Philosophy Now Forum

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 2:55 pm

peacegirl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 2:22 pm

seeds wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 12:35 pm
Uh-oh, peacegirl, now you've done it,...

...the forum's shining exemplar of the Dunning-Kruger Effect (of which there are many on this site) is going to give you a piece of his mind.

Just try to remember the old adage...

"...Never mud-wrestle with a pig. You'll both get dirty, but the pig will enjoy it!..."
_______

Thus is not the Dunbung-Kruger effect which is an easy cop out. This author knew what he was talking about but if you are already sure he didn’t, how in the world can his discovery be made known if this group is supposed to be the cream of the crop? 🫩

You really are a huge cretin. Seeds was on your side there and he was accusing Philpot98989898 of Dunning-Kruger. There's something seriously wrong with your reading and comprehension skills.

Look, when you've been beaten down as I have been with so many false accusations, my first response would be defensive. That shouldn't be a surprise. So, I made a mistake as to whom this accusation was directed. Sorry, Seeds. Thanks for pointing out my error FlashDangerpants.

peacegirl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 5:33 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 4:32 pm

peacegirl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 4:21 pm

Fiary and this Phil guy? They weren't curious at all. They are on the attack. I did not ask you to read my bumps, okay? Fairy called me a tyrant. No, I don't play these games of aggression and one-upmanship. It's a power grab to keep one's power in the group. It's a built-in structure in these types of forums that makes it hard to penetrate. I do understand why people are so skeptical. Most people who make extraordinary claims are proven wrong. But that doesn't make him wrong. You have to explore every claim carefully, not make assumptions, which you have done based on flimsy reasons.

It wasn’t personal, tyranny is the energy of this entire thread, it’s disgusting, but if the costume fits, then wear it. It’s your role you’re playing in your drama you’re creating for yourself, the one you deny playing.

Oh, but it was personal or you wouldn't have used that referent. Why the game playing, Fairy? You can make up your own story about me, but the costume doesn't fit.

Knowledge has no copyright.The thief left it behind; the moon at my window.

peacegirl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 5:40 pm

Look, when you've been beaten down as I have been with so many false accusations, my first response would be defensive. That shouldn't be a surprise.

To the tune of row, row, row your boat.

For the uninitiated fuck, fuck, fuck a duck, screw a kangaroo, gang bang, orangutang, orgy at the zoo.

Fairy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 5:58 pm

peacegirl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 5:33 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 4:32 pm

It wasn’t personal, tyranny is the energy of this entire thread, it’s disgusting, but if the costume fits, then wear it. It’s your role you’re playing in your drama you’re creating for yourself, the one you deny playing.

Oh, but it was personal or you wouldn't have used that referent. Why the game playing, Fairy? You can make up your own story about me, but the costume doesn't fit.

Knowledge has no copyright.The thief left it behind; the moon at my window.

No one said knowledge has a copyright. But books do. What are you accusing me of now?

Fairy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 6:03 pm

peacegirl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 5:40 pm

Look, when you've been beaten down as I have been with so many false accusations, my first response would be defensive. That shouldn't be a surprise.

To the tune of row, row, row your boat.

For the uninitiated fuck, fuck, fuck a duck, screw a kangaroo, gang bang, orangutang, orgy at the zoo.

Let it go Fairy. You're just here to mock. This thread is not for you.

peacegirl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 6:13 pm

Let it go Fairy. You're just here to mock. This thread is not for you.

I agree it’s time to let go. Stop flogging dead horses.

Quit complaining. You can complain because roses have thorns, or you can rejoice because thorns have roses.

This beauty is not for sale.

Fairy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 6:30 pm

peacegirl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 6:13 pm

Let it go Fairy. You're just here to mock. This thread is not for you.

I agree it’s time to let go. Stop flogging dead horses.

This horse is far from dead.

Fairy wrote:Quit complaining. You can complain because roses have thorns, or you can rejoice because thorns have roses.

