Philosophy Now Forum

Somehow, barb, I feel one of these things about you must be true:

You have taken a lot of psychedlic drugs, or are, or smoke a lot of pot; ( I don't think u do speed)

Or

You are an anxious neurotic who has issues around not being heard;


I ask myself: what is up with a person who just spills from their mouth like a faucet?

Too much LSD. Not speed though because you seem a little too coherent to be on speed.

A person who has been 'touched' by the absurd who has gotten stuck in it instead of moving through it

Someone who is way too invested in the object and has learned too much book philosophy ( this seems to produce individuals who spurt out phrasings without actually realizing what they really mean. The incoherency is blotted out by the mashing of ideas such that few see it for the spectacle. )

Discuss please. Don't preach; its like watching someone have a melt down.

Sorry internal error

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Barbara I absolutely love your zeal. It's obvious you are excited and I am excited for you.

But to be honest it seems that for our transactions with you to be reciprocal we would have to maintain a 'child to parent' mode which would be complementary with your seemingly 'parent to child' mode. I for one feel offended because you constantly tell us what all the philosophers of old meant, as if we're incapable of deciding for ourselves. I for one feel that it would be nice if you would use verbiage that alludes to your perception of their meaning. At least I believe that an effective philosopher exudes humility. I feel that this alone would allow for a perceived complementary 'adult to adult' transactional state. I bring this to your attention, purely as constructive criticism, while constructive criticism is what one can change, and I invite it, please.

Again, i absolutely love your zeal! I believe you have recently been the most prolific contributor to this forum.

Thank You!

I agree, SOB.

But I feel something is off with this one.

lancek4,

Feelings that seems all you know. When pray tell will you think? You would probably be the first in line denouncing the true philosopher always judging actions of others because they are different or whatever you don't like as you feel they should be thinking therefore they must be a drugster or a drunk or an angry Mother you place them in this cubicle of yours that renders that person's thought invalid . Do me a favor take your box or more so you couch and buzz off!

Lance4,

Let us show where you are full of crap "In other words: time and space are the only 'things' which exist a priori analytically, that have no object with which knowledge must reconcile; they exist 'prior' to any necessary correspondant object or knowledge, but are complicit with knowledge's existing."

You are absolutely in error as to time. But you have so much bull in you that you get away with untruths. You need to explain yourself or I will start referring to you to be a mere babbling rhetorician.

Barbara Brooks wrote:Lance4,

Let us show where you are full of crap "In other words: time and space are the only 'things' which exist a priori analytically, that have no object with which knowledge must reconcile; they exist 'prior' to any necessary correspondant object or knowledge, but are complicit with knowledge's existing."

You are absolutely in error as to time. But you have so much bull in you that you get away with untruths. You need to explain yourself or I will start referring to you to be a mere babbling rhetorician.

I think we already had on another thread.
But ok

First I would need to know what the object of time is. ? And then how time may be separate from knowledge. ?

Barbara Brooks wrote:lancek4,

Feelings that seems all you know. When pray tell will you think? You would probably be the first in line denouncing the true philosopher always judging actions of others because they are different or whatever you don't like as you feel they should be thinking therefore they must be a drugster or a drunk or an angry Mother you place them in this cubicle of yours that renders that person's thought invalid . Do me a favor take your box or more so you couch and buzz off!

It is not so much how or what you think that bothers me but the manner by which your present your toughts. As if you are the pinnicle of righteousness.

You need to look in the mirror buddy. I personally don't like how you present your thoughts so who is right ? If I bother you don' t read them. don't read them.

Somehow, barb, I feel one of these things about you must be true:

You have taken a lot of psychedlic drugs, or are, or smoke a lot of pot; ( I don't think u do speed)

Or
You wrote:
You are an anxious neurotic who has issues around not being heard;


I ask myself: what is up with a person who just spills from their mouth like a faucet?

Too much LSD. Not speed though because you seem a little too coherent to be on speed.

