| Home | Community | Message Board |
|
You are not signed in. Sign In New Account | Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery » |
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.
|
| Shop: |
| |||||||
|
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ Registered: 08/28/09 Posts: 82,455 Loc: Onypeirophóros Last seen: 4 years, 30 days |
| ||||||
|
language is like this: when you increase your vocabulary, it's like when you increase any other skill set...you are garnering memoragic data, like RAM in a computer, and improving the routing in your brain...it's like neuronal tracing, only by microform details, like the graphism of the letter.
| |||||||
|
Stranger Registered: 02/19/18 Posts: 419 Last seen: 3 years, 11 months |
| ||||||
Quote: Generally agreed to the extent that one reaches an optimal average. This is the case with the language center as its just a 'translation' hub. There are diminishing returns to the extent that you go beyond a high-end average and trend moreso into overlapping superfluous vocabulary. This is exampled in my own above statement... I gain nothing grand by knowing the word superfluous vs the more common synonyms : excessive; redundant; needless Quote: Yes and no. As with computers/ram/etc, there are physical limits. Knowing 1000 synonyms for the same word doesn't improve your brain function. Instead, you'll just begin overwriting useful memory. This is the diminishing returns aspects and why, even if you learn the whole dictionary.. you'll soon forget it and focus on a smaller working set to express yourself. Language past a certain high level average has negative effects esp involving overlapping words. An expanded vocabulary only allows you efficiency of expression and only when there are not one word synonyms and only when that expanded vocabulary is practiced daily and common among people you converse with. Languages with excessive alphabets are archaic, inefficient, and i'd argue cause adherents to have less intelligence.. this relates to the memory space it takes up in the brain that could be used for more useful rote memory.
| |||||||
|
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ Registered: 08/28/09 Posts: 82,455 Loc: Onypeirophóros Last seen: 4 years, 30 days |
| ||||||
Quote: and yes, if you know what 'superficial' means, you then have an nexus of superficial-superfluous that, in all probability, is going to prove an effectively 'better translation' of understanding and comprehension, whether in stance of opposition or agreement. Quote: i tend to disagree. i find people either understand, or don't. i find that [see this repetition?] there are nuances to natural language and conversation, but when in a setting such as this [writing] your ability to be cohesive is much better [and if you can be so cohesive in conversation, it's clearly not the same thing, as you have those particular limits you mentioned, but then and only then, it seems to me. otherwise, you are free to speak as eloquently as you wish, but that doesn't mean everyone will understand you [or even want to read it]. this is their problem. not the writers. the minimalism of thought is a degree of laziness, not a limit. this limit you speak of, i don't find it inherent in language or the brain's structure, in and of itself, i see it as markings of territory, more than anything...hence this strange belief i find many embracing, that of "minimalism". you do note that a people as to have this inclination, and what i am saying is that is inherent in culture, not language itself. we essentially agree, but on some very small order quibbles. Quote: again, i tend to disagree. our brains are perfectly fine with processing large vocabularies. some are just slow-learners on the subject. like me, you give me mathematics, i'll get back to you in awhile...i'm not whiz kid...but you ask me to write you a novelty in words and i'll give you one. it's perfectly understandable to think that most people are simply attuned to different orders of affairs [quite an instrumentalist and materialist take on my part, but alas, matters are just electrons within their own right, that are bound and spun]. this creates the instance of ideas and their changing and modifications. this can also be confuted by the matters of currency [sound-tokens of a brilliant deduction], whereby people will be fundamentally shifted into a survival mode over a multifarious leveling of forces [economic, survival, ideology, propaganda, social mores, etc.] which then effects the amount of time they have to concern themselves with thinking and memoragic concerns. Kant's "functional enclosure of epistemicity": and since "time is money" [as people say], there belies a sort of "chronoception" of belief, which is allotted and distributed in various strata of society and community. i find this is an affect on intelligence and memory, more than anything.
| |||||||
|
Stranger Registered: 02/19/18 Posts: 419 Last seen: 3 years, 11 months |
| ||||||
Quote: In what sense and to what end? You're expressing exactly what I referenced when I spoke of the time period/context in which these words came about.. A bunch of uppity wealthy people sitting around all day probing the extended detail they could go with language for no grander purpose than reflect that they had excessive time/money on their hand and could extole their mastery therein. There is no higher opposition/agreement with such vocabulary as it most typically amounts to self-masturbation. I of course value a higher-average of vocabulary. However, to the outer-reaches I described it has diminishing and sometimes negative returns in that you lose the number of people you can successfully communicate with yet gain nothing of value. If you go into a room of PhD physicists, they are going to have a scholarly Repertoire of English. Instead, they will have a scholarly repertoire of science. There are only 24 hours in a day, I'd much rather cultivate my mind in other ways than wank myself off to my expanded vocabulary. There's often no purpose beyond self flattery to it beyond a high-average.. Quote: You're expressing what I framed earlier to a T. Yes, a mastery of language/diction afford you a panoramic luxury of detailed expression. However, rarely in life beyond art is that desired. More often than not, it becomes a 'trophy' of elitism necessarily translating as : I have so much free time/luxury in my life that I can masturbate to a near infinite range of expression and master it even though it has no sensible real life value beyond art.. and what of this art of expression beyond the exclusive noble who can opine to such value in elite manner that its do? It's circular masturbation in the outer reaches.. You're declaring to the world your mastery of something while becoming increasingly less communicable and then you engage in wild mental gymnastics telling yourself you've obtained something valuable/transcendent. No dude... you