This beauty is not for sale.

Neither beauty nor the truth is for sale, but books are, and there is nothing unethical about compiling this author's writings to aid in understanding. You, like the others here, have already concluded this claim can't be true, hence your mockery. I've done all I can do to create interest, and if it's not there, so be it. But I will continue to post if I find something of interest, whether it applies directly to this thread or not. You may think I'm complaining or whining, but I'm only defending myself against false accusations. That's only fair. I'm not going to leave this thread as if I lost. I gave the first three chapters for people to read many times, but not one person has asked one pertinent question, not one. This link is not for you, Fairy, so you don't have to respond. This is to give anybody new to this thread, who may want to learn what this book is about, an opportunity to do so.

https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:s ... c6fd4770d8

This video is an example of what people will and can do to make money at the expense of others. This is exactly the kind of thing that is prevented in the new world.

https://youtu.be/qPqS9OMKTTM?si=im9d42ZvMsiUply8

peacegirl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 5:40 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 2:55 pm

peacegirl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 2:22 pm

Thus is not the Dunbung-Kruger effect which is an easy cop out. This author knew what he was talking about but if you are already sure he didn’t, how in the world can his discovery be made known if this group is supposed to be the cream of the crop? 🫩

You really are a huge cretin. Seeds was on your side there and he was accusing Philpot98989898 of Dunning-Kruger. There's something seriously wrong with your reading and comprehension skills.

Look, when you've been beaten down as I have been with so many false accusations, my first response would be defensive. That shouldn't be a surprise. So, I made a mistake as to whom this accusation was directed. Sorry, Seeds. Thanks for pointing out my error FlashDangerpants.

So rather than learn from your own mistake you went straight to self-pity like you always do. That's not a false accusation by the way, so don't bother whining about it.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Dec 05, 2025 1:46 pm

peacegirl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 5:40 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 2:55 pm
You really are a huge cretin. Seeds was on your side there and he was accusing Philpot98989898 of Dunning-Kruger. There's something seriously wrong with your reading and comprehension skills.

Look, when you've been beaten down as I have been with so many false accusations, my first response would be defensive. That shouldn't be a surprise. So, I made a mistake as to whom this accusation was directed. Sorry, Seeds. Thanks for pointing out my error FlashDangerpants.

So rather than learn from your own mistake you went straight to self-pity like you always do. That's not a false accusation by the way, so don't bother whining about it.

What mistake did I make FlashDangerpants that would nullify this major discovery? Pray, tell? BTW, it IS a false accusation if you are accusing me of a mistake that is not true or does not falsify the soundness of his demonstration.

Nobody cares about your book. You lost the last flicker of interest about 50 pages ago. You are necromantically reanimating this deceased thread with your magical self-pity. You should let it rest in peace you grave robber.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Dec 05, 2025 1:55 pm Nobody cares about your book. You lost the last flicker of interest about 50 pages ago. You are necromantically reanimating this deceased thread with your magical self-pity. You should let it rest in peace you grave robber.

If nobody cares, then this thread will go by the wayside. It's as simple as that. I am not begging anyone to read or even click on this thread. You actually made me perplexed about the complete disconnect when you said, "rest in peace you grave robber." This is really funny because I am not robbing anyone of anything. I will be applauded one day, even if I'm dead, for my perseverance. But I have no free will, so I could never take credit for what I could never not do to help pass this discovery along. You have no idea what this knowledge is about, let alone my role as his protégée, which I did not ask for. You are so angry with me, and I have no idea why. And please don't give the lame excuse that I'm a liar because I'm not.

I was just going over his earlier book. People may like it better because it's a dialogue between two friends and brings up many questions that all of you may have if you ever decide to read it.

