There's an extra aye in there Moll. If you think of some of the external processes I investigate and the internal ones you have explicated (not that either of us is restricted to either), there is a lot of common ground. Bifurcation is often a 'false split'.
On Thursday, February 12, 2015 at 1:00:45 PM UTC, Molly wrote: > > Aye, aye, aye > > On Thursday, February 12, 2015 at 7:29:51 AM UTC-5, archytas wrote: > > Merrie Monk is still brewed by Marstons. Technically a mild, 4.5 abv but > seems to hit harder. Craft beers from micro breweries don't appeal to me > much - we have one round the corner (Banks) with about 7 different beers > that all taste the same. Mostly badge engineering over here, by Interbrew > - even they are now ab-inbev co the world's largest brewer. Boddies is now > part of that chain. I swear they have even screwed Stella Artois and have > been advertising it as 'reassuringly expensive'. > They make Bud too. Back in the day, I met the CEO of Stella Artois - he > was tea total. Kind enough to stock my hotel fridge with product though. > > I'm waiting for the time African beer gets marketed here with small print > 'warning: contains crocodile bile and battery acid' under the Mumbojawless > brand. Beer, apart from a few small brewers, tends to taste better and > cleaner abroad. Nordic friends now get ratted on Lithuanian hooch before > meeting at Ziggy's to sip expensive beer before piling back to the barbecue > at Sven and Olga's to finish off on Estonian imports. > > I see our new information manager is settling in nicely, already in a room > of her own talking to the walls. The gibberish she has to come up with is > difficult to learn but she has language skills to refine it to total > misinformation with that paranoid edge that keeps people on their toes lest > they slack into actual conversation. I doubt we could have appointed a > better one trick pony. One visit to her room by the information > commissioners and we will never see them again. > > Molly has done nearly all the work. The plan, of course, was always to > lure Gabby to this room and let her exhaust her poisons until no one else > is left, with the last one out pulling the door tightly shut. > > On Thursday, February 12, 2015 at 12:42:29 AM UTC, Chris Jenkins wrote: > > Oh man, Merry Monk is one of my favorites. I'm a sucker for Tripels...more > so for Quadrupels. > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 7:40 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > Boddingtons' was the favourite bitter back in cop/army days. It was weak > abv, amber, creamy and nectar. Since then big brewers took over, closed > the old brewery and ruined the flavour.darkened the colour and the flavour > went malty. Brings a tear to my eye to drink the much now. Holt's bitter > was the classic though. Smelled like an old kangaroo's jock-strap or > something Gabby throws in her cauldron. You had to get the first pint down > holding your breath, By about the fourth, it was all cream nectar and you > just had to make it eight. It was all live beer in 36 gallon barrels back > then, manipulated into cellars by gangs of muscular dwarfs, watched over > for days by a loving but grisly landlord who sank the first edible pint > himself just to let us know who was in charge. Then came pasteurised beer > and lager - and shameful sights like me and Railway Frank arm-wrestling for > the last pint of Merry Monk. I won, but had to let him have the beer to > make up for that. > > > On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 at 11:42:45 PM UTC, Chris Jenkins wrote: > > I'm enjoying a Boddie's now; it's no Younger's 2, but it's got a nice > creamy head. I can't find enough of the bitters here though; IPA's are the > frat boy craft beer of choice. > > My good mates live on a 42' single mast now; the children are gone, and > land held no attraction. I've still got another eight years or so before > that becomes a possibility. > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:34 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > Just right for a transportation sentence then. Used to sail. My balance > is crap now. Flying a desk just ain't it. When I was more actively > engaged, some of the best parts involved solitude. I miss that. > Loneliness is not the same thing. Bolton pubs have an air of desperation > now, so I don't bother. The ale is usually cack too. That old fuggy muggy > behind the sanctity of the pub door has faded to disinfectant and stale > food smells. And I used to smoke when drinking. Not the same without. > Plus 'young punk' violence is much worse now. > > I still get out to sea a couple of times a year on a mate's fishing > smack. His quota days have just increased from 4 to 5 days a month. > There's no living in it any more. Due out with him at the end of the month > and will probably resume normal beer service then. Theakston's Old > Peculiar and another black beer, Younger's No 2 are a treat when properly > creamy. You'd still be sucking the stuff in from that facial appendage the > following day. > > > On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 at 11:02:09 PM UTC, Chris Jenkins wrote: > > My pony tail and beard are built for the sea, but I skipper a desk chair, > more to my chagrin. > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 5:52 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > Who are you calling an old pirate, Blackbeard? And what kind of nancy-boy > pubs where they let woman in other than to be barmaids 'ave ye been > drinkin' in? > > > On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 at 10:28:39 PM UTC, Chris Jenkins wrote: > > Only to an old pirate. > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 