presence did make me think a lot about arguments around free speech, especially in philosophy debates, and the whole 'tolerant of intolerance' concept...so well done there! You certainly got me thinking.

HexHammer · Post by **HexHammer** » Sat May 30, 2015 1:27 pm

SiobhanL wrote:Really? I am so gullible! I was so taken aback by some of those posts and didn't second guess them for a second . I must be such a pessimist to think that there would actually be someone who would spend all that time posting such extreme things (and yes, I did notice that Hex's comments were getting more aggressive). In any case, I'm kind of relieved to find out that Hex doesn't exist (on this forum, at least) . Although his/her presence did make me think a lot about arguments around free speech, especially in philosophy debates, and the whole 'tolerant of intolerance' concept...so well done there! You certainly got me thinking.

You might note that I've heavily criticized RickLewis's magazine for being tragically low quality, and you can evidently observe in this thread that his debating skills are equally tragically low, when he has to resort to blatant lies and ridicule.

Ginkgo · Post by **Ginkgo** » Sat May 30, 2015 1:35 pm

HexHammer wrote:
SiobhanL wrote:Really? I am so gullible! I was so taken aback by some of those posts and didn't second guess them for a second . I must be such a pessimist to think that there would actually be someone who would spend all that time posting such extreme things (and yes, I did notice that Hex's comments were getting more aggressive). In any case, I'm kind of relieved to find out that Hex doesn't exist (on this forum, at least) . Although his/her presence did make me think a lot about arguments around free speech, especially in philosophy debates, and the whole 'tolerant of intolerance' concept...so well done there! You certainly got me thinking.
You might note that I've heavily criticized RickLewis's magazine for being tragically low quality, and you can evidently observe in this thread that his debating skills are equally tragically low, when he has to resort to blatant lies and ridicule.

Hex, it is a parody.

Philosophy Now Forum