Quote:

---

johnm214 said:
I find myself, more and more, noticing and almost cringing when I see references to the Matrix movie.  This movie presents a situations in which the world exists separate from the reality experienced by people and that the later is an elaborate hoax.

I seems that in both conspiracy ramblings and in philosophical discussions, references to the Matrix are sure to accompany nonsense.

Part of me even doubts the post with Matrix-references will have any value because someone who's only reference to the various ideas presented in the movie is unlikely to have thought them through very much.

I mean, the Matrix's world doesn't even really make sense to begin with, and yet I'm constantly hearing silly arguments based on it and posters that seem to regard the concepts as something new and great.

Am I alone in cringing when I hear these references and immediately imagining the poster's idea is likely garbage?

Just had to vent, that feels better. 

---

Hater's gonna hate.

Quote:

---

blingbling said:
sometimes when you get really intense deja vu you see glitches in the matrix... serious.

---

Quote:

---

johnm214 said:
I find myself, more and more, noticing and almost cringing when I see references to the Matrix movie.  This movie presents a situations in which the world exists separate from the reality experienced by people and that the later is an elaborate hoax.

I seems that in both conspiracy ramblings and in philosophical discussions, references to the Matrix are sure to accompany nonsense.

Part of me even doubts the post with Matrix-references will have any value because someone who's only reference to the various ideas presented in the movie is unlikely to have thought them through very much.

I mean, the Matrix's world doesn't even really make sense to begin with, and yet I'm constantly hearing silly arguments based on it and posters that seem to regard the concepts as something new and great.

Am I alone in cringing when I hear these references and immediately imagining the poster's idea is likely garbage?

Just had to vent, that feels better. 

---

Quote:

---

johnm214 said:
Well, my whole point was that the ideas weren't novel and yet the movie is constantly refrenced in rather silly discussions/threads to the exclusion of other refrences exploring the same idea, so I'm not sure why you've concluded that I don't see the commonality of the theme with other works/ideas when that was the whole point.

Further, your premise that I don't understand *something* wasn't explained nor substantiated at all, so it's unclear how you get that from my post (or wherever it came from). 

Constant refrences to "the matrix" (the concept of the fabricated reality) accompany silly poorly thought out posts on all manner of topics as touched on in the original post, and they're usually crap from what I've seen- probably because those who'd refrence the movie as if it were the definitive exposition on these concepts haven't put any thought into it nor considered others' thoughts and hence produce pretty vapid discussions of their thesis.  (or, in a more arrogant-sounding way: they're just simpletons grasping at mass media for petty insights)

In any case, your post seemed pretty pointlessly aggressive: what's the basis for all those conclusions as to my nature?

---

Quote:

---

johnm214 said:
garbage?

---

Quote:

---

MarkostheGnostic said:

Quote:

---

johnm214 said:
Well, my whole point was that the ideas weren't novel and yet the movie is constantly refrenced in rather silly discussions/threads to the exclusion of other refrences exploring the same idea, so I'm not sure why you've concluded that I don't see the commonality of the theme with other works/ideas when that was the whole point.

Further, your premise that I don't understand *something* wasn't explained nor substantiated at all, so it's unclear how you get that from my post (or wherever it came from). 

Constant refrences to "the matrix" (the concept of the fabricated reality) accompany silly poorly thought out posts on all manner of topics as touched on in the original post, and they're usually crap from what I've seen- probably because those who'd refrence the movie as if it were the definitive exposition on these concepts haven't put any thought into it nor considered others' thoughts and hence produce pretty vapid discussions of their thesis.  (or, in a more arrogant-sounding way: they're just simpletons grasping at mass media for petty insights)

In any case, your post seemed pretty pointlessly aggressive: what's the basis for all those conclusions as to my nature?

---

Well, since you are making open-ended pronouncements about referencing 'silly,' 'crappy' posts on The Matrix, and since I have on numerous occasions been one of those individuals who has made such references, you were taking an aggressive stance toward ME. "Crap," "garbage," and "vapid" do not describe my posts, so, as the expression goes, 'you can't be talking about me.' Nevertheless, it was YOU that assumed a ranting stance in the first place. At worst, I'm taking a defensive stance toward the quality of my thoughts.
I did not think that you could appreciate the wealth of ideas that the Wachowski brothers put into this trilogy, which like lots of things in life, from Brussels sprouts to cognac, takes time to appreciate.