5:26 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > Has anyone else noticed that a colon and a right parenthesis look like a > symbol for a cut-throat razor? :) > > > On Wednesday, 11 February 2015 22:19:52 UTC, Chris Jenkins wrote: > > No justifications, dear Gabs. Just a correction. :) > > > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 4:58 PM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > Oh yes, What, who, whose questions are being ommitted is quite telling. > There is a geometry in that too, of course. I explicitly said no blaming, > and you come up with justifications?! For what? Yes, we were close to my > wish come true, but then Facil appeared and it all started again. There is > nothing I can do about it from where I sit. ;) > > Am Mittwoch, 11. Februar 2015 schrieb Chris Jenkins : > > Oh, how quickly time muddles the recollection...perhaps you should go back > and review some of those posts before I left. It was for the same reason > Craig did, and had nothing to do with the legacy nature of an email list. I > was overloaded between job and family, and simply couldn't keep up with the > volume of communication (a strike against your assertion I left because I > knew it was an outdated format). There were hundreds of posts, some of them > quite combative (*ahem*), and any action taken by mods to keep the list > adhering to its original intent was met with a hearty round of "fuck you > matey". It was draining. > > My goodbye: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/minds-ey > e/by$20chris/minds-eye/ZQB5vLJ2rSI/0GbRK-9nz-AJ > > Note that I put it to the group to decide, specifically because there was > no other way to effectively determine any sort of self governance, and I > didn't feel I had the right to make an arbitrary decision without input. > > You promptly attacked every facet of my decision (and I expected no less). > There was a long and robust conversation with a ton of familiar faces (most > missing now). Your first vote was for a natural death. Have you gotten your > wish? > > > > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:37 PM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > Over a thousand members, 5 actually post? > > > This question coming from you? YOU! Oh come on, Chrissy baby! This is an > outdated format here that doesn't generate much traffic anymore. You know > that, that`s your job to know that, that`s why you quit the mod job here! > No one is blaming you for that but don´t play the innocent here! You > introduced no transparent polling as to who should become your successor, > but lay down your crown to the one who threw his hat in the ring, a method > acceptable for the queen also. Nice try, dear. > > 2015-02-11 17:34 GMT+01:00 Chris Jenkins <[email protected]>: > > Yep, he passed the bar some time ago, which is a big part of why he no > longer had time for these conversations. > > He's not alone in that, apparently. Over a thousand members, 5 actually > post? > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 11:32 AM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > Such charm as ever Gabby. The term paedophile is not well taken here and > may really insult Allan and make him sad. Molly was gone, in the sense of > 'gone fishin'. Craig was becoming a lawyer. Hope he made it. He was a > Mormon too. > > It would have been nice to hear updates on Bacon. There were eleven > Idols. I expect your superior model incorporates them, or perhaps spits > spleen. We can only be sure of never seeing it. > > We model defeasibly now and use a lot of geometry because a lot of us > think in shape. The idea is to make natural language usable by the > machine. It has even more difficulty making sense of just what humans say > than a pair of paranoid-schizoid positionists. We do consider 'shapes' > like the molygon as underliers in our logic and they are instructive. A > gabbygon is on the horizon - some no doubt thinking this is the best > place. The general theory is called 'bag of words' - we look for shapes in > text to give context meaning and identify root metaphors. You probably > know how the SNERT stands out like a sore thumb? Maybe accusing old men > and their dogs kind of thing? We are trying to find much more routine > issues in word use to get at some of Tony has described as dishonesty from > 'bag of words' samples taken from the 'marketplace' and other Idol > conversations. What the machine establishes from metadata - considering we > often haven't - is fascinating because we are not sure what it i doing at > all. We have it working on the self-justification of psychopaths at the > moment. > > Gravity obviously collapses on seeing a photograph of me. Thanks for the > memory. > > > On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 at 3:13:50 PM UTC, Gabby wrote: > > This here is my real lesson. You have been bringing up and pushing this > idol model so many times that I have forgotten what the one was that I > found better. All that I remember is that it was either located in the > alchemy or in the metaphysical poetry context. It was a perfect four is all > that is left. It has been overwritten by your four idols. > > 2015-02-11 1:35 GMT+01:00 archytas <[email protected]>: > > Francis Bacon classified the intellectual fallacies of his time under four > headings which he called idols. He distinguished them as idols of the > Tribe, idols of the e, idols of the Marketplace and idols of the Theatre. > An idol is an image, in this case held in the mind, which receives > veneration but is without substance in itself. Bacon did not regard idols > as symbols, but rather as fixations. They expand a bit like this: > > 1. Tribe > > The example of desiring