didn't. The words I just typed out probably haven't be used by me in a decade. They're just sitting there dormant on a shelf. They're redundant to other more commonly used words. Like any educated/read person, I can pull them out of my arse at will. It doesn't make me intelligent. It adds no value to the conversation. Quote: Mins/Max .. there is idiocy at both ends of the spectrum for all things. The optimum is most often at a high average. I am well versed in a computing language. You probably are not. Opportunity cost. I am well versed in mathematics, etc etc.. All are languages. I don't seek to master them because there's idiocy at the max. I could find a guy who has mastered a computing language. If I put him in a team environment, he's equally as destructive as the idiot who knows nothing.. even worse probably because at least the idiot knows his limits. The master isn't a master but thinks he is.. and again, if no one understands him/his code, what is the value in that? Even in computing languages, after you learn mastery, you are told to focus on a narrow more common form in team environments. Recursion is a difficult thing to understand/implement and is a part of coding languages. However, you'll never see it in practice because it actually performs like dog shit and is impossible to understand. Isn't it funny how this principal of diminish returns is everywhere? Quote: Oh it's most definitely inherent in your brain unless you think you have special magic meat upstairs. I can point you to some neuroscience papers if you'd like. You brain definitely has limits of capacity/bandwidth/etc. I'd love for you to explain the benefit of clogging up such a system with redundant information. You brain in fact prunes this junk every night which is why you forget superfluous b.s. The marking in territory is the elitist thinking centered around language especially as it ignores the many forms that language come in : scientific languages, chemistry, math, physics, computing languages. Again, you don't have magic meat upstairs. So, mastering and becoming a savant of 'high art english'.. most likely requires you to be diminished in other areas and in that the clear negative/diminishing returns of specializing in something with no higher value. Quote: We likely agree on the concept of a great value residing in a 'high average' mastery of language. We might disagree on where to draw that line and I think you need to take pause to recognizing the opportunity cost involved in going past this 'high average'. We're both implying by omission that a lower average grasp of language is beneath discussion as it is clearly a bad thing that impacts all aspects of one's life/capability. Quote: Diminishing returns/opportunity cost/brain capacity. There is nothing to disagree on except where the lines are drawn up. The above are factual. If your brain ere fine w/ it, you wouldn't forget it. Forgetting occurs when your brain prunes/tunes down circuits that aren't in frequent use or of importance. It does this to run more efficiently and to 'reuse' unnecessary portions of your brain for more important things. Quote: You seemingly can't avoid what I framed earlier.. LOL Opportunity cost. Time is money. You could either spend your time mastering how to colorfully express these terms or master what they mean in the real world. To become versed in math to the level I did, I forwent the opportunity of indulging in the 'arts'. To become more versed in how the brain actually functions, I had to forego even more indulgence in language. The strata of old society knew nothing about the reorganized strata of today. Today, tech rules society and the languages therein. Mastery of language sets changes with society. Intelligence has nothing to do with rote memorization... and if you condition you brain to value such things, you indeed will be different and underappreciated in a era that values creation and master of science vs that of communicable diction. Maybe in a past life, a person of already high stature/wealth had the luxury of such recreation .. Most certainly not in this life. Our forefathers after-all, already plumbed those extremes so as to free our mind/time to other matters... If you are of the profession of the arts and literature, you most necessarily need the skills you express and it is indeed valued in its appropriate medium. Beyond that though... BRUH ![]() And honestly, of the many well authored books I read, I almost never find myself picking up a dictionary to understand a word. Doesn't take much indulgence to get to such a working vocabulary.. Just based K-12 education + college degree and occasional reading.
| |||||||
|
irregular verb Registered: 04/08/04 Posts: 37,531 |
| ||||||
|
is making up your own language good or evil
why would you do it? is there a motive?
| |||||||
|
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ Registered: 08/28/09 Posts: 82,455 Loc: Onypeirophóros Last seen: 4 years, 30 days |
| ||||||
Quote: you're simply highlighting the "capitalism" of words. the currency of language. it's a retroactive pursuit, to assess such things, isn't it? i see people opting for more of the same tenses of "reform", revolt", "reproach", "resign", "react", [aha]. this in an attempt to "take back" what they feel they should...well, all the properties of this "currency" aforementioned is seen here, in all it's glory. you use words to win, as much as one uses a sword. Quote: from a societal perspective, i could maybe see your point but...it's not always an "exchange" of values. sometimes people just like what they do. there is a repertoire to everything. [see, i kept it short here, and i'm not going to fill in the subtext with context. you get the idea, i don't need to flesh it out, right? not everything is a "test" or a "competition" or a "score" or a "gain", sometimes people are just bored and they are entertaining themselves with whatever system of interaction they, in their mind, wants to emulate, internally.] Quote: real life value? you think that that's something that's been assigned? ok...by whom? =) you tell me. Quote: it totally depends on the situation. i think wit is incredibly overrated, but...that doesn't stop people from incorporating into conversation. some people find word play annoying, and puns insufferable- not all, though. some people let their academic jargon flow wildly to people that can understand them, thus, more flows wildly flow, and you might not like that- but they do. sometimes natural language, the language of the laymen, or the poet, even, can be conflated and seen as one, and not unrightly so. Quote: sure, but one sense of idiocy is truly lacking, while the other is overflowing- and usually for the sake of reverence, yes, but it's not always to "pull the wool over ones eyes", as you seem to be implying. sometimes it's merely because it's more interesting and fun to use highfalutin language to explicate something quotidian and