A New Earth

CHAPTER 2 — THE GREAT IMPASSE OF BLAME
AND PUNISHMENT

That evening, Jim could not sleep for the longest time. He kept reflecting on the conversation with Larry, and the more he dwelt on this, the more amazed he became with the realization that although 98% of the world believed in freedom of the will, man’s will was actually not free at all. He then began to understand how this belief, or any fallacious conception that had gotten a dogmatic hold on the mind, could very easily prevent the discovery of knowledge hidden behind it, because no one takes thorough pains to look. “But that in itself could not be accurate because Spinoza and many other philosophers also knew that man’s will is not free,” he thought to himself, “and yet they didn’t make any discoveries. I also know the same thing, now, yet I wouldn’t know what to do with this knowledge if my life depended on it. I suppose that these men, with all their potential as deep thinkers, just didn’t think deeply enough, that is, if Larry really and truly has made a sensational discovery. Somehow or other, despite his apparent seriousness, I believe he’s pulling my leg. Well, tomorrow I’ll know the truth once and for all,” and Jim finally dozed off with this on his mind.

The next day, they met at their usual place, and Larry could see that Jim was all excited to learn what it meant that man’s will is not free.

“Well, Buddy Boy, did you have a good night’s rest?”

“Are you kidding? Say, Larry, will you please not beat around the bush any further, and kindly tell me what your discovery is?”

“Don’t get impatient, Jim. There are certain things that must be understood first in order to comprehend this discovery, and one of them is the realization that all my reasoning of yesterday could never, in itself, dethrone the belief in free will, simply because there is a force that compels the belief to remain in existence. Durant, all theologians and other philosophers, and all forms of government would never be shaken by my demonstration thus far.”

“I can understand why religion would want free will to remain in existence, because otherwise God would have to be blamed for the evil in the world.”

“Let us be more accurate with our words, Jim, and say that religion thinks God would have to be blamed if man’s will is not free. But what about the philosophers and governments who are compelled to reason that man’s will is free in spite of everything?”

“I give up, Larry. What is responsible for the ‘almost eternal recurrence of philosophies of free will?’ And that was from memory, too.”

“The responsibility lies with the fact that the corollary thrown up by the knowledge that man’s will is not free presents an impasse which no thinker, including the deepest of all time, has been able to understand and overcome. The belief in free will came into existence out of necessity because it was mathematically impossible for man to solve his problems without blame and punishment, which required the justification of this belief in order for him to absolve his conscience. But once it is established, beyond a shadow of doubt, that will is not free because life is constantly moving in the direction of satisfaction, completely beyond control (this is an invariable law which cannot be denied or disproved by anyone anywhere), compelling man to always prefer of available alternatives that which he, not someone else, considers more satisfying for himself, it becomes absolutely impossible to hold him responsible for anything he does, regardless of what.”

“You must be joking, Larry. You know it’s impossible not to blame and punish people for committing murder, rape, stealing, the wholesale slaughter of 6 million Jews, etc. Does this mean that we are supposed to condone these evils, and wouldn’t man become even less responsible if there were no laws and threats of punishment to control his nature? Doesn’t our history show that if man wants something badly enough, he will go to any lengths to satisfy his desire, even commit murder and pounce down on other nations with talons or tons of steel? What is it that prevents the poor from walking into stores and taking what they need and want, if not the fear of punishment? Do you fully realize that what you just said strikes at the very heart of all civilization, the teaching of what is right and wrong, good and evil, for how is it humanly possible not to blame a person for hurting others? No, Larry, there is no way out of this, and unless you perform some kind of miracle, I’m afraid that I, too, will have to continue believing in freedom of the will, that is, unless this corollary is untrue.”

“Well, Jim, is it any wonder free will has never been dethroned when the solution has been beyond the capacity of every thinker thus far? Can’t you see when a thinker is faced with this problem, he is given two alternatives: either admit his ignorance or pretend to knowledge he doesn’t possess?
Do you know the answer, Jim?”

“I certainly do not.”

“Then why do you pretend to knowledge you do not possess?”

“I didn’t say I knew the answer.”