The Matrix utilized not only Buddhist and Gnostic apprehensions about matter-mind, space-time, and then cast those concepts in a starkly materialistic, futuristic, and hellish idiom, which, IMO was brilliant. The Architect is a William Blakian parallel to his demiurgic, Gnostic creator. The Architect and the Oracle parallel one set of the 30 Gnostic Syzygies in Gnostic mythologies, wherein one of the Archons (according to the Gnostic Basilides) goes rogue, just like Agent Smith. Buddhism is present in the spoon-bending savant, Hindu thought with Sati and her family. "Temet Nosce"  (the Latin translation of my sig - "Gnothi Sauton" ) adopted by Socrates from the Oracle at Delphi, was a sign which hung in the Oracle's kitchen. So, more philosophy and even myth was enjoined in the film. That "Zion" was a subterranean 'cave,' like the myth of Plato's cave, and yet, 'another level of control,' opens up further speculations on the free-will/determinism continuum, regarding the AI of the so-called remnant humans (or what remained of human consciousness held in an electronic matrix), and of the Architect's AI. Good and evil flow from this dichotomy.

I could pontificate at great length, but the artistic form into which the Wachowski's cast these timeless, archetypal themes was ingenius. If other posters who intuit the profundity I have, but who have been unable to write a more eloquent or more comprehending post, why do you think you are in a position to make blanket statements about the vapidity of their posts? If you can't take criticism, don't dish it out. If you dish it out, do so selectively, then be ready for rebuttal.

---

Quote:

---

Freedom said:

Quote:

---

johnm214 said:
garbage?

---

If you are modestly well read (or even just modestly rational and well thought), and you expect most posts on a philosophy sub-forum of a drug website to be informative or carry any insight to you, then your expectations are unreasonable.

---

Quote:

---

MarkostheGnostic said:


Well, since you are making open-ended pronouncements about referencing 'silly,' 'crappy' posts on The Matrix, and since I have on numerous occasions been one of those individuals who has made such references, you were taking an aggressive stance toward ME.

---

Quote:

---

I did not think that you could appreciate the wealth of ideas that the Wachowski brothers put into this trilogy, which like lots of things in life, from Brussels sprouts to cognac, takes time to appreciate.

---

Quote:

---

If other posters who intuit the profundity I have, but who have been unable to write a more eloquent or more comprehending post, why do you think you are in a position to make blanket statements about the vapidity of their posts? If you can't take criticism, don't dish it out. If you dish it out, do so selectively, then be ready for rebuttal.

---

Quote:

---

Freedom said:

Quote:

---

johnm214 said:
garbage?

---

If you are modestly well read (or even just modestly rational and well thought), and you expect most posts on a philosophy sub-forum of a drug website to be informative or carry any insight to you, then your expectations are unreasonable.

---

Quote:

---

In any case, the posts I mention seem particularly silly even by the forum's own standing, I think.

---

I don't think posts with references to The Matrix are particularly silly.  There have been threads about how one should arrange toliet paper or how cool it would be if we were all robots.   Why does discussion of the possibility of an alternate reality bother you so much?

Quote:

---

Why does discussion of the possibility of an alternate reality bother you so much?

---

Quote:

---

HippieChick8 said:

Quote:

---

In any case, the posts I mention seem particularly silly even by the forum's own standing, I think.

---

  Why does discussion of the possibility of an alternate reality bother you so much?

---

Quote:

---

I find myself, more and more, noticing and almost cringing when I see references to the Matrix movie.  This movie presents a situations in which the world exists separate from the reality experienced by people and that the later is an elaborate hoax.

---

Quote:

---

i prefer to use kleenex

---

Quote:

---

MarkostheGnostic said:

Quote:

---

johnm214 said:
Well, my whole point was that the ideas weren't novel and yet the movie is constantly refrenced in rather silly discussions/threads to the exclusion of other refrences exploring the same idea, so I'm not sure why you've concluded that I don't see the commonality of the theme with other works/ideas when that was the whole point.