otherwise mundane. whereas minimalism is also an artistic statement, it's usually done for the abstract reason of "concision" [a concept that applies more to declarative statements, and professions which necessitate not just the economical, but the legalistic, or coded forms of interchange], whereby the reader is left with more holes than a vivid picture of events, which is a conundrum for the most part, not relevant here- i'm talking about brevitas, and the like concession to the wont for a reduction of circumstantial speech. platitudes. easy answers. quick answers and solutions. many people even confuse concision and succinctness, unable to comprehend that there is no "simpler way" to put "a thing". people confuse the notion of "word salad" with verbosity...because of their lack of a comprehensive vocabulary. Quote: i'm well aware of the concept of a 'sunk-cost'. however, you are you...you aren't me. i'm not you, either. clearly we have different perceptions on what is a "waste of time and energy" and what isn't. Quote: sure. but not all idiots know their limits, actually, that's kind of the definition of an idiot. a person who doesn't understand the concept of "their limit" and others'. Quote: yes, you are told to. Quote: i'm the guy who made an essay about how language is recursive and endless...and that information is the same. but also, that there is no "off" function. you are told what to do, are you not? Quote: i said the "brains' structure" to be specific. brains contain information, but they don't seem to contain structures that define a "minimum and maximum idiocy". i'm sure you think that'd be nice, though. isn't it funny how these recursions pop up? Quote: i never said it doesn't have limits. i already mentioned that it clearly has memory limits. it also has floating data points, which is an interesting phenomenon. Quote: i'd love for you to explain your point? what is your abduction? that writers are too writerly, and people should just 'learn to code', and be "more productive" in the particular way you think is the "better" way, and what would be more "efficacious" to some group or body, is the only choice solution to a problem [that] you perceive in people's expansive vocabulary in and of itself? sounds rather inexplicable, but maybe you can tell me about this grandiose fault of humanity. i blame the need to make money because you aren't exactly held-aloft by strings the state provides, no? or god, yes? not any of those things help anyone, and since people are not driven cattle, they have to learn for themselves, don't they? how to "make ends meet", as people say. really, when it comes down to your "pithy" society-made problem, isn't that the only concern? where it progresses from here in the most effective way? very computer like of you. Quote: you're doubly wrong here. who "makes the most of themselves" in this society...those who can code and do science. you're totally off-base here, with the idea of 'marking territory'. glad i brought it up. Quote: you decided that value, how? magic head meat? or no? not that? more like mechanical headmeat, oh metally one. but you decide what is negative in it's return because you are the entire arbiter of the social-engine. Quote: well, let's see where this goes, as it's a recursive set of two series here, one of the number, and one of the word. current-cy [rheological flows] and value-orientation. Quote: your brain automatically performs, involuntarily, to survive- a person will kill, likely, to survive. that's purely a motivation beyond the will- a person's will is everything, according to your admonishment to beware opportunity costs' detriment. so use it. [see, was that laconic end point more useful? i suppose not, it's a platitude signifying that you use your will, pretty obvious, right? but then again, that's what we're debating about, isn't it?] what is better? free will? or constrained will? and who is doing more of the constraining? word-smiths, or money-barons? writers or scientists? who makes the most "value" for society, and who makes the most "value" [or surplus value, for that matter, if one includes Marxian theory] for themselves, and where do we "draw the lines" or "not draw the lines" in this instance? should people shut up for the sake of a few? Quote: no, you're completely wrong, LOL, read again. i already addressed the aspect of "time as money", and you didn't address it [the actual thing i was ascribing to with the phrase...you just sort of repeated the phrase.] Quote: they mean as much as you're willing to extract- you're more in wont to extract more resources out of the earth, no? more "progress", more romantic gestures as such? no? tell me i'm wrong. Quote: all languages, like you said. so what's your point? that the number rules all? that the brain? the face? what is your point? Quote: ok, Tesla. i'm sure your courting genius levels of curiosity on the daily, and you'll enlighten the social world and civilization anyday now with something that will fill the void of their lives with, surely, something that is entertaining and not just "end-of-life necessity" like a medical cause, and "fructifying progress into the stars" with spaceships and maybe even space-mining, and there'll be annoying gadflies then, too, to pester you, annoy you, simply be speaking, right? Quote: you seem to admire these people, but you think that there is no room in society for such "faults" of all-too-human cognition, though...that...is merely an opinion. a lot of people value the stability of a recreation beyond pure number. Quote: *snore* Quote: conlangs have motives, like Toki Pona was constructed sort of for reasons that are highlighted above, namely, retention...but also a nonplussing language, to make people "kinder" and nicer overall. Edited by akira_akuma (12/22/19 08:19 PM)
| |||||||
|
Stranger Registered: 02/19/18 Posts: 419 Last seen: 3 years, 11 months |
| ||||||
