Actually Richard, thats a good one. The joke. And the humor of the joke has nothing to do with Peter.
In that you can tell a funny joke, that you can post informed lucid pieces at times, makes my working hypothesis that you are using your "crazy banter " to make a point. As an artist or writer might. A satire or parody. How good it is? doesn't matter much if it entertains you -- others don't have to read your posts. I read few of them actually. I, at times, post things that are obscure, have odd references, but are funny to me. Maybe one other person gets it. if that, its worth the effort. And even if not, it was a clarifying experience for me. For example, Turq's "chasing the dragon" (not even explicitly stated as such, but juxtaposed) in my post yesterday. That R Williams is not crazy, but parodying, thats my working hypotheses. But I always have alternative hypotheses. I have no way, as in actually knowing what is going on inside your head, of knowing if the working hypothesis is true. Maybe, as an alternative (but its not this or that -- there are multiple hypotheses) you are crazy. Maybe Peter is right. I give that hypotheses about a 5% chance of being correct. And a much higher weight to my working hypothesis. As a quick aside, my working hypothesis is always the one with the highest percent of probability. In the case where the working (highest hypothesis) is at 20%, its clear that I REALLY don't know. And I don't kid myself that I do. That Peter perhaps, I don't know, gives 100% probability to your being crazy is odd to me. (Not wrong, just i) odd, and ii) to me) If Peter gives you 50% probability of being crazy, and 50% to doing a parody, then thats great. If that is the case, and he stated that, much of this discussion would "not exist". But I try, don't always to or succeed, to look at statements from different hypotheses, from different perspectives. People who don't, who are 100% sure that what they "know" or believe is true, well I suggest some inquiry, and some reading on epistimology, logical fallacies, cognitive errors, and goals incompleteness theorm as a staring place for that inquiry. or if you are lazy. just read Byron Katie. (Joke, and I like katie). --- In [email protected], "Richard J. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Peter wrote: > > > You're crazy. > > > > Judy wrote: > > Wouldn't you just *love* to have him as your > > therapist? Such integrity...makes you feel all > > warm and fuzzy, don't it? > > > Pete reminds me of that doctor guy I met at the > State Hospital. Years ago I applied for a job there > and I was taken on a tour of the facility. In one > room was a fellow swinging a golf club who said "I'm > Arnold Palmer and I'm getting out of here and sink > a hole-in-one." Another fellow in the next room was > swinging a baseball bat saying "I'm Babe Ruth and I'm > getting out of here to hit a home run." Another guy > down the hall was humping a large bag of peanuts. > He said: "I fuckin' nuts and I never want to get out > of here!" >