“But your whole attitude clearly indicates that you believe it is mathematically impossible to solve this problem, which means that you are pretending to possess the knowledge that I don’t have the solution. What difference does it make whether you say something can be done or it can’t be done; don’t you clearly indicate that you possess the knowledge to know this?”

“You’re right, Larry. I did imply that I know this cannot be accomplished, but I take back what I said on the grounds that I do not have the knowledge of your knowledge.”

“Which is nothing but the truth, right, Jim?”

“Don’t rub it in, Larry. I admitted I was wrong.”

“Well, then, let’s continue. You see, Jim, I fully realize that my explanation thus far is inadequate, but you jumped to a conclusion right away without even letting me clarify the corollary. I know that your knowledge that man’s will is not free will not prevent you from continuing to blame and punish despite this fact, if it gives you greater satisfaction under the conditions that demand such a reaction. I repeat, I know that this is certainly not a sufficient explanation as to why there should be no blame and punishment, especially when these corrective measures were definitely the lesser of two evils as a solution to the many problems that always confronted mankind.”

“I apologize again, Larry. I realize how wrong I was to jump to the conclusion that you were not aware of the inadequate explanation.”

“Thank you, Jim. If it had not been for the development of laws and a penal code, for the constant teaching of right and wrong, civilization could never have reached the outposts of this New Earth. Yet despite the fact that we have been brought up to believe that man can be blamed and punished for doing what he was taught is wrong and evil (this is the cornerstone of all law and order up to now), the force that makes us move in the direction of satisfaction (or this invariable law of God) states explicitly, as we perceive these mathematical relations, that since man’s will is not free — Thou Shall Not Blame anything he does.”

“There you go again, Larry, and I can’t help myself because that statement rubs me the wrong way since I can think of many situations where blame and punishment are absolutely necessary as the lesser of two evils. However, it’s true that I don’t know what you have up your sleeve, but if the average person is anything like me, you would have one heck of a time getting him to listen to what appears to be plain nonsense.”

“How well I know this. I tried to engage a rabbi once in a discussion about free will, and when he said: ‘If man’s will is not free, then you can’t blame or punish anything he does, is that correct?’ And when I answered, ‘Right,’ he actually got up and walked out of the room. Now you tell me, Jim, how is it possible to explain the solution when nobody wishes to listen because they think they know there isn’t any?”

“I will listen, Larry, and the whole world will listen if you really can put an end to all war, crime, and evil in general.”

“That’s just it, Jim; it requires the entire world to listen and understand so that this evil in our lives can be done away with. Do you still have that book, Mansions of Philosophy, in your car?”

“Yes I do.”

“Will you get it, please? I’d like to read you just part of a sentence to show that Durant is no different than the rabbi, and that his mind is also closed to what to him is already a foregone conclusion.

Here it is: ‘Let the determinist honestly envisage the implications of his philosophy,’ which demonstrates that all reasoning in favor of free will is the result of inferences derived from the inability of logic to accept the implications. Right at this point, Jim, lies the crux of a problem so difficult of solution that it has kept free will in power as far back as we can remember, for how was it humanly possible for government, religion, education, even philosophy and psychology to strike at the very heart of all civilization, or even look in that direction for an answer.”

“That’s exactly what I have been saying, Larry. It is impossible for anyone to think otherwise.”

“Yes, Jim, but that doesn’t imply there isn’t any solution because we are faced with what appears to be an impossible impasse. There is even another implication that will only complicate matters still more; do you know what it is?”

“I think I do, but I didn’t want to mention it for fear I would only make a fool of myself.”

“Actually, you wouldn’t be making a fool of yourself, Jim, that is, assuming that you are thinking what I’m thinking, because even Durant thought the same thing. Well, what are you thinking?”

“It occurred to me that if man knew his will is not free, he would use this knowledge to excuse himself by saying, ‘I could not help myself because my will is not free.’”

