Understanding Forum participants

[HexHammer]

Without language my logical thinking would be that of an animal:

I see a lion, therefore I run away.

I see an antilope, therefore I try to catch it.

Do you know anything about intelligences, which are independant and which works together, what do you know about neurology?

..nothing?

All you have presented are mere rethorics.

[aiddon]

Funny how the rest of us are simpletons yet you are the one a)responding to a somebody who is at best dubious, but probably a fraud and b) who
doesn't know how to spell diarrhoea.

He might be or not be what you say, but that is irrelevant to the topic.

Does dyslexia affect abstract logic in any way? ...no?

You fail in responding with an intellectual answer, instead it's a unthoughtful emotional response.

You obviously don't realise that dyslexia isn't a disorder by which you spell words incorrectly.

Why should I respond intellectually to a post that calls most people on this forum simpletons?

[aiddon]

Without language my logical thinking would be that of an animal:

I see a lion, therefore I run away.

I see an antilope, therefore I try to catch it.

Do you know anything about intelligences, which are independant and which works together, what do you know about neurology?

..nothing?

All you have presented are mere rethorics.

Jesus, can anyone spell on this thread?

[HexHammer]

You obviously don't realise that dysalexia isn't a disorder by which you spell words incorrectly.

Why should I respond intellectually to a post that calls most people on this forum simpletons?

Aha?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyslexia

Because I'm factual correct?

[duszek]

Jesus, can anyone spell on this thread?

Bill Wiltrack can.

[aiddon]

You obviously don't realise that dysalexia isn't a disorder by which you spell words incorrectly.

Why should I respond intellectually to a post that calls most people on this forum simpletons?

Aha?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyslexia

Because I'm factual correct?

Does it say it's a spelling disorder?

[HexHammer]

Because I'm factual correct?

Does it say it's a spelling disorder?

So what you are saying that you don't comprehend this simple article?

Ok let me help you a bit, you seem to need it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dyslexic_words.jpg the picture will depict a person with sever dyslexia, I however has a mild dyslexia.

[aiddon]

Because I'm factual correct?

Does it say it's a spelling disorder?

So what you are saying that you don't comprehend this simple article?

Ok let me help you a bit, you seem to need it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dyslexic_words.jpg the picture will depict a person with sever dyslexia, I however has a mild dyslexia.

Thanks, this proves my point. Dyselxia is related to the order of letters and words on a page. The example you sent me is someone who, when spelling the word "teapot", gets the p mixed up - backwards, upside down etc. So, they may write "teaqot". This is not misspelling. The post to which I was referring was a blatant misspelling of the word "diarrhoea", which was spelled "diariah". There were many other examples of bad spelling/grammar. This is just bad spelling, owing to very little time spent reading, or just, in the words of the poster himself, a "simpleton". It is not dyslexia. So, no I'm not the one who needs the help here.

[HexHammer]

Thanks, this proves my point. Dyselxia is related to the order of letters and words on a page. The example you sent me is someone who, when spelling the word "teapot", gets the p mixed up - backwards, upside down etc. So, they may write "teaqot". This is not misspelling. The post to which I was referring was a blatant misspelling of the word "diarrhoea", which was spelled "diariah". There were many other examples of bad spelling/grammar. This is just bad spelling, owing to very little time spent reading, or just, in the words of the poster himself, a "simpleton". It is not dyslexia. So, no I'm not the one who needs the help here.

It seems you try to troll me by luring me into some silly trap of yours.

You have proved nothing other than you are an emotional based whining troll.

[Skip]

Creating original ideas that advance philosophical knowledge depends on participates understanding the mental process of systematic reasoning.
I will stop and wait for replies that reveal which participants have an interest in collaborating and who feel threatened.
kelly

Well I approve of the idea, it seems that there is one against, and I'm not quite sure where Skip is on the subject. Perhaps a bit of clarification?

Didn't know a stand was required. I tried to respond to the first question posed: Why do philosophy forums not further philosophical knowledge? The rest was musing on the topic. It got some responses, anyway...

.... though I'm not sure how being so familiar with excretory functions as to spell the most difficult one ad hoc proves one an intellectual or philosopher....

....but to those who really care, I might recommend paying attention to the little wiggly red lines that appear under words with which the machine is dissatisfied. Just keep replacing letters until it goes away.

As for Kelly's proposal, it seems to me that participants on philosophy forums are forever worrying "truth", "perception" and "knowledge", without adding anything appreciable to the sum of human understanding. For a collaborative exercise, try introducing some off-beat concept like 'olfactory recall' or 'animal magnetism'. It might be more fun.

[aiddon]

Thanks, this proves my point. Dyselxia is related to the order of letters and words on a page. The example you sent me is someone who, when spelling the word "teapot", gets the p mixed up - backwards, upside down etc. So, they may write "teaqot". This is not misspelling. The post to which I was referring was a blatant misspelling of the word "diarrhoea", which was spelled "diariah". There were many other examples of bad spelling/grammar. This is just bad spelling, owing to very little time spent reading, or just, in the words of the poster himself, a "simpleton". It is not dyslexia. So, no I'm not the one who needs the help here.

It seems you try to troll me by luring me into some silly trap of yours.

You have proved nothing other than you are an emotional based whining troll.

