You're right doc, you're right. I think you are reasoned. It's not something I find here a lot, which on a philosophy forum is of course kinda perplexing.
Ok well I'll give it a week of listening and learning from people who can make some sense, if it turns out it's just you and VT, well I have nothing to lose that I did not already have. I mean I like bobs posts, aka as Dave and even Bills aka as Dave, although he does seem to talk a lot of shit, he's weird but at least he's not a braggart about it. I like Wandering lands posts, he's one of those conspiracy theorists and he has some funny ideas but at the end of the day, but considering some of the conspiracy theorists I have talked to he's pretty on the ball by comparison, you feel like you are talking to someone who isn't so invested in what they say that, anything anyone else says they can't and wont listen to, like you do with the so called "phillosophers" on here. And there are quite a few others you can have a conversation with (if I didn't mention you don't take it awry), without it turning into, well how many books have you read and just what do you know fest, of a pissing contest and if I launch enough ad hominems at you, I am gonna be right about something at some point.
Well I don't need to digress on those people you probably get the same sort of I am quite mighty you know as I study philoophy and you don't, and when you don't express all the ideas I read in a book in a formualiac way that I can understand it makes me feel nervous. I can only discuss things that are established reason, anything that comes from someone who has learned to reason for themselves terrifies me. To put it in an analogy, the accomplished Swordsman does not fear those who are versed in fencing as much as he does the accomplished warrior that never learnt it, and hence does not conform to the forms he knows in Epee and foil. Such a person is dangerous to the swordsman, he learnt to fight in another way, and his means may well surprise you. Such mediocre minds are of course are easilly terrified by the unknown, they have to know where you learnt your form so they can then tackle your form, being inventive and hence able to think on the fly is not for them. The master knows that capa fera can be countered with Tibult. If anyone says that they are just going to pick up some sand, throw it in your eyes and then kick you in the nuts, well there is no defence against innovation. Not that I am saying I am an accomplished warrior by any means, but meh.
Them other wankers, well you're right who needs to listen to another self righteous pratt, get enough of that from politics.
Incidentally this was the answer to that post I said where I'd give a thread title and then you had to work out the topic. I noticed how few people felt comfortable thinking about something and reasoning outside of their comfort zone, and actually being intelligent, for those who did though I salute you. It seems an I may be wrong, you give a "philosopher" a minimum information problem and it terrifies them so much that they can only look at the ground. You might as well ask a mushroom to think as you would these guys to think beyond what they learnt in books and from the bible of "philosophy" aka weeblism. They're not smart at all, they're just repeating the trite language of others they read, it's all they know how to do and indeed can do. To actually for once think about something you don't know the answer to right away and you can't quote scripture at, well that would kill them.
The clues were: the film Pleasantville, the film Gatticca, colour threads in whatever form and obviously the original and a few more no one really read, and probably felt scared them to the extent that they might think for once creatively. Did any of them bother thinking about the clues of course not, they saw the thread and thought nah I wont even go there, being creative is not for me, nah you'd have as much chance of making a brick wall care about who leant on it.
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=13003