to see more order in the universe than is actually > there is one of his examples of an idol of the tribe. He thinks that we all > suffer from that one. > > 2. Cave > > An example of an idol of the cave (one of Bacon's examples) is that some > minds are more drawn to new things and new ideas than they are to what has > been around for a long time, while other minds are more drawn to > "tradition" and "old school" ideas and ways than they are to newness. Bacon > thinks we should become aware what our own tendency is so that we can make > corrections for it. He hopes that by becoming aware of our own mind's > tendencies toward loving novelty or tradition that we might be able to > "correct" for them and then hopefully see things more clearly and truly. > > 3. Marketplace > > We often use words very loosely in common discourse. Bacon sees nothing > wrong with that when we are just speaking ordinary language with friends > and family. But, when it comes to trying to describe the world accurately > and precisely, we should be aware of our tendency to use words loosely and > should try to correct for it. When we are trying to speak precisely we > should probably not say things like "The mountain is out today" (anyone > outside of the Puget Sound area wouldn't have a clue what this means); or > "The sun went under a cloud" (the sun did not go anywhere, let along > underneath something); or "The sun came up this morning" (the earth > actually just rotated). None of those sentences is precisely true, and if > we use language imprecisely like this it can sometimes accidentally lead to > huge misapprehensions about the world. Bacon thinks this misuse of words > and language causes far more problems than we realize. > > 4. Theatre > > If you can think of someone you know who has recently bought into a whole > new religion or philosophy or psychology, you can probably see how they > have suddenly come to interpret everything in the universe according to > their new world view. That world view has become the new lens through which > they perceive and interpret everything in their world. What Bacon says, > though, is that we all do this. We all interpret the world through the lens > of our own little world view. It's just easier to see other people doing it > than it is to see ourselves doing it. Bacon thinks we should become aware > of how these world views shape and distort our own perceptions of the world > so that we might be able to correct for it a bit. > > This is old work. My questions are about how we recognise the 'second > head' as a delusion yet move hardly at all on obvious political delusions > like economics, votes counting, social care, public ignorance and the > making invisible of many social issues. For me, deep questions on self are > involved. The internet self is unlikely to be, as Tony says, the same as > the 'real'one - but then we have know for much longer than the internet > people don't say the same things in different contexts. In fact the man or > woman in the bar often looks totally different the morning after, let alone > what the politician says in a speech compared with when she is with her > backroom boys in the spin room. > > . > > On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 10:17:04 PM UTC, archytas wrote: > > At least with my knowledge of delusions I can imagine certain people > growing a second head overnight and shooting the wrong spare. > > On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 10:11:09 PM UTC, archytas wrote: > > That seems to run to form Gabby. > > On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 10:06:43 PM UTC, Gabby wrote: > > Facil picked up your question and gave his answer, I agreed and then came > Allan barking at Facil and I told Allan to watch his tongue or leave to his > own thread. Only then did you enter the group timeline to start your big > daddy has come home show. Now tell me what my deceitful intent was ... Or > better, tell me tomorrow, I'm off for today. > > Am Dienstag, 10. Februar 2015 schrieb archytas : > > The only people I meet like that tend to be online students Tony. We use > Skype video conferencing for a few sessions, so have actually seen each > other. I'm quieter than people imagine, though none have yet said > 'uglier'. I'm very prone to catch whatever bugs go around university > environments too, so rather like electronic distance. With colleagues, the > situation is we know a lot more about each other than most in online > encounters. > > My version has 'confusion' written through it. I say something, Gabby > takes it another way, or knows what I intended and chooses another slant > for whatever reason. Online, I assume she has a sense of humour and a good > turn with words. Deception is not part of this in the first place. Just > guesses with less risk than so called reality. I suppose the classic > online deceiver is the groomer - where the intent is to set up and image > and then meet the victim. > > On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 7:54:18 PM UTC, facilitator wrote: > > > On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 2:11:33 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote: > > The delusion that we are what we project is interesting Tony. > > > "We claim to be what we project". Your version allows for reality mine > allows for dishonesty. I think most people want to project a filtered image > of themselves enough so that if we ever meet people who we've only > conversed with online we become slightly astonished how different they > appear and act in "real life". > > > > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. > To unsubscr > > ... -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