Further, your premise that I don't understand *something* wasn't explained nor substantiated at all, so it's unclear how you get that from my post (or wherever it came from). 

Constant refrences to "the matrix" (the concept of the fabricated reality) accompany silly poorly thought out posts on all manner of topics as touched on in the original post, and they're usually crap from what I've seen- probably because those who'd refrence the movie as if it were the definitive exposition on these concepts haven't put any thought into it nor considered others' thoughts and hence produce pretty vapid discussions of their thesis.  (or, in a more arrogant-sounding way: they're just simpletons grasping at mass media for petty insights)

In any case, your post seemed pretty pointlessly aggressive: what's the basis for all those conclusions as to my nature?

---

Well, since you are making open-ended pronouncements about referencing 'silly,' 'crappy' posts on The Matrix, and since I have on numerous occasions been one of those individuals who has made such references, you were taking an aggressive stance toward ME. "Crap," "garbage," and "vapid" do not describe my posts, so, as the expression goes, 'you can't be talking about me.' Nevertheless, it was YOU that assumed a ranting stance in the first place. At worst, I'm taking a defensive stance toward the quality of my thoughts.
I did not think that you could appreciate the wealth of ideas that the Wachowski brothers put into this trilogy, which like lots of things in life, from Brussels sprouts to cognac, takes time to appreciate.

The Matrix utilized not only Buddhist and Gnostic apprehensions about matter-mind, space-time, and then cast those concepts in a starkly materialistic, futuristic, and hellish idiom, which, IMO was brilliant. The Architect is a William Blakian parallel to his demiurgic, Gnostic creator. The Architect and the Oracle parallel one set of the 30 Gnostic Syzygies in Gnostic mythologies, wherein one of the Archons (according to the Gnostic Basilides) goes rogue, just like Agent Smith. Buddhism is present in the spoon-bending savant, Hindu thought with Sati and her family. "Temet Nosce"  (the Latin translation of my sig - "Gnothi Sauton" ) adopted by Socrates from the Oracle at Delphi, was a sign which hung in the Oracle's kitchen. So, more philosophy and even myth was enjoined in the film. That "Zion" was a subterranean 'cave,' like the myth of Plato's cave, and yet, 'another level of control,' opens up further speculations on the free-will/determinism continuum, regarding the AI of the so-called remnant humans (or what remained of human consciousness held in an electronic matrix), and of the Architect's AI. Good and evil flow from this dichotomy.

I could pontificate at great length, but the artistic form into which the Wachowski's cast these timeless, archetypal themes was ingenius. If other posters who intuit the profundity I have, but who have been unable to write a more eloquent or more comprehending post, why do you think you are in a position to make blanket statements about the vapidity of their posts? If you can't take criticism, don't dish it out. If you dish it out, do so selectively, then be ready for rebuttal.

---

Quote:

---

blingbling said:

Quote:

---

MarkostheGnostic said:

Quote:

---

johnm214 said:
Well, my whole point was that the ideas weren't novel and yet the movie is constantly refrenced in rather silly discussions/threads to the exclusion of other refrences exploring the same idea, so I'm not sure why you've concluded that I don't see the commonality of the theme with other works/ideas when that was the whole point.

Further, your premise that I don't understand *something* wasn't explained nor substantiated at all, so it's unclear how you get that from my post (or wherever it came from). 

Constant refrences to "the matrix" (the concept of the fabricated reality) accompany silly poorly thought out posts on all manner of topics as touched on in the original post, and they're usually crap from what I've seen- probably because those who'd refrence the movie as if it were the definitive exposition on these concepts haven't put any thought into it nor considered others' thoughts and hence produce pretty vapid discussions of their thesis.  (or, in a more arrogant-sounding way: they're just simpletons grasping at mass media for petty insights)

In any case, your post seemed pretty pointlessly aggressive: what's the basis for all those conclusions as to my nature?

