> On 4 Jul 2019, at 17:06, Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> wrote: > > Do as you wish, if it makes you feel better... I don't think insulting is > useful, and a list like this one should be free of it, but instead here > disagreement is always followed with insults. It's just sad.
Yes, it is sad. Insults, dismissive tone, semantic word play, … all that are tools for forgetting ideas and reasoning. Bruno "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." -- Eleanor Roosevelt > > Le jeu. 4 juil. 2019 à 13:02, PGC <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit : > > > On Wednesday, July 3, 2019 at 4:08:29 PM UTC+2, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > I don't know what Bruno did to you,what's the point to always attacking him > like that and misunderstand on purpose what is written ? > > You can keep that for you. > > If you have something interesting to say, say it, if it's only for insulting > don't bother posting... those king of insulting emails are really boring, not > only yours, all of them. You're not greater or something, it does not serve > the debates, it is just useless and shaming. > > Serve the debates? What multiverse do you inhabit? > > In the past weeks this list has gone through a religious purge with Platonia > and its specialists here not merely conceding that they've tampered with > evidence, but that doing so in the name of their truth displays the only kind > of "correct scientific attitude". This while continuing to claim that > mind-body problem is the only critical problem to solve, while denouncing all > forms of materialism, while writing on material keyboards in clock time and > using an internet reliant on the existence of material servers plus > electricity, through a culture of democratic freedoms afforded to us by > physicalist mad men! And this every single day without fail, as if confusing > their material screens with reality. > > Mind body solutions are provided by just about every institutional religion > on the planet, all with their own books and "evidences". As somebody that > regularly analyzes discourse of all kinds, I see no debate here but a > monologue of ideologues that suffocates any alternative ontological > approaches on a list designed to discuss "theories of everything". Yup, > theories in plural. Therefore, au contraire Quentin the anxious, the fact > that for some 2 decades, the list is barraged by discourse such as "what > world, what clock you naive person?", as soon as any everyday interpretation > and/or wording of events or phenomena is stated by Brent and others, quite > gratuitously and insultingly by platonists. Whenever the platonists feel like > it. In essence solidifying pure opinion as mathematical truth riding the high > moral horse of truth of ignorance. > > When the non-platonists bemoan pronoun use or unclear grandmother assumption > notions that forcibly arise in the initial discursive setup of UDA on the > other hand, such unclear notions get a pass by platonists here. Double > standard through cherrypicking. > > The discourse in question also appears to yours truly as ascetic in nature: > denial of access to reality, so how can a metaphysics or anything including > debates be meaningfully pursued? Nihilism overlaps with asceticism and denial > of access to the real or that can be shared. So how could any agreement or > disagreement for example be as meaningful as stating the "right theological > attitude" in the first place? Then the discourse deploys "infinitely weak > mechanism for the search" or similar without provision of an account of > evidence and/or map. > > Don't take my word for it, but these discursive styles and principles have > been refuted from many angles and/or have been unable to resolve basic > philosophical problems and consistency constraints. See > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asceticism > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asceticism> > > Quote "the purpose of pursuing spiritual goals" as an operation of platonic > mind commonly assumed here equates to fundamental inquiry as a sort of > redemption from the illusion/dream of life. That's pretty Christian and all > too human for bona fide computationalistas of this list, or is it not? Just > shadows but salvation in rejecting materiality while materializing numbers, > literalizing their properties strongly and laying a territorial claim to > "Origins of physical laws", which I'll maintain is ambitious in proportion to > the speculative existence of means to evidence besides being "territorial" in > nature. Tampering with evidence is a thing in platonia, is it not? Science > does better. > > Quote "Asceticism is seen in the ancient theologies as a journey towards > spiritual transformation, where the simple is sufficient, the bliss is > within, the frugal is plenty." This is the basic aesthetic decor of our > discourse here: the simplest 2+2=4 decor that hides the monstrosities of > duplicating machines and powerful computing ability we don't have to verify > our observations in nature. I reject it because I'm not certain materialism > is not a hopeless delusion. Besides being too strong a claim, materialism > brought weapons and war for sure, but science can't coexist without it. With > art, all these things are interdependent and materialism bootstraps our > creativity towards joy. The shared kind under liberality and diversity > measures. Hedonisms, of which say consumerism is a diluted form, don't commit > wholesale to some extreme physicalist straw man you guys keep beating ad > infinitum. This strengthens the case that the discourse in question is a set > of rhetorical ideological devices rather than science. > > The utilitarian focus on hyper simple ontological performance, which is an > overemphasis on the "what", the content; lacking the dimensionality of the > "why", points to some ascetic resignation in discourse or psychology terms. > What a discourse leads to concretely for outcomes in life is tending to > outstrip with yours truly the concern