The Rhetoric of Philosophy Now's Forum

[Iwannaplato]

First, reading over this thread I am now aware, oh painfully so, how fucked-up I am. That’s it, I am going into therapy.

Second, Age has achieved something eXtRaOrDinaRy. Aside from one solitary ‘f’ in upper case the post looked like any other. I laughed and felt elated — celebratory. But then something strange happened. The bright humor drained out of me completely.

I wept.

[So many strange things going on in the world. I’ve given up trying to interpret ‘rationally’]

I no longer read good, old Age. I saw that he had responded. In case he or anyone thought so, number 37 is NOT aimed at Age who has a much more complicated set of rhetorical flourishes and as far as I know does not use number 37, though it might be hard to tell.

I actually quite like the fact that Age is so unique. Diverse ecosystems seem healthier to me and more interesting. I'm afraid I had to leave off interacting with him for other reasons. I don't know if that is why you felt sad. But I would feel sad if Age gave up his style, even if it led to greater clarity. Though I think the style can be kept yet have greater clarity, that's not really my business, certainly not anymore. I wish in some abstract sense he would change in other ways, but neither is that really my business, certainly not anymore.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Everything EVERYTHING is aimed at ME!

I’m trying real hard to improve. But, well, progress is slow.

(The reference is Jules to Ringo in Pulp Fiction.)

[Alexis Jacobi]

don't know if that is why you felt sad.

Adapting Jeremiah to my (questionable) purpose:

Who can understand the human heart?

[Wizard22]

But putting the 'faulty' word above here in single quotations, for the reason you provided, is completely redundant, especially considering the Fact that you had already used the 'can' word.

The 'can' word worked perfectly to explain that vagueness could lead 'you', people, to make faulty assumptions as well as accurate ones.

First, reading over this thread I am now aware, oh painfully so, how fucked-up I am. That’s it, I am going into therapy.

Second, Age has achieved something eXtRaOrDinaRy. Aside from one solitary ‘f’ in upper case the post looked like any other. I laughed and felt elated — celebratory. But then something strange happened. The bright humor drained out of me completely.

I wept.

[So many strange things going on in the world. I’ve given up trying to interpret ‘rationally’]

One of us!

One of us!

One of us!

One of us!

[Age]

37) Use citation or quotation marks on a key term. Not as an insult - as in Your 'argument' does not make any sense. At times just make sure one of the key words in your post is in citation marks. Do NOT explain this. Later if someone points out problems in your deduction, for example, you can just say that actually you meant something else when you used that term. It's hedging your bets. Also, since it is unclear what you mean with the citation marks, the vagueness can lead to people making 'faulty' assumptions. You can lord this over them. I put 'faulty' in citation marks, since of course their assumptions may well have been quite accurate interpretations of the sentence. That's the beauty of the unexplained citation marks: you got options.

But putting the 'faulty' word above here in single quotations, for the reason you provided, is completely redundant, especially considering the Fact that you had already used the 'can' word.

The 'can' word worked perfectly to explain that vagueness could lead 'you', people, to make faulty assumptions as well as accurate ones.

First, reading over this thread I am now aware, oh painfully so, how fucked-up I am. That’s it, I am going into therapy.

Okay, that seems fair enough.

Second, Age has achieved something eXtRaOrDinaRy. Aside from one solitary ‘f’ in upper case the post looked like any other.

I CERTAINLY HOPE that MY post did NOT look like ANY OTHER post.

I laughed and felt elated — celebratory.

ABOUT 'what', EXACTLY?

Surely you do NOT laugh and feel elated, and celebratory, when you see some 'thing' that looked like ANY OTHER? Or am I COMPLETELY and UTTERLY Wrong here, and 'this' was EXACTLY why you laughed and why you felt elated, and celebratory?

But then something strange happened. The bright humor drained out of me completely.

WHY, EXACTLY?

I wept.

AGAIN, WHY?

[So many strange things going on in the world. I’ve given up trying to interpret ‘rationally’]

Did you even bring 'rationally' here, with you in the beginning?

If yes, then are you ABSOLUTELY SURE of this?

[Iwannaplato]

don't know if that is why you felt sad.

Adapting Jeremiah to my (questionable) purpose:

Who can understand the human heart?

He's weeping because, at least in part, he understood. So, there's one.

[Age]

First, reading over this thread I am now aware, oh painfully so, how fucked-up I am. That’s it, I am going into therapy.

Second, Age has achieved something eXtRaOrDinaRy. Aside from one solitary ‘f’ in upper case the post looked like any other. I laughed and felt elated — celebratory. But then something strange happened. The bright humor drained out of me completely.

I wept.

[So many strange things going on in the world. I’ve given up trying to interpret ‘rationally’]

I no longer read good, old Age. I saw that he had responded. In case he or anyone thought so, number 37 is NOT aimed at Age who has a much more complicated set of rhetorical flourishes and as far as I know does not use number 37, though it might be hard to tell.

Here is probably one of the GREATEST examples of 'confirmation bias' CAUSED by BEING COMPLETELY BLIND, AND, of BEING COMPLETELY BLIND BECAUSE of one's OWN 'confirmation bias'.