I'm unfamiliar with the term troll, so I'll ignore it.

Let's take a step back for a moment...I intervened in this thread because an accusation was made that the majority of people on this forum are simpletons. I merely pointed out that you peppered your post with misspellings and grammatical errors. Then you accused me of mocking people with dyslexia. So, I pointed out that dyselxia is not a spelling disorder. I am a teacher of children, so I am familar with dyselxia. Now who is being the irrational one here? Take a chill, man. I ain't looking for a fight - but I take offense when I'm being called a simpleton.

[HexHammer]

I'm unfamiliar with the term troll, so I'll ignore it.

Let's take a step back for a moment...I intervened in this thread because an accusation was made that the majority of people on this forum are simpletons. I merely pointed out that you peppered your post with misspellings and grammatical errors. Then you accused me of mocking people with dyslexia. So, I pointed out that dyselxia is not a spelling disorder. I am a teacher of children, so I am familar with dyselxia. Now who is being the irrational one here? Take a chill, man. I ain't looking for a fight - but I take offense when I'm being called a simpleton.

If you don't know the term "troll" then you have live under a rock for a decade.

If you are trying to say that dyslexia only limited to reading difficulties, but magically people can spell what they can't read, correctly, then you are inventing your own reality.

Besides, just because you are teacher proves nothing, there are utterly incompetent people, who should get fired, and you seems like one of them.
You are right now just proving that you indeed are categorizing youself as a simpleton, specially when I havn't called you one.

All I did was presenting my view of the statistics, that is not calling you anything, not accusing you of anything.
You are jumping to conclusions, whcih tragicly proves you can only preform parrot speeches, not really able to comprehend the simple subject.

Maybe I missed something, where do I explicitly call "aiddon" (you) a simpleton?

[marjoramblues]

As for Kelly's proposal, it seems to me that participants on philosophy forums are forever worrying "truth", "perception" and "knowledge", without adding anything appreciable to the sum of human understanding. For a collaborative exercise, try introducing some off-beat concept like 'olfactory recall' or 'animal magnetism'. It might be more fun.

Hmmmm, quite like the sound of 'animal magnetism':
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_magnetism

Animal Magnetism and its so- called "higher" phenomena has been in fact extremely appealing both to the crowds and to many men of science. It posed in fact a threat to the rational logic attitude, and at a certain point it became a very popular practice that spread throughout almost all levels.

The key point is that in mesmerism knowledge is extracted from "intuition". Taking one of Mesmer’s examples: in a similar way as intuition guides birds toward the right path, reconnnecting to Nature and its inner perceived "flow" can bring both health, and hence the magnetic cures. This reconnection also allows the gaining of higher truths as human development lies inside man.

A not exclusive list of the mesmeric developments would mention its influence on German Romantic culture, on Naturphilosophie and the philosophies of Schelling and Schopenauer that developed the concepts of "indeterminism''

How would this work as a collaborative exercise?

[Skip]

I have no idea. Maybe like choral singing - each kind of voice (or school of philosophy) takes a distinct part and develops that line orf reasoning. I volunteer Kelly to conduct.

[Kelly]

Chuckle, I am real, not even fraudish, my middle name is Kelly (Wayne Kelly Leggette Sr.) and Project Logic, and PL 2 and 3, were real and funded with real money. Unfortunately none was paid out because no participants on the 3 threads submitted propositional sentences, or answered questions that even as a stretch could be considered useful to advance philosophical knowledge. All the participants, except one, were obviously more interested in attacking me. I even posted two links to videos, to quell the doubters, showing me in my natural environment. Nothing worked. The trolls had their way and I finally gave up and ceased posting.

Since I began to participate in Philosophy Forums, I have witnessed at least four forums that trolls, who identify themselves with Philosophy, have taken over and driven away the other participants who were seeking to have intelligent philosophical discourse. The thing is, the trolls don’t even realize what they are doing or how their behavior affects a forum so they continue until everyone else gives up and leaves. Then, there are no ideas for the trolls to discredit, to enhance their self-esteem, and they leave and the Forum closes. If one has participated on the PN Forum and long as I have (on and off, under different user names, since the late 90s), it is obvious the traffic is dropping in the last twelve months.

I realize the characteristic that most symbolizes Philosophy is a diversity of ideas about the nature of the same things. In other words there is no consensus about anything. How then is it even possible to have intelligent discourse? How is it possible to have intelligent discourse about any philosophical subject when everyone has different ideas about the nature of the subject? Think about this; what if the digital system used by mathematicians was different for every mathematician. This is the situation that exists in Philosophy. The foundation for philosophical thinking in not digital, it is comprehensive universal definitions of abstract concepts i.e.:
Consciousness
Different
Existence
Idea
Knowledge
Logic
Meaning
Need
Purpose
Reality
Right
Sense
Thought
Truth
Belief
Behavior
Problems
Perception
????
Abstract concepts are invented and only exist as their definitions. Unfortunate for mankind, philosophers have failed to construct comprehensive definitions of these concepts. Unfortunate, because comprehensive definitions of these concepts makes Philosophy logical and reveals the mechanics of rational thinking. The greatest benefit Philosophy can be to mankind is teaching the process of rational thinking.

kelly