for features, fancy body-mind purported > solutions, quantum mechanics etc. The why, especially talking attitude, seems > somehow a more appropriate point to converge on whenever metaphysics is > called upon. > > Quote "Nietzsche describes the morality of the ascetic priest as > characterized by Christianity <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity> as > one where, finding oneself in pain or despair and desiring to perish from it, > the will to live causes one to place oneself in a state of hibernation and > denial of the material world in order to minimize that pain and thus preserve > life, a technique which Nietzsche locates at the very origin of secular > science as well as of religion. He associated the "ascetic ideal" with > Christian decadence." > > Given unconvincing evidence and unclear arguments concerning how, where, and > why some forms and types of materialism are problematic also leaves me > skeptical of the entire enterprise and its solvability. Yeah, you guys will > say it's a theology where everything fits but simultaneously afford > yourselves to push hard on the supposed truth of computability applying to > reality, which is questionable in view of a notion of "evidence" we saw in > previous weeks you guys have no problem proclaiming to tamper with. That's > "theory" veering hard into opinion with pride and ideological ambition to > boot. The internet, no surprise. > > You speak of empty insults, and my assessment of the discourse states > uncalled for use of linguistic tricks, which is obviously required when all > standards of evidence and peer criticism are abandoned in favor of the "right > attitude to fundamental questions". I didn't participate in that flurry of > ambitious posts, you guys did that to yourselves while continuing to try to > maintain the semblance of some serious academic debate. A debate that is > sabotaged by the kind of discourse that denies its own reliance on > materialism. Similar to the right wing guys that seek influence in democratic > institutions while they clearly declare themselves to be proud ideologues > fundamentally opposed to democracy, probably with the "right kind of > attitude". My contention is: the platonic side pretends to be innocent on the > dynamics and complexity of the platform they employ to participate in > discourse. > > That's hypocritical but worry not anxious Quentin. I have neither the time > nor inclination to "debate" with ideologues. You guys win. Always and anyway > and forever. You have infinite time to post, so do the maths. But if you're > sensitive to your own discursive tricks applied to your reasoning for a > change, which you clearly are when you feel a need to silence me in posts > such as the above, I'll repeat with pleasure: "Grow a pair and respect > yourselves. You guys are better than this. You don't want to advance debate > outside your monologues and ideology which run counter to the spirit of the > list." Because "Theories" is in fact plural. PGC > > > > > > > Quentin > > Le mer. 3 juil. 2019 à 15:50, PGC <[email protected] <>> a écrit : > > > On Wednesday, July 3, 2019 at 11:51:52 AM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 2 Jul 2019, at 20:22, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > > <[email protected] <>> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 7/2/2019 2:41 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> Which time? I can access only my subjective time, and I would say that my > >> period between birth and the age of ten has been considerable longer that > >> the once between 10 and 60. > > > > We should send you a clock and a calendar then. > > :) > > The whole point is that physics arise from the statistics on first person > experiences, which are required when we do physical experiment and look at a > needle. > Thanks for sending me a clock and a calendar, but we cannot use it to solve > the measure problem, or you are invoking the mind-brain identity link which > is the problematic thing, not in physics, but in physicalist metaphysics. > > No shadow of your smile as it would be consistent to not award you the > supposed prize we keep hearing about! Those guys understood the situation > apparently. Some prize awarded at some time t cannot be real. Lol > > You get no clock, so you get a clock. No prize means that you got a prize. > Death means immortality. Losing means winning, so not having solved the > measure problem means having solved it. Applause is appropriate but > non-applause is preferable and it's what you got! > > So the absence of success on all fronts means: success platonic! Everybody > with debts is now rich, which means that everybody is dumb, which means that > they're smart. That's what age will do to you: you get old and your arguments > + evidence get better and better hurtling towards certain immortality. The > heavenly stuff. Mind body total reality. Total partial non-control. Tomorrow > it will be rainy or snowy or foggy or sunny or everything or nothing. With > the bar so high one begins to wonder why anyone could have the audacity to > think they've failed or succeeded at anything without Bruno's generous > support. PGC > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] <>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/50e53fc4-47f0-4632-a0bb-abfa393aea9b%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/50e53fc4-47f0-4632-a0bb-abfa393aea9b%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. > > > -- > All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy Batty/Rutger > Hauer) > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/a00962e1-0bb1-4b88-8257-8add8cba5135%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/a00962e1-0bb1-4b88-8257-8add8cba5135%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMW2kArJUS7bp_Ug3WcUaSBsekvn2Wmt5OO0GbbkqXN%3DSb%3DRbQ%40mail.gmail.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMW2kArJUS7bp_Ug3WcUaSBsekvn2Wmt5OO0GbbkqXN%3DSb%3DRbQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/2CB42D67-E86F-4933-9C22-B2B0D0F1F32C%40ulb.ac.be.