---

Well, since you are making open-ended pronouncements about referencing 'silly,' 'crappy' posts on The Matrix, and since I have on numerous occasions been one of those individuals who has made such references, you were taking an aggressive stance toward ME. "Crap," "garbage," and "vapid" do not describe my posts, so, as the expression goes, 'you can't be talking about me.' Nevertheless, it was YOU that assumed a ranting stance in the first place. At worst, I'm taking a defensive stance toward the quality of my thoughts.
I did not think that you could appreciate the wealth of ideas that the Wachowski brothers put into this trilogy, which like lots of things in life, from Brussels sprouts to cognac, takes time to appreciate.

The Matrix utilized not only Buddhist and Gnostic apprehensions about matter-mind, space-time, and then cast those concepts in a starkly materialistic, futuristic, and hellish idiom, which, IMO was brilliant. The Architect is a William Blakian parallel to his demiurgic, Gnostic creator. The Architect and the Oracle parallel one set of the 30 Gnostic Syzygies in Gnostic mythologies, wherein one of the Archons (according to the Gnostic Basilides) goes rogue, just like Agent Smith. Buddhism is present in the spoon-bending savant, Hindu thought with Sati and her family. "Temet Nosce"  (the Latin translation of my sig - "Gnothi Sauton" ) adopted by Socrates from the Oracle at Delphi, was a sign which hung in the Oracle's kitchen. So, more philosophy and even myth was enjoined in the film. That "Zion" was a subterranean 'cave,' like the myth of Plato's cave, and yet, 'another level of control,' opens up further speculations on the free-will/determinism continuum, regarding the AI of the so-called remnant humans (or what remained of human consciousness held in an electronic matrix), and of the Architect's AI. Good and evil flow from this dichotomy.

I could pontificate at great length, but the artistic form into which the Wachowski's cast these timeless, archetypal themes was ingenius. If other posters who intuit the profundity I have, but who have been unable to write a more eloquent or more comprehending post, why do you think you are in a position to make blanket statements about the vapidity of their posts? If you can't take criticism, don't dish it out. If you dish it out, do so selectively, then be ready for rebuttal.

---

who says pontificate? lol

---

Quote:

---

HippieChick8 said:

Quote:

---

I find myself, more and more, noticing and almost cringing when I see references to the Matrix movie.  This movie presents a situations in which the world exists separate from the reality experienced by people and that the later is an elaborate hoax.

---

This statement is what made me think you might be bothered by the possibility of an alternate reality.

---

johnm, sooner or later you're going to realise just as I did that there's a difference between knowing the path and walking the path...

Quote:

---

Part of me even doubts the post with Matrix-references will have any value because someone who's only reference to the various ideas presented in the movie is unlikely to have thought them through very much.

I mean, the Matrix's world doesn't even really make sense to begin with, and yet I'm constantly hearing silly arguments based on it and posters that seem to regard the concepts as something new and great.

---

The Matrix is my secret shame

I just wish people would stop trying to ruin perfectly good fiction!

Quote:

---

Blondell_Letrange said:
johnm, sooner or later you're going to realise just as I did that there's a difference between knowing the path and walking the path...

---

Quote:

---

blingbling said:
who says HELLO! lol

---

You seem to "lol" at a lot of things. Been doing this very long? Do you ever laugh for no reason that you can think of? Do you follow linguistic trends that change, or have you ever incorporated something into your personal lexicon that carries some easily recognized emotional gravitas? Hey...who says "gravitas?" Who says "lexicon?" (Hint: The answer is in blue). 

Quote:

---

MarkostheGnostic said:
Dude, YOU are the one insulting other peoples' posts. HELLO! I didn't call you any names, you're reading shit into my post. Ask someone else's opinion.

---

Quote:

---

MarkostheGnostic said:

You're alone in not having the insight to see...
So all I get from you is failure to see the profundity [...] and a sad absence of imagination...
You're just frustrated from lack of comprehension...

---

Quote:

---

MarkostheGnostic said:
I did not think that you could appreciate the wealth of ideas...

---

Quote:

---

MarkostheGnostic said:
You are responding in paranoid fashion and that's a professional opinion, not an attack...
Bug off...