Quote: I'm highlighting the origin of the 'art form' you seem most enamored by. Per your logic : Slang, Hood lingo, netspeak, and memes are of similar arbitrary value as the airy words which you favor. There's simply no compass or landscape with the picture you're painting and you either remain ambivalent to it because you've invested so much time/energy to this art or because you actually believe the elitist narrative I've already painted. I shouldn't have to use the words I am right now to get this point across but can in comedic fashion. My argument could be summarized in basic language in less than 2 sentences but here we are having a good ol' fashioned wank and go at each other for no higher purpose which is the hallmark sign of 'over-philosophizing'/mental masturbation for which there is indeed a 'language'. I choose not to waste my time excelling at it because I've found it to be pointless beyond witty ear-marking. Quote: We call that art/social science.. And there's a reason why it is considered to be a lesser degree of higher education. Quote: And depending on the nature of a thing ... i.e : Intellectual masturbation, therein lies the low value of such an exercise besides self flattery and/or mutual reach around flattery. Keep it short? That would have amounted to acknowledging my point that the 'repertoire' of mention was born out of elites having a wank at each other in past times while plebs did their bidding and how in this modern age its an outdated practice which is why most of it has died out along with the diction/repertoire. Some people enjoy the nostalgia of it all and what it was associated with : elitism/wealth... So, they enjoy the wanky and airy posturing that comes along with expressions of it. Maybe, I'm a wierdo but I very much have a point often to my engagements. Here, I was trying to really understand if you believed the posture you made on this and clearly you don't because you just admitted to doing so for : entertainment and there being no higher value beyond that. Quote: You believe creative communication art forms relate to intellect. Per your thinking those steeped in : slang, hood speak, netspeak, and memes are underappreciated Artisans of higher minded society... What I'm slowly unwinding to you is that the outdated nasally practices of old English have been replaced in modern times by netspeak/slang/memes. It's a far more effective expression of the same thing. A picture is worth a thousand words after-all. Who knows all the memes but an Artisan of high station of the modern web? Who pray tell is so free of worldly requirements but a NEET in a basement eating mum's tendies such that he may imbue his mind with memes aplenty? ![]() Come on man.. any great mind can pull this crap out of their rear end. Quote: It's a dry/dated practice steeped in elitism. I am no fan of it. The key point of observation was actually being in these circles/studying and excelling at the finest academies and higher ed institutions and realizing that its just 'social club' bullshit. I can turn it on at will and I see no greater purpose. Most of the humor is as dry as a desert. The intellect tasteless. The depth of ideation dearth... So, I see it of no great practice beyond the tried and true obsession of ivory tower elites who never get out and live life enough such that 'language' flows more organically and is attached to actual experience... Instead, the sheltered elites of time's passed merrily were theorist of life. They opined what life was like outside of their manner/station but never truly lived it... which is why their banter was so dry/shallow/weak. You can struggle as much as you like to posture in a different manner but you know these words to be true. Quote: It is for the sake of reverence for the pleb/idiot who lives life fully immersed vs. the academic who theorizes as to the experience from an ivory tower ad nauseam. Both extremes are steeped in the same ignorance of the middle fulfilling path. Listening to excessive verbiage about simple things or muddling complex things with flatulent words/posture is as excruciating as listening to an idiot Quote: You can't.. I have feet in many worlds. I know what they are in essence. You're having a good wank bruhv, bumpin your gums but aint sayin chit. There's no wool.. and my eyes are wide open calling it what it is. Quote: Quote: Platitudes : n. Flatness; dullness; insipidity of thought; triteness. As I stated earlier before this wank-fest. ![]() Quote: And some people like to fill the air/time with their own farts of Flatness; dullness; insipidity of thought; triteness. Quote: Whatever becomes of this foolishness you clearly concede is : - Platitude - entertainment Time has no value to you?
| |||||||
|
Stranger Registered: 02/19/18 Posts: 419 Last seen: 3 years, 11 months |
| ||||||
Quote: Not everyone steeped in the art of language is an intellect. You usually are able to decipher this through extended exchange. Limits can be surmounted if a person seeks growth/progress and has intention/goal behind their day to day actions. I can't imagine how one achieves that smelling their high art circular farts/philosophy all day... "Their limit" "others" You play with language so much you perceive a depth that isn't there in reality. It's all in the hall of language you have constructed in your head which gets me to the point I made about NEGATIVE returns playing with language too much. You begin to 'see' structure that isn't there. Your brain stops trying to perceive the world and its complexities as it is and instead begin trying to ascribe high art language qualities that aren't there. The classic entrapment of the lifelong philosopher.. Quote: You learn not to because it results in shitty performance and unpredictable and unstable code. Quote: I'm the guy with a Graduate degree in Computer Science who is telling you, even in this specialty, there are features of the language that are never used because in REALITY they lead to shitty performance, in-stable systems, and it is pointless which is why even in computing, most of the features of a language are never used because the ARTISANS who authored them were engaging in self-masturbation for the sake of language and that leads not to a higher meta understanding/practice of the world.. It leads you down a self-flattering and crappy trip through the language author's mind and a crappy inner trip down your own hall of mirrors. Quote: I was referring to the brain's biological structure and limits therein specifically with reference to memory and thought flows. Your brain has functional limits and actively and unconsciously prunes superfluous content. You have no control over this which is why one most frequently practice non-useful things to keep it 'fresh'. You're forcing your brain to not over-write the junk which you have subscribed to as a hobby. Quote: Yes, you are failing to 'see' yourself and your hobby for what it is so here we are still working through it. I'm done however. I know this pattern of exchange quite well when dealing with certain types who bask in self-masturbatory philosophy and I know having broken such individuals down with far more confronting language what the common intent is behind it .. As I have outlined earlier. Quote: Analog isn't a 'floating point' and its operation, in-so-much as the brain is concerned is not known. And no your brain has nothing to do w/ meme-learning statistics and RELU. Quote: My point to be blunt was: Don't smell your own academic/self read farts so much that you think because you have an artful expression of words that you're an : > Intellect > Big brain The great polymaths of the world don't take on the characteristics you extol. Quite the opposite. Quote: I'm not wrong in the slightest sense and please don't engage in psychological projection. While it appears I clearly am a man of science, I also maintain an extended study of what appears to be your bread and butter.. Enough such that I can cut through