A person who has been 'touched' by the absurd who has gotten stuck in it instead of moving through it

Someone who is way too invested in the object and has learned too much book philosophy ( this seems to produce individuals who spurt out phrasings without actually realizing what they really mean. The incoherency is blotted out by the mashing of ideas such that few see it for the spectacle. )

Discuss please. Don't preach; its like watching someone have a melt down."

Now you say:
It is not so much how or what you think that bothers me but the manner by which your present your toughts. As if you are the pinnicle of righteousness."

What is wrong with being that? I have worked my whole philosophical life being that. What is wrong with that. Is there no award for being good.

.









......................................






I know that won't help...


Barbara, how about if we voted you Philosopher of the Year - 2011 for the Philosophy Now Forums?





I think you have been GREAT this last year!




I would like to see your opinions on other topic headings but perhaps you have found your niche in the Philosophy of Mind.



Either way, you are a star for me.







.

Barbara Brooks wrote:Somehow, barb, I feel one of these things about you must be true:

You have taken a lot of psychedlic drugs, or are, or smoke a lot of pot; ( I don't think u do speed)

Or
You wrote:
You are an anxious neurotic who has issues around not being heard;


I ask myself: what is up with a person who just spills from their mouth like a faucet?

Too much LSD. Not speed though because you seem a little too coherent to be on speed.

A person who has been 'touched' by the absurd who has gotten stuck in it instead of moving through it

Someone who is way too invested in the object and has learned too much book philosophy ( this seems to produce individuals who spurt out phrasings without actually realizing what they really mean. The incoherency is blotted out by the mashing of ideas such that few see it for the spectacle. )

Discuss please. Don't preach; its like watching someone have a melt down."

Now you say:
It is not so much how or what you think that bothers me but the manner by which your present your toughts. As if you are the pinnicle of righteousness."

What is wrong with being that? I have worked my whole philosophical life being that. What is wrong with that. Is there no award for being good.

Fair enough.

Barbara Brooks wrote:Somehow, barb, I feel one of these things about you must be true:

You have taken a lot of psychedlic drugs, or are, or smoke a lot of pot; ( I don't think u do speed)

Or
You wrote:
You are an anxious neurotic who has issues around not being heard;


I ask myself: what is up with a person who just spills from their mouth like a faucet?

Too much LSD. Not speed though because you seem a little too coherent to be on speed.

A person who has been 'touched' by the absurd who has gotten stuck in it instead of moving through it

Someone who is way too invested in the object and has learned too much book philosophy ( this seems to produce individuals who spurt out phrasings without actually realizing what they really mean. The incoherency is blotted out by the mashing of ideas such that few see it for the spectacle. )

Discuss please. Don't preach; its like watching someone have a melt down."

Now you say:
It is not so much how or what you think that bothers me but the manner by which your present your toughts. As if you are the pinnicle of righteousness."

What is wrong with being that? I have worked my whole philosophical life being that. What is wrong with that. Is there no award for being good.

I think his point is that there is something wrong with those that do as they do, as to seek award, which is apparent in their methodology of presentation. Award should only go to those that humbly do as they selflessly do for the benefit of others, not themselves, which is apparent in the methodology of their presentation.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:...
I think his point is that there is something wrong with those that do as they do, as to seek award, which is apparent in their methodology of presentation. Award should only go to those that humbly do as they selflessly do for the benefit of others, not themselves, which is apparent in the methodology of their presentation.

What a bunch of humanist twaddle! Are you a Christian?

Arising_uk wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:...
I think his point is that there is something wrong with those that do as they do, as to seek award, which is apparent in their methodology of presentation. Award should only go to those that humbly do as they selflessly do for the benefit of others, not themselves, which is apparent in the methodology of their presentation.

What a bunch of humanist twaddle! Are you a Christian?

'Like this cup, you are full of your own opinions speculations, and presuppositions...' to you, it matters not what I say! We judge others against the foundation of belief that we stand upon, regardless of the basis.

.

I really appreciate the way SpheresOfBalance conducts himself.

His writing style is compelling in a philosophical way.

You can sense his being.

He reminds me of the member satyr.



.