IF this one HAD READ what I WROTE, THEN they could have SEEN that 'it' had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AT ALL to do with ANY 'thing' being aimed AT me, NOT with ANY 'thing' to do with 'your' number 37.

I actually quite like the fact that Age is so unique.

YET for reason/s ONLY 'you' KNOW 'you' have DECIDED to, supposedly, NOT read ANY 'thing' I WRITE, forever more.

Diverse ecosystems seem healthier to me and more interesting.

YET you have DECIDED to ONLY look at SOME 'things' and NOT OTHER 'things'.

I'm afraid I had to leave off interacting with him for other reasons.

And, if you DID READ what I WRITE here, then you COULD SEE that I AM ASKING, What were those 'other reasons', EXACTLY?

I don't know if that is why you felt sad. But I would feel sad if Age gave up his style, even if it led to greater clarity. Though I think the style can be kept yet have greater clarity, that's not really my business, certainly not anymore.

I forgot how many times I have EXPLAINED HOW, and WHY, to GAIN CLARITY. I have ALREADY EXPLAINED what the BEST WAY IS to OBTAIN ABSOLUTE CLARITY. And, I have ALREADY EXPLAINED WHY I WRITE the WAY I DO, and WHY I JUST WAIT, PATIENTLY, for THOSE who are TRULY INTERESTED in OBTAINING and GAINING GREATER and/or ABSOLUTE CLARITY.

IF you BELIEVE that you KNOW WHERE so-called 'greater clarity' could have been EXPRESSED, then WHY did you NOT EXPRESS and EXPLAIN that 'greater clarity' "yourself"?

I wish in some abstract sense he would change in other ways, but neither is that really my business, certainly not anymore.

So, you think of BELIEVE that it is YOUR BUSINESS to EXPRESS that you WISH I WOULD CHANGE, but suggest NOTHING AT ALL.

I, by the way, WISH 'you', "iwannoplato", WOULD ALSO CHANGE. But, considering you have ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST AT ALL here, and 'you' will, supposedly, NEVER EVER READ 'this', there is NO REASON for me to INFORM 'you' of HOW.

[Age]

Everything EVERYTHING is aimed at ME!

I’m trying real hard to improve. But, well, progress is slow.

(The reference is Jules to Ringo in Pulp Fiction.)

I suggest STOP 'trying' and START 'just doing'.

[Agent Smith]

When I look at her, I feel ...

I know, I know ...

So, you've felt it!?

Yeah! I'm used to it! I saw a ...

You mean ...

Yep ... doesn't rhyme with boat now does it?

Hahaha! Nope! I see ... things

10 mg of Haloperidol will fix that!

Oh? So there's a cure?

This is 2023, not black bile, yellow bile BC!!

[Alexis Jacobi]

I suggest STOP 'trying' and START 'just doing'.

Yes YES!

[Age]

I suggest STOP 'trying' and START 'just doing'.

Yes YES!

So, WHEN will you START DOING the IMPROVING.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I suggest STOP 'trying' and START 'just doing'.

Yes YES!

So, WHEN will you START DOING the IMPROVING.

I feel your ANGST brother. I feel it.

In May Jupiter and Mercury will come within 6° of each other. Jupiter will be located in the constellation Pisces, while Mercury will be in Aries. Just think about what that means!

There’s gonna be a radical shift in how we all talk to each other. Nothing short of Rhetorical Revolution.

Iwannaplato and Flannel Jesus were the harbingers!

::: salutes & bows deeply :::

This is close upon us. And I think it’s gonna do BIG things for all of us here.

What SIGN are you BTW?

[Eodnhoj7]

Any additions?

Not yet...hmm maybe...

x) All philosophical arguments rely upon contradictions as there is a viewpoint and the opposing viewpoint; from this it may be derived that philosophy requires absurdity and from it anything goes.

This sounds like a comment on all philosophical dialogue and not a specific kind of rhetorical tool, or?

Yes and no. A tool is how to act within a specific set of circumstances and in turn the tool becomes a meta-circumstance within the circumstance. I am providing a tool by saying philosophy is just a hammer and showing the nature of this hammer. What was said is a tool within a tool. You are using rhetoric to define rhetoric.

[Age]

Yes YES!

So, WHEN will you START DOING the IMPROVING.

I feel your ANGST brother. I feel it.

In May Jupiter and Mercury will come within 6° of each other. Jupiter will be located in the constellation Pisces, while Mercury will be in Aries. Just think about what that means!

There’s gonna be a radical shift in how we all talk to each other. Nothing short of Rhetorical Revolution.

Iwannaplato and Flannel Jesus were the harbingers!

::: salutes & bows deeply :::

This is close upon us. And I think it’s gonna do BIG things for all of us here.

What SIGN are you BTW?

Did you REALLY want me to think about what 'that' means?

If yes, then what 'that' means is you have just, ONCE AGAIN' SHOWN your absolute INABILITY to just ANSWER a CLARIFYING QUESTION posed, and ASKED to you.

[Alexis Jacobi]

you have just, ONCE AGAIN' SHOWN your absolute INABILITY (dot dot dot)

My fate is uselessness. Must you rub it in?