We Erred Rand Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 (NOTE FROM MSK: This pearl of intellectual depth was culled from here.)>>>Nevertheless, several questions come to my mind in the manner in which you have chosen to interact with this forum:I am duly awed by your intellectual prowess and your overall wonderfulness (to borrow a phrase from Bill Cosby). Believe me: I'm shaking in my pajamas at the frightening prospect of having to answer your questions.>>>1) are you familiar with the forum's programs wherein you can link your reply to the paricular post, supra that you are "replying" to?;I actually find it more cumbersome than the simple ">>>". But I'll try to mend my ways.>>>2) are you generally supportative of Ayn's general analysis of philosophical issues?; andGenerally. But so far, I haven't seen any of her analysis of philosophical issues on this site. I've seen material reductionism (which has nothing to do with her general analysis of philosophical issues); I've seen epistemological nominalism (which has nothing to do with her general analysis of philosophical issues); and I've seen hedonism (which has nothing with her general analysis of philosophical issues).You seem like a friendly chap, Selene (stupid, perhaps, but friendly). Can you help? I'm looking for a site called "Objectivist Living." The current site bearing the same name appears to have been hijacked by a group of . . . of . . . (what's that word again...?) ah, yes: fuckwits.>>>3) what is your purpose in joining this forum?Lofty intellectual entertainment. I'll let you know when I find it.>>>I have many more questions, however these will suffice for now.I admit to feeling great relief (coupled with physical and emotional exhaustion) at having come through your grilling. I hope to do even better the next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 Enough of this crap "weird Rand."This is a warning if you wish to interact with this community.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 He's got a lot of brains. Reminds me of Seymour's sidekick Darren from SOLOP. I don't remember if he ever posted here.--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 Brant,I think he did. I think he used the moniker of Aristotle something-or-other. Now it looks like the same dude in a new account.He's a piece of work, all right. I agree he has brains, but have you noticed the one theme, the major subtext, running throughout ALL of his posts? It is: "I am superior to you" or "I am superior to Rand" or "I am superior to Rand critics" and so on.Like anyone cares who he feels superior to.But on he babbles and it probably makes him feel good.When you first encounter it, it seems like a taunt, so you react. But notice that it becomes dreadfully boring after a while.Intellectually, one person's excessive vanity is another person's shit. It feels good coming out, but if you leave it around after that, it stinks up the place, then eventually turns into powder.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syrakusos Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 I am surprised that MSK has been this tolerant of his trolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 Brant,I think he did. I think he used the moniker of Aristotle something-or-other. Now it looks like the same dude in a new account.He's a piece of work, all right. I agree he has brains, but have you noticed the one theme, the major subtext, running throughout ALL of his posts? It is: "I am superior to you" or "I am superior to Rand" or "I am superior to Rand critics" and so on.Like anyone cares who he feels superior to.But on he babbles and it probably makes him feel good.When you first encounter it, it seems like a taunt, so you react. But notice that it becomes dreadfully boring after a while.Intellectually, one person's excessive vanity is another person's shit. It feels good coming out, but if you leave it around after that, it stinks up the place, then eventually turns into powder.MichaelWrong! He was serious from the git-go and he wanted to unto the school of logical -positivistic verification-ism (that is a mouthful).Popper is one of the few philosophers mentioned by real live honest to god physical scientists without gagging or sneering.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 Bob,You are such an innocent soul at times.I say that with tenderness, not snark.Of course this dude is serious about disproving all those inferior fools out there and silently patting himself on the back for being so smart. He's deadly serious. I think that's all he's got in his soul. He would be a disaster stranded all alone on a desert island.In fact, do you want a good vision of hell on earth? Be the one person stranded with him.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 AristotlesAdvanceJoined 24 Nov 201080 postslimited to 5 a daylast visit Dec 2010--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
9thdoctor Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 I'm sure Comrade Sonia would already have switched this 'member' to 'read-only' status. And probably have deleted all his/her posts. There are some good points here: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 Nice pick Ninth...She is quite adept at communicating her points in clever ways.A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xray Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 Is suppose hardly anyone posts on Darren's site anymore and the 'lack of audience' is frustrating him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Ah fond memories! I recall at solop we had a couple of semi friendly conversations via pm. At the time I was working 90-110 hours/week so I did not have a lot of time to sift through his christian based 2nd law of thermodynamics explaining his views of creationism garbage.He then went in a rampage trying to flame me, my career my hours etc which of course I blew up at him and even offered to show scans of my pays tubs (-sin# address ) etc. He got banned which surprised even me. Lol @ Barren Darren... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Ah fond memories! I recall at solop we had a couple of semi friendly conversations via pm. At the time I was working 90-110 hours/week so I did not have a lot of time to sift through his christian based 2nd law of thermodynamics explaining his views of creationism garbage.He then went in a rampage trying to flame me, my career my hours etc which of course I blew up at him and even offered to show scans of my pays tubs (-sin# address ) etc. He got banned which surprised even me. Lol @ Barren Darren...The second law of thermodynamics has never been falsified isolated collections of atoms with populations of the order of Avagadro's number (or more). While the second law is statistical the probability of its failure for isolated molar masses is so close to zero as to be practically unmeasurably small. Do not hold your breath waiting for entropy to diminish spontaneously, If you do you will turn blue and faint.The only way to unscramble an egg is to feed it to a hen.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now