bs with ease. My point of referring to what modern elites (wealthy people) are now and how they speak was to take a dump on the art form of past modern elites (wealthy people) and artsy/fartsy language expression. True of today as it was then : Stop feeling yourself. You're nobody in the grand scheme of things. Nobody cares for your overly obtuse non-productive old-english art form expression. The same way no learned person cares for some tech billionaires grandiose bullshit. Quote: After smelling the air in the room, I could tell it was rank. So I investigated further and found its source. I don't determine value. I'm a nobody. I extend this out to others especially those steeped in an old tradition of elitism. It's your thing I guess.. Cool. But you said one crucial thing that got things down this course. Your equated language with intellect. It is not. You after-all didn't create the words/structure you are uttering from rote memorization... Elites of Oxford did. So, you are either unaware, unaffected, or are simply carrying on a tradition in hopes of associative valuation. None of which work on true intellect. So, do as you please. The world is after-all your own subjective experience. Feel as elite and as intellectual as you need to feel. I see your banter, as you have conceded, to be on par with hood slang.. Quote: I'm done after this post. I've wasted enough of my life masturbating with myself and others in the realms of philosophy. I have been missing for some time for this reason. Just dropping in towards the new year to see if any minds have changed and are oriented towards what's coming or hae interest. Apparently not.. Apparently art forms of old still capture minds of plenty. O'well. Quote: Spend less time in artsy fartsy books and pick up some books on neuroscience. You'll learn alot more about how your brain works and language even. You'll pick up scientific language/understanding that nullifies most philosophical bs from the past and you'll speak more intelligently in the present and future. DAT SUNK COST AT PLAY Quote: Will isn't everything. Spend less time masturbating to language/philosophy and more time studying science and you'll learn this. Quote: A healthy mix of all things is good. People's narrow focus and specialization is what plagues the earth currently. Everyone further wants to pretend they're something their not through images and language. Quote: Keep doing you bro.. Who I am to tell you different? Quote: I'm spend more of my time living life than philosophizing about it. This includes meta topics. This results in me not having alot of time to masturbate to theoretical language constructs and thoughts about it. I forgot, at what point I came to such a conclusion in my college education in philosophy.. But i distinctly remember a scholarly debate with a professor that resulted in a twisted circle jerk of language that arrived at nothing at which point i saw into his world and wanted nothing to do with such a self-immersed existence. Quote: Ah', the philosopher's black and white depiction of the world.. You're either wanking yourself off with romantic diction or you're a robber barron of destruction sucking the earth dry.. Somewhere out there in the real world, there is a middle ground.. It's where I live and in that realize the time/energy that it requires that results in me not being a self masturbator of language and thought forms. Quote: It's a point you'll never seemingly see wanking off in the hall of mirrors of language... That is my point. The real meat and substance of life/intellect simply pass you by because your brain is so obsessed with language/philosophy you see no point beyond your limited bubble of ROMANTIC thought. I walked away from this years ago. I know the textbook sign of it. How many posts have gone by with nothing of value said? This is normal to you... Quote: The ride never ends when your nose is this far in the air ![]() Quote: ![]() I admire these people? ![]() Look at yourself m8... Quote: ![]() Enjoy that beautiful world you crafted.. I know the reality.
| |||||||
|
Psychophysiologist Registered: 03/02/15 Posts: 8,006 Loc: Now O'Clock Last seen: 28 days, 2 hours |
| ||||||
|
Holy shit dude you're my new favorite poster on here, by miles. Saving this spot when I get back.
| |||||||
|
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ Registered: 08/28/09 Posts: 82,455 Loc: Onypeirophóros Last seen: 4 years, 30 days |
| ||||||
Quote: and i wouldn't disagree with that at all. you see? you think "airy highfalutin words", i'm just thinking "words". Quote: you keep assuming things: i never said that the above conlang was "super duper great" or anything, you're just assuming that i'm praising it. stop. it's disingenuous malarky. Quote: you think i admire Oxford? their dictionary sucks [they invent notions that do not exist, like "identitarianism" being a purely "ethnonationalist" phenomenon, even though it's just another word for "identity politics". the only dictionary i see get that one right is wiktionary] and they have some pedos hooked in over there...no, another failed prediction on your part. you're misreading me. i never said that you must admire them, i said "it seems you admire" them, and "them" was never "Oxford", but "them" meant "writers", like the fucking thing we were actually referring to...so again...take your disingenuous shit and try a little harder to make less foolish ascertainment. Quote: you've proven nothing. Quote: nothing of value? that's totally subjective. i've gotten nothing of value out of your posts, either. the real "substance" of life is not something people can pin-down so easy [philosophers and sociologists and anthropologists, etc., have tried for a long time], but i'd say everything up to and including the processes of the earth, and the mantic inclinations of a human soul, a human's personality, a human's desires, their thralldom in the viewing of their living self in existence, is a part of the language of reality. Quote: sure, you "accomplish" something by doing nothing. except that that isn't true, is it? you're masturbating right now, aren't you? why? aren't you just wasting your time, and mine? Quote: no one is stopping you. go bungie jumping or something. most of these ideas, including yours, are subjective and/or merely theoretical. Quote: yes, i've talked to people about the role of overspecialization in the current paradigms problematics, that you find people discussing all the time. and? people pretend about everything. even you. you're pretending right now, even by your own logic. Quote: yeah, well, i didn't say it was "everything". you haven't said anything here, just another "retort" of empty words. Quote: i already read neuroscience. floating data points, brainwaves [gamma, delta, theta, etc.,] did YOU get the memo? Quote: whoa, you're lightyears ahead of everyone, and wow you like know me and everything about me, your presumption that i am