The Philosophy Discussion Forum

WARNING: may be assaulted by porn pop-ups after clicking.

https://kaotic.com/video/781bd597_20260623213046_t

And yet pa was doing the same thing when he was twenty, no?

What is it that has made the people such hypocrites and basketcases about their sexuality. Well, it's a compound problem.

First, the people intuit but won't admit publicly that they are just highly evolved fuckers and that there is no sexual morality. Second, this intuition has been aggravated by religion. One is first frustrated by unsatisfied sexual desires and then made to feel guilty for having them in the first place.

Result: dipshits like pa there. That guy is a subconscious wreck of thirty years of conservative redneck sexual confusion. Had he read The Origin of Species instead of the first two chapters of the king james bible, he wouldn't be such a monster truck of a mess.

Now see, i was the smart 20-year-old that knew all the angry dads were liars and hypocrites... so i'da come back later, shot that asshole and drove off into the sunset with my girl like Mickey Knox.

And it's not even really an instinct to fend off encroaching males that might impregnate your daughters, thereby increasing your workload. This guy is too dumb even to operate instinctually. In his case, he's a) playing the father-role (with a little guidance from Lynyrd Skynyrd) in front of the camera to impress a redneck audience, and b) seeing an image of himself in the boy and recoiling in horror realizing that it's his daughter this time and not the seventeen year old Mary Jane rotten-crotch he was banging under the bleachers in highschool.

These stand the test of time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wA6nMLE9O24

promethean75 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2026 4:58 pm

I don't even know what you're talking about.
I did connect with one of your links once, and it was disturbing.
Damn near gave me nightmares.
Just because I didn't activate the link, doesn't mean that I need a transcription.

So, that's why I don't know what you're talking about, and don't need to know.

Nothing personal. You have the right, the freedom of speech and all that, and everyone has the right to learn from it, although exactly what that might be is beyond your control. Paranoia can f*** you up, as you recently demonstrated somewhere with a creative narrative.

I have the need to monitor personal input that risks touching emotions ... since emotions generate karma from action, and lightening the load becomes a need when preparing for a journey.

No joke, mannnnn. (Once was a common expression.)

"as you recently demonstrated somewhere with a creative narrative"

No, sir, what I wrote was nonfiction.

Isn't that crazy? When your reality really is like a John Grisham novel.

I don't have a joke but I'd like to speak about a joke if I may.

Forum hobby philosophers today that aren't nihilists and/or leftists are one half fake and one half irrelevant. The half that is fake is the highly technical epistemology they pretend to understand and be engaged in, and the half that is irrelevant is the material that that fake engagement is pretending to be about.

My point is that you need not sort the two out because the entire thing is an invalid. In the first case because it is sophistry, and sophistry (unless intentional in the Protagorian sense) is a betrayal of honest philosophy. In the second, because the material and the sophistry address no real problems and is therefore useless.

promethean75 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 12, 2026 4:32 pm I don't have a joke but I'd like to speak about a joke if I may.

Forum hobby philosophers today that aren't nihilists and/or leftists are one half fake and one half irrelevant. The half that is fake is the highly technical epistemology they pretend to understand and be engaged in, and the half that is irrelevant is the material that that fake engagement is pretending to be about.

My point is that you need not sort the two out because the entire thing is an invalid. In the first case because it is sophistry, and sophistry (unless intentional in the Protagorian sense) is a betrayal of honest philosophy. In the second, because the material and the sophistry address no real problems and is therefore useless.

Philosophy has always been a luxury, like charity.
Conclusion: luxuries are necessary.
Time for a premise check.

The joke is that everyone works for the luxuries, while claiming work is to put food on the table. Luxuries like philosophy become necessities through attachment.

And that is precisely the problem. The nonchalance of luxury, when philosophy isn't needed and is just casual speculation. For once, we want to need philosophy... to even depend on it or perish!

All philosophy should come in the heat of a moment and disappear just as fast!