---

Quote:

---

Freedom said:
wow perma ban for such minor personalisms?

---

Quote:

---

Freedom said:
and in the same post you make your own personalism against him ("quack").

---

Quote:

---

Freedom said:
Just look at how many times Icelander makes personalisms. Its constant and no seems to mind.

---

Quote:

---

Freedom said:
threatening to permaban a longtime member because they call someone frustrated and paranoid is a mistake.

---

Quote:

---

Poid said:He said "only a quack gives professional medical opinions to people on the internet that they've never met", that is not a personalism.

---

Quote:

---

So far it seems like all you've done is launch into a red herring about your views of the Matrix's themes

---

Quote:

---

This thread which started out as a rant, with no concrete examples and should have been posted somewhere else like OTD

---

I agree.
I'm sick of these people who post such provocative threads to bait others into speaking out and then play lawyer all over the place.

" You called me this and you called me that "

get over it

btw..if this john kid wasn't mod, markos would never have been banned.

lets look at this -

4) Avoid malicious personalisms.

how malicious were his comments ?

5) Long-time forum regulars will generally get a littler more discretion from the moderators than noobs. This is in recognition of their many contributions to the nature and character of this forum, and the many times they've had to deal with the noob who shows up with a new, mind-blowing concept that's actually an old rag we've deconstructed here a hundred times over the years. If you're new here, keep that in mind. Stick around and become a regular yourself!


he's been here since 99

If he was really perma banned, thats some bullshit.

Quote:

---

Sleepwalker said:
That's the thing about the personalisms rule...

Is a person something different than the sum of their ideas and actions? I believe this line is drawn rather poorly.

---

Quote:

---

Freedom said:


responding to both john and poid,

I do not know the long history. however i consider the personalisms here to be minor, and cannot see how they could be considered so insulting as to derail the topic.

---

Quote:

---

Freedom said:
The approriate response to someone who says that your thoughts are the result of frustration and paranoia is to counter their argument with logic.

---

Quote:

---

Freedom said:
the comment containg 'quack' also references the context of Marko's post. the obvious inference is that marko is a quack. for example if i said, "only a @#!$! would have a tiger swiming under water in their avatar", technically you could say it wouldn't be a personalism, but with the context of my avatar its obvious what I'm inferring.

---

Quote:

---

Freedom said:
I should have said a long time member who has contributed many posts that many people find valueable. Even the rules recognize the value of long time members, " Long-time forum regulars will generally get a littler more discretion from the moderators than noobs. This is in recognition of their many contributions to the nature and character of this forum..."

---

Quote:

---

Freedom said:
I can't remember all of ice's posts and i'm not going to go digging through them, but one example is Ice frequently saying Andrewws has been drinking.

---

Quote:

---

Poid said:
So what is the correct response to someone who makes several personalisms against you?

---

Quote:

---

So what? The rules here prohibit direct insults, not snide remarks.

---

Quote:

---

He has a long history of insulting people..just because someone is a long time forum member doesn't mean they are allowed to flame with impunity.

---

Quote:

---

Freedom said:
So? How is that a personalism? You frequently make boring posts..my announcing this fact is not a personalism. You don't even seem to understand what a personalism is.

---

Quote:

---

Freedom said:
wow perma ban for such minor personalisms? and in the same post you make your own personalism against him ("quack").

such a hypocritical post highlights the selective enforcement of the rules around here. The only time I have seen consistent enforcement of the rules is when some one is flagrantly being insulting (swearing, cursing out your mother, etc). Just look at how many times Icelander makes personalisms. Its constant and no seems to mind.

threatening to permaban a longtime member because they call someone frustrated and paranoid is a mistake.

---

Quote:

---

Freedom said:

Quote:

---

Poid said:
So what is the correct response to someone who makes several personalisms against you?

---

obviously the correct response is to ignore everything they've said except for the personalisms, and engage in derailing the thread....

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So what? The rules here prohibit direct insults, not snide remarks.

---

letter of the law, spirit of the law...

---

Quote:

---

which were ignored until finally he stated that he not only wouldn't explain the relevance of his reply but wouldn't be posting at all.

---