just all about everything i've said as arguments in this thread is just all i ever really think about or partake in. you like know this by way of super powers! you're something, you're really something! Quote: and yet LOOK at you hypocritically trying to determine value for ME! all while assuming that "this is all that i'm about", when it's not. i have more interests that this, but you've assumed too much, already. not that that bothers me, this is typical human behavior. Quote: there aren't many polymath left in the world, as there is so little time to study. and what are you talking about? you're acting like i started this tirade...you did. i'm responding TO YOU. not the other way around. Quote: wow, i shudder at your in-depth analysis, those boots, boy, they were made for walking, and you're doin' it...heck it's making me quake in mine! Quote: intelligence reports beg to differ. plus, i didn't say the brain itself was a mathematical object, i said there are floating data points in your neuronal structure...there is "overflow", "run-off", from neuronal activity. Quote: again, i'm so quivering right now. Quote: grammarians of old were real sneaky. you know what call the delusion of language? hypnothesis. but alas...you're using language to waste your time with me...why bother? maybe the same reasons i have bothered...no? now, go back to programming some stuff. Quote: yeah, no shit, but you're ascribing this to me, and to basically anyone you label as "philosopher". you know how many shitty programs have been written? tons. please, stop acting so high and mighty and calling me a piece of shit, when i can agree with you, mostly, just not your attitude...nor your imaginings that you are floating above this all like a colossus of genius intellect because you figured out that people can be full of themselves [sort of like you]. Quote: the encoding of the entire system is unstable, and will remain that way until we are all made into robots. the coding of the government is unstable, the coding of jobs are unstable, the coding of work itself, is unstable, the coding of love and life is unstable, the coding of families are unstable, the coding of everything goes into an overcoding and contains instability with stop-gap procedures. SO!? what THE FUCK are you gonna do about it? NOTHING. Quote: yeah, the smell of coding-farts are sooooo much more enjoyable. Quote: build more buildings. build more computers...no one fucking cares if you do, because they will adjust and then find things to complain about later, and it'll all be based on the lacking humanity that all these devices engender into society. Quote: and you think not with words, but with code! [even though that's just another language, them damn elites!] but of course we know that's false...you think with words...we all think WITH WORDS. Quote: you already failed and were mistaken in this regard. you assumed. Quote: dude, i bolded the really highfalutin (???) confusing language you used that really upset me. but other than that...yeh, no, you've not "unwound" me. i appreciate the language of memes and netspeak, to an extent. Quote: yeah, well, context matters. make a fucking point. give some context, instead of saying some people were full of shit in the past, hence, that invalidates the use of half the dictionary of English words, cause i've got a stick up my ass about elitism. don't worry, we all do. Quote: sorry^ too many big words, too idiotic, didn't read. Quote: you've mismanaged the context here. i never said i was trying to pull the wool over "your eyes", my statement was completely different than that...so your reading comprehension is failing you...now? now, after all of this, this is what you come up with? this pushback of "you won't pull the wool over my eyes", well, i'm not really trying to. you seem to be doing a good enough job of that, yourself. Quote: you haven't really made a point, all you've done is make a diatribe about how "people who use highfalutin speech or sesquipedalian language piss me off, personally". Quote: i can see that. Quote: first off, that's a platitude. you and your notion of "high-minded language is for elite pretentious fart-sniffers only, and they ruin everything with their bad coding!" is just a platitude, a shibboleth. secondly: are you not entertained? i am, hence, value. also, take note: you never address MY main point. you eagerly avoided it. YOUR ELITE LANGUAGE ... is number and code. prove me wrong. Edited by akira_akuma (12/24/19 02:32 PM)
| |||||||
|
Stranger Registered: 02/19/18 Posts: 419 Last seen: 3 years, 11 months |
| ||||||
|
I made a post.. You responded directly to me with :
Quote: Things went off the rails here because this is neither how a computer or brain functions. If you spend time researching either, you learn this. My first post was in response to Divided Quantum. You replied to me. Then I responded to you and this who drama got kicked off. I explained to you in quite simple terms why you were wrong and even agreed to a middle ground with reference to a 'high average' here : https://www.shroomery.org/forums Then came the foolishness that was steeped neither in science or computing and instead artistic philosophy of your own making. For which I entertained because you sounded intelligent and I thought you were trying to get to something of higher intelligence but the more things went on, it was just 'art'. My first post was my point. My first response to you was my point. You missed this because you intended to engage in art. The only intelligent discussion could have been about neuroscience or computing because that's the context of my initial post and the context of your initial reply. We danced around and had a good ol' time and I was reminded of something from my past which I knew to be a waste of time and called it quits. What has happened thus far and up until now in human history is that all of the cool and deep stuff has already been done. There's really no more grand philosophy to discuss. So, philosophers are bored and make up conversation and debates.. The same actually goes for a number of other disciplines. For most of academia... Even corporate America. The next thing is there if people combined disciplines but everyone is stuck in their respective 'towers' of specialization huffing farts. Eventually they will be combined and something great will come of it and it will refresh and give everyone something new to talk about. Until then, its comfort around the fireplace I guess.. I came back a week or so before we head into 2020 to see.. after spending some time away if anything has changed.. Is there some new 'meta' being discussed? Some new and deep spiritual insights? Are the people who have dabbled with their third eye even aware or trending on what is to come? And the answer is : Nah.. The same ol' same ol'. What's interesting is, this is pretty much the case almost everywhere.. Which alerts me to the timing of things.
