Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

What is 'thinking', anyway?

Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
April 01, 2012, 11:59:34 PM
Are you Jewish?
Partially, yes. Ashkenazi, to be specific. I'm also a part Italian and part Celtic. I'm an American made mutt.

Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
April 02, 2012, 12:02:08 AM
I'm a Celt. And, as I said, maybe Jewish, although if I am, I'll never be sure.
Mutt :)

Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
April 02, 2012, 12:20:43 AM
I have Jewish(great grandfather), Southern Anglo slave owners, Irish miscreants, Italian intellectual atheists, Norwegian, Swedish, Scottish and a dash of Cherokee and neanderthal going on in this thang.

Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
April 02, 2012, 12:25:47 AM
That would certainly increase the difficulty of knowing what/who you are.
I had it easy: I started out a real fuckin' mess.
The only way to go, was up.

Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
April 02, 2012, 11:06:16 AM
Of course people won't read what you give to them to read on the internet.  They're right, you're wrong; no sources you can provide will dissuade them of that fact.  I used to write two/three paragraph long responses to people on forums, so as to get some kind of actual "debate" going, but the minute attention span of the average American male seemed to doom my posts to have responses no more thought out than "hurr durr it's too long, I won't read it, so I'm right".

Edit: other than here, I don't discuss such things on the internet any longer.  There's no point, for the oases of intelligence are few and far between.

Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
April 02, 2012, 05:46:57 PM
Of course people won't read what you give to them to read on the internet.  They're right, you're wrong; no sources you can provide will dissuade them of that fact.  I used to write two/three paragraph long responses to people on forums, so as to get some kind of actual "debate" going, but the minute attention span of the average American male seemed to doom my posts to have responses no more thought out than "hurr durr it's too long, I won't read it, so I'm right".

Edit: other than here, I don't discuss such things on the internet any longer.  There's no point, for the oases of intelligence are few and far between.

This presupposes that the purpose of argument or "debate" is to convince your immediate opponent.  I've always assumed that "debate" is about laying out a position for the audience.

Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
April 02, 2012, 05:53:47 PM
Excellent point. Most people miss that completely.
You describe the very reason why I never debate, under any circumstances.
I am not interested in convincing anyone of anything.

Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
April 02, 2012, 06:05:02 PM

I am not interested in convincing anyone of anything.


Then what do you think you contribute?

Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
April 02, 2012, 06:06:48 PM
One thing that sticks out, is the enthusiasm I arouse in those wishing to distance themselves from any recognizable alliance with me.

Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
April 02, 2012, 06:11:53 PM
Excellent point. Most people miss that completely.
You describe the very reason why I never debate, under any circumstances.
I am not interested in convincing anyone of anything.


This seems a bit like a humpback claiming he doesn't eat krill.  You defend your position as if in debate, although your methods are less conventional than some.  I find that what you have to say is valuable, sometimes brilliant.  I just wish you'd drop the pretense of superficial novelty and present your posts in a standard paragraph format.

Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
April 02, 2012, 06:21:48 PM
I am not you I don't operate as you do Get used to it In time I'll move on.
How's that?

Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
April 02, 2012, 06:24:09 PM
I am not you I don't operate as you do Get used to it In time I'll move on.
How's that?


Why the insistence on idiosyncratic formatting?  Your words need no pretense to be impactful: why irritate for the sake of irritation?

Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
April 02, 2012, 06:33:54 PM
I am not irritated by it.
I was once a Signwriter.
Such a craftsman uses white space to emphasize the actual content.
The space is almost as important as the words themselves.
It is easy to read, and generally, people react emotionally to individual words, rather than string words together, to deduce meaning.
But there is really nothing that can be done about people's refusal to divine the intended meaning.
One can only do one's best.
I do mine.
Do you do yours?

Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
April 02, 2012, 06:37:57 PM
This presupposes that the purpose of argument or "debate" is to convince your immediate opponent.  I've always assumed that "debate" is about laying out a position for the audience.

The purpose of an argument is to convince your immediate opponent, while the purpose of a debate could be construed either (or, really, both) ways, really.

Have you ever been involved in a debate over the internet that wasn't hosted here?  Everywhere else they devolve into arguments (excepting a couple of private websites here and there).

Re: What is 'thinking', anyway?
April 02, 2012, 06:49:01 PM
That's why I never debate, and never argue.
People often think I am doing that, but what I'm really doing is being secure in my worldview, to the point where nobody can modify it.
My worldview is always open to modification, but only by me, as a result of what I learn, through direct experience of the world around me.
I don't abdicate responsibility, by taking on board what anyone else may push upon me.
And I don't expect anybody else to take my words and wear them without due consideration.

The bane of wise men, through history, has been those damned disciples, who behave like leftists, and hear something that sounds good, then start repeating it, without ever having understood what it meant.