“That’s right, Jim. That is the other implication. Durant expresses it on page 87 by saying — here it is — ‘if he committed crimes, society was to blame; if he was a fool, it was the fault of the machine, which had slipped a cog in generating him.’ In other words, he assumes that this kind of knowledge allows a person to shift his responsibility for what he does. One individual blames society for his crimes, as he rots in prison, while another blames the mechanical structure of the machine, which slipped a cog and made him into a fool. However, you will soon see that not only Durant but all mankind are very much confused by the misleading logic of words that do not describe reality for what it is. It is important to remember, Jim, that just as long as it is believed man’s will is free, that’s just how long it is possible to blame and punish as a solution to our problems. Nobody would think of blaming a baby for being born, but shortly thereafter, the parents and society will blame and punish this child for not acting as he should. Society judges what is right and wrong and then holds man responsible to these standards. In other words, just as long as man has this safety valve of blame and punishment, he is permitted to strike the first blow of injustice with impunity.”

“What do you mean, Larry?”

“Every standard of right blames someone in advance for doing what is judged wrong; but supposing this yardstick itself is wrong? Then the person who judges the conduct of another according to this measurement is permitted to strike the first blow of injustice with impunity, while being permitted to blame any retaliation. A perfect example is when parents tell a child that it is wrong to do certain things. The child, desiring to do what they said not to do, is blamed and punished, while they justify their own conduct by saying his actions were wrong since he didn’t have to do what he did because man has free will to act otherwise. Are you beginning to see what takes place in our present world, Jim?”

“But Larry, isn’t it obvious that parents have to teach a child something, and regardless of what this is, it must be a standard of some sort? Supposing your son, while visiting some friends, was to jump on their brand new sofa with his shoes and use it as a trampoline, wouldn’t you blame and punish him for embarrassing you and hurting their furniture in this manner? And supposing he was in the habit of doing this, wouldn’t you warn him in advance that if he does it he will be severely punished? Isn’t it obvious that we must have standards of some kind so that a child can be taught the difference between right and wrong, good and evil? Supposing all individuals in a society are told that it is wrong to steal (I hope you’re not going to tell me this is right), yet certain ones deliberately ignore this and take what belongs to someone else, isn’t it obvious that we must blame them because they were warned in advance that should they steal, they will be punished? Are you trying to tell me there is no such thing as a standard of right and wrong?”

“Bravo, Jim! You’re not so bad yourself. However, my fine feathered friend, if you know the difference between right and wrong, and you also know that a person cannot be blamed or punished for what he does because his will is not free, isn’t it obvious that we are given only one alternative, and that is to prevent the desire to do what is wrong from arising, which then makes it unnecessary to blame and punish? In other words, just as long as man has this safety valve of blame and punishment, he doesn’t have to find the solution to this doing of what is wrong. Parents can be very careless and excuse themselves by blaming their children, as governments can be careless and excuse themselves by blaming their citizens, while plunging the entire world into war.”

“But supposing they are not careless, and they are doing everything in their power to prevent children and citizens from doing what is wrong so that blame and punishment are not necessary, what then, are we not supposed to blame and punish them for our own protection when they do something wrong?”

“That’s just the point, Jim. Once it is discovered, through mathematical reasoning, that man’s will is definitely not free, then it becomes impossible to blame an individual for what he is compelled to do; consequently, it is imperative that we discover a way to prevent his desire to do the very things for which blame and punishment were previously necessary as the lesser of two evils.”

“In other words, Larry, your discovery, whatever it is, will prevent man from desiring to commit murder, rape, start a war, annihilate 6 million people, etc., is that right?”

“That’s correct, Jim. The corollary Thou Shall Not Blame doesn’t mean, when it is extended, that we will be forced to condone what hurts us, but only that we will be shown how to prevent these evils by mathematically extending the corollary.”

peacegirl wrote: ↑Fri Dec 05, 2025 4:40 pm I was just going over his earlier book.

A New Earth

https://dauntbooks.co.uk/shop/books/new-earth/