| |||||||
|
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ Registered: 08/28/09 Posts: 82,455 Loc: Onypeirophóros Last seen: 4 years, 30 days |
| ||||||
Quote: no. you...*sigh* you were the last poster before i said that...but i wasn't addressing you just because i said what i said after you said what you said...what? am i supposed to "reply to" someone else who i'm not trying to reply to, in order for you to not be confused? well, sorry...but that's not really gonna help anything, is it? so just stop being confused. i said what i said, and then you said what you said, blah blah blah, you aren't going get a response like "oh you, you're so right, i responded to you! so i must now listen to your ass all day!" right. my fucking god...i was actually coming in here to say something...people do not understand exaggeration these days...at all...i think this is a clear-cut example of how this occurs...because people [like you] get confused as all fuck, and then you start trying to preach, and then i'm just responding to your ass, like, WTF ARE YOU ON ABOUT, but my dumb ass falls for this whack-ass preachy diatribe about how you're gonna teach me how to think right, and how to talk right, and act right, wtf are you my fucking mom & dad? you're gonna teach me about how to respond to you? WTF this is like one of the Youtube videos i'm watching now...lol, it really is. ![]() PS: the rest of your post i hardly read but...good for you. i'm happy that you're happy.
| |||||||
|
Stranger Registered: 02/19/18 Posts: 419 Last seen: 3 years, 11 months |
| ||||||
Quote: Easy solution... *Heads over to user settings and forgets this ever transpired.
| |||||||
|
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ Registered: 08/28/09 Posts: 82,455 Loc: Onypeirophóros Last seen: 4 years, 30 days |
| ||||||
|
ahaha, i knew you would do that. boy, you really got...oh what's the meme again... oh right...
![]() boy, i trigger all the "superskeptic reality busters", even Loaded Shaman nig'd me, and i thought he and i were on the same ontological-rationalist page, but boo-hoo, he mad. you people are too much. PS: https://www.shroomery.org/forums i defy anyone to tell me this post doesn't exude highfalutin fart smell. .... i rest my case. Edited by akira_akuma (12/24/19 12:45 AM)
| |||||||
|
Psychophysiologist Registered: 03/02/15 Posts: 8,006 Loc: Now O'Clock Last seen: 28 days, 2 hours |
| ||||||
|
Akira is a tool that has to leave low ratings on people that already had him blocked for months for this exact type of shit.
Fool left me a 0 star rating after I had him blocked so I wouldn't have to interact with his lack of understanding of rational philosophy. That right there is a desperate person in need for validation, because they know they have nothing. Don't take it to personal, you're triggering his insecure ass because you're correct. Edited by Loaded Shaman (12/24/19 01:33 AM)
| |||||||
|
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ Registered: 08/28/09 Posts: 82,455 Loc: Onypeirophóros Last seen: 4 years, 30 days |
| ||||||
|
whatever, though...here is a quote from someone that explains language in a way, a very concise way, if you simply read between the lines:
"...but like in a subconscious way [someone knows a word they mean to say], but when asked [what the word means, to the person, one] doesn’t know how to word it. A lot of people do that, especially if they like learning weird words". this explains alot of why i have learned my vocabulary...this susses everything, and is quite sound: i have always been able to think of words that i wanted to use to describe something, and my mind, i guess, seems to like to pick up on "weird words" [there've been studies on how "word sounds" are attractive to people on a fundamental level], and so subconsciously they've been stored in my memory, and are accessed when i think it's the word to use- this is how i've always operated on the shroomery, hence, why i've often miscalculated and misused words, which i then have to correct [the latter usage of], and/or explain the meaning of my use of the word and the reasoning for the timing my use of the word [kairos], which i mistook for the word i wanted to use to express what my thoughts were- these rare instances are then later corrected, in affirmation to the mistaken identity of the word to the actual proper word i was looking for [if i've been made aware of it, which i usually check]...at this point, i don't really think about it, my vocabulary is pretty maxed out, i'd say- for the most part. oh and, LS: [you nig'd me, so that's you also being triggered, by the way] "Some claim that science is the ne plus ultra in the education of human affairs at large, and that what follows is that empiricism is the sine qua non of scientific endeavor. This is the imp of nu-scientism. Truly, and insuperably, the notion follows suit, that it is not empiricism which is sine qua non to science [however of import it may be], but that instead the sine qua non of scientific endeavor is ratiocination, per se. Indeed, science is driven by predilections. Nothing more. This is the sine qua non of science. To be driven by predilection for further discovery. Ratiocination is universal. What is empirical is real qua conception, but 'cannot be universal without the text', however, and is contingent on it [, hence it is absurd to reason that ratiocination is at the behest of empiricism as a tool, and not the other way around], seeing as we don't all share the same sense organs, q.e.d." Loaded Shaman, i've already assessed what you've conceptualized in form. good day. you have completely misapprehended [and are another new fangled "my way or the highway" individuals who need to have things done "precisely your way", because logic outside your bubble eludes you, you can't communicate or even reason that there is communication that isn't "logical" by your "exact standards", which aren't even consistent in reality, they are mere fibers which need to be coded to your particular parochialistic "language" which only you can "see" people communicating with you using "your logic", which you simply call "logic". it's ludicrous. you're unrealistic. and you're not even wrong. and no, you're not triggering me: no. you [both] left me bad ratings, i simply returned the favor, and simply corrected rootcomplex's earlier good rating from me. you've betrayed me, in a sense. this is what you get...you've not won any battles, here, but it's HYSTERICAL that you think that some ratings are enough to "evince" this for you, in delusion. PS: https://www.shroomery.org/forums another esoteric ontology. what have you done lately? Edited by akira_akuma (12/24/19 02:43 AM)
| |||||||
|
Stranger Registered: 02/19/18 Posts: 419 Last seen: 3 years, 11 months |
| ||||||
