We have more than one trendy-goobldygook spouting, intellectual poser of a real world troll who decided to come here precisely because he doesn’t’ enjoy the board and wants to cause controversy with half baked idiocy that he spouts off without understanding the basic methodologies of proof and refutation? I think that Smashy is one of a kind in his utter negative impact on threads he drops a load in. And, to be frank, I’ve never seen a poster like him ever before. He’s got a truly unique blend of smarm, stupid, and utter bullshit.
Smashy is the kind of moron who makes normal morons look bad.
He’s not only aggressively stupid and irrational, but he’s loud about it and goes out of his way to pat himself on the back for his ‘cleverness’. He’s like a high school nerd who never grew up but kept reading ‘deep’ books while thinking that they made him a better person than those around him and holding obscenely idiotic political views painting him as the lone misunderstood genius trying to save the world and everybody else as The Enemy.
I mean, for fuck’s sake, he makes Der’s metaphysics look reasonable and his politics look tame.
And yet again, if you’re the same kind of waste of space malcontent that Smash is, why don’t you fuck right off and go somewhere else?
Or are you just another troll like him? You came here a handfull of months ago, and evidently hate the community you’ve decided to become a part of.
Are you an idiot, a masochist, or just someone who’s decided to pick fights in a place that you admit you don’t enjoy?
Truly I’m curious. We already know you’re pretty stupid because you’ve been taken in by Smashy’s bullshit, but this is more about the content of your character than the lack of intellect you’ve displayed. So, why is it you stick around a place that you hate? You just here for the abuse?
You really are aggressively stupid, aintcha?
Here, I’ll toss you a hint for free. The ad hominem fallacy is not, in fact, an instance of a logical argument.
You are, in fact, a useless stupid git who joined a community that you admit you hate, and your posting here is either as an act of idiocy, masochism or sheer trollishness. You’re a waste of space fool who should fuck right off at your earliest convenience.
I’d advise you to start now.
Perhaps I’m misreading, but I wonder if the comments SmashTheState (and his supporters) made here means that they’re in favor of teaching creationism in schools. After all, the creationists have said time and time again that what they want to do is present their side and let the students decide. Sounds a lot like what they advocate here.
I suspect that it’s just that their irrational idiocy is what they use to justify their sloppy thinking and make their lack of intellectual rigor seem better. It’s a post hoc rationalization applied to something “Reality is subjective! Shamanism is awesome and they were all crazy! Liberals would compromise on only killing a portion of blacks! Oh, and that’s all because the standards of proof and refutation are just games and I prefer making shit up as I go along.”
It’s not that they’re necessarily creationists, hell, they might even oppose it being taught… but once you’ve knocked down reason and epistemology you’re left with whatever jackoffs decide to abuse the educational system.
GD.
Smashy and her are just so much smarter and wiser than the gathered Dopers that they’d like to let us know that only their intellectual leasers enjoy the rules of a formal debate where you can’t just haul off and claim that “revelation” is the equal of proof and refutation or Jung is the equal of peer reviewed literature and psychological studies.
Oh, and Kim ol’ gal?
You’ve been here few a few months and decided you hate the posters and guiding ethos here, why not fuck right the fuck off and go use your obvious superiority to enlighten some shamans, or something?
Yet again, why are you posting on a message board that you admit you hate?
Are you simply shit-stupid?
Are you a masochist?
Or are you a troll?
They didn’t knock epistemology out of the window, that’s hardly what SmashtheState or Kimmy_Gibbler were getting at.
They were saying that our models of epistemology are limiting factors that don’t take into account other models of description. Not so much that they are useless, but that they have limitations. Now, I don’t have the full postmodern critique education to go fully into how it works, but it seems to me that the gist is that it’s not so much that what the schizophrenic SEES that is the problem, but the problem lies in his ability to RELATE what he sees to those around him. The problem isn’t perceptive, but descriptive. The Schizos extreme intuitive model is hampered by being put into a fully utilitarian framework.
Like the difference between a poet and a lawyer. The poet takes liberties with the language in order to express an emotional concept and the lawyer takes liberties with the language in order to achieve a desired result.
Of course it is. “However, there are three means of obtaining useful information: empiricism, rationalism, and revelation. Each has its strengths and its weaknesses.”
By putting proof and refutation on the same footing as making shit up (aka “revelation”) it destroys epistemological principles while elevating simple wooism. It’s the same schtick that Lekatt engages in, gussied up with some sophomoric babble that he got from reading books he rather obviously didn’t understand. Much like his quote about the use of imagation that totally ignored what the quote was actually saying. He is truly a sophomoric, pretentious ass.
No, as I pointed out Smash was caught making shit up in GD and using phony ‘cites’ to back it up, and when he was called on the carpet he ran off like a whiny bitch to talk about how horrible the mean ol’ dopers are.
So when a Buddhist monk meditates upon a koan or when Nietzsche speaks in aphorisms, this is mere “woo,” to use the idiotic parlance of the Mythbusters set? The truth in Guernica is meaningless until some statistician provides you with a full account of the Spanish Civil War? You are exactly the type of person I had in mind when I spoke earlier about those who confuse being an able technician (as I’m sure you are) with those who’ve actually tried to engage the world, humanity, and its ideas.
You pretentious git, your and Smashy’s babbling is nowhere near the elegant simplicity of koan, or Neitzche’s philosophizing with a hammer, or Picacaso’s almost lyrical imaginary. You should be ashamed of making the comparison, but you idiots are nothing if not unjustifiably proud of yourselves.
And yet again, you’ve revealed yourself to be a pretentious fool talking way above your actual knowledge or intellect. You obviously understand nothing of Neitzche nor the mental exercises that koans represent. Good name dropping though. “I’ve… I’ve… I’ve… I’ve heard of Picasso! He totally justifies my back slapping self-congratulatory ignorance! I bet you don’t even know about as much fine art as I do, and you’re probably a technician!!!”
Yet again, why are you posting on a message board that you admit you hate?
Are you simply shit-stupid?
Are you a masochist?
Or are you a troll?
Another thing I just thought of: am I mistaken, or wouldn’t most shamans actually strenuously object to their beliefs being called part of “science”? I mean, most people of any faith don’t think of the tenets they believe in as scientifically testable, AFAIR; they know it wouldn’t be “faith” otherwise, right?