Quote: Yeah, I just saw a shroom fall off my rating. It's all good. I didn't engage him further with the intent of starting a flame war. I actually had this crazy hope he'd see himself and try to center on a goal/point to his high minded/artful language. I just got done with a write-up about this very thing in Academia. Too many people smelling their own farts instead of moving the ball forward collaboratively. I seemingly always have a higher minded goal behind my actions. It's been shocking lately to drill it out with a person and have them come to realize/state they don't.. Like what? They often say 'I do it for entertainment' or 'just to pass time'. And I'm sitting here deeply into my pursuit to understand the universe and I realize I'm speaking with people who have no such drive. They're literally just humping around the human experience for the feels. What? Who does that with their life? Language.. Yeah, there's the 'human' interpretation of it and then there's the functional/directional aspect of it. I'm a human being so I ofc got the feel-zone interpretation like everyone else.. But that's native and base-level.. Once I discovered the functional/directive aspect, I stopped indulging in the feel-zone. Richard Feynman - Names Don't Constitute Knowledge.. 'I refuse to learn the names of things because knowing the name doesn't constitute knowledge'... A profound and true intellect : Would walk circles around some of the best philosophers. Sure a person can know the language/names of a thing and go on and on and on about it and still know nothing.. Have no true understanding and its pointless to spend extended time with such a person because they have a mental limitation.. They can't see beyond the language/names into that next functional/directional aspect... Which is why they never seek to build anything in conversation.. They only seek to wax/wayne in the romantic utterance of words... and pull others DOWN into that space. Screw that man. Philosophy and a number of Academic disciplines are literally in a rut because all the major progress has been made in them and no one wants to take the risk/make the effort to look beyond it. So, lots of adherents are simply romanticizing covered ground. Uttering the names of dead men and ideas as if they are great minds by association. A big change is coming and from that new and exciting 'work' humanity will progress from there. Until then, its rather pointless this circling of the same wagons. It's almost like a waiting pattern until the next break through... Of course, no one in this formation is willing to step out and strike anew.. They'll wait instead on the odds to finally favor a pioneer meanwhile spitting on them and kicking them along the way for good measure for stepping out of the 'tribe'.
| |||||||
|
Psychophysiologist Registered: 03/02/15 Posts: 8,006 Loc: Now O'Clock Last seen: 28 days, 2 hours |
| ||||||
|
Absolutely. The assumptions, mostly platonic/determinism, poison both science and philosophy with completely irrational metaphysical primary(s).
| |||||||
|
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ Registered: 08/28/09 Posts: 82,455 Loc: Onypeirophóros Last seen: 4 years, 30 days |
| ||||||
Quote: you people always want to exaggerate. that is, when it suits you to, when it "makes you feel better", you can make hyperbolic claims of my insincerity, but when it comes to coming up with a counterargument, it's nothing but more exaggerations, only of the sort where "i'm just so-and-so" and how you're not gonna deal with that!...it's the same with all you hardheads who think you know it all.LOL, it's typical. Quote: oh boy...do i have to try and explain to you that i do the same thing too? is that how ludicrous you are? Quote: "Plato believed rhetoric was to truth as cookery was to medicine. Cookery disguises itself as medicine and appears to be more pleasing, when in actuality it has no real benefit." another one up against you. you use these terms willy-willy and you don't know their scope. "platonism" isn't your enemy, there was the unwritten doctrine, you sophomoric sophist. there is your fucking direction, it's within, it's spiritual, you...*sigh* Quote: lol, sure, you aren't doing any of this writing based off of 'feelings', none at all.... you aren't being rational. ratiocination is had only with volition, and volition requires vitality, it requires motoricity, it requires a "leap" into action [otherwise, you'd be in a state of 'aboulia']...and knowing how to act...it requires feelings to coordinate the logical decision to take said "leap", and this leads to the action whereby you can coordinate decisions based off of logic, and reason, outside of 'feeling'. but you are still dwelling in 'feeling'. you aren't 'knowing' what you are saying you have the answers for...which is why i laugh and will continue to. [one also shouldn't confuse 'feeling' for 'emotions', they're two different things. one is sensory, the other metaphysical and extrasensory.] PS: you all nigged me cause you can't take opposition...pathetic. we even agree on most things, but...you won't see.... ![]() Quote: who can't put up opposition that's fitting for him, so he puts people on ignore, cause they out-annoy him. enjoy your echo chamber. here's some of the things i've written, already, that are all in the same vein as what you two are jerking off about: §1: To be motivated by ideologies & ideograms/ideographs [words] is to be within a aggregate which is subsumed by memes which engulfs into multiplicities, at any rate—only the flows & holes made creates channels which feed into the symbolized or iconified architectonic aggregate. §2: The "perfusion" of aggregates into multiplicities are memetic in nature, that is to say, they are libidinal/information investments that are communicable [& not merely mimesis or copying, per se—this "copying" occurs when agents operate within an accretion, not otherwise]. §3: A 'memetic accretion disk' is a zone of "memetic zero", which confers a coterminus loop with the inside/outside. This "leap of translationability" is what determines a rhizomatic effect/affection. oh look §⁂: The universe is built infinitely recursive, where the information serves thermodynamic entropy—and entropy, negentropy—and viz. that selfsame process, the reverse is fed into the universe—and the universe, as much as we are built into "it", "it" is built into our cells/self. (Scholium, 1: It should be noted [it's been expounded on, elsewhere] that the "metaverse" theory only serves as a useful metaphor for recursion in a subjective/objective psychegenic split in the symmetry of the universe, in that you have asymmetry and antisymmetry.) Scholium, 2: It could be said that the antisymmetry of the universes' "outside" [which is it's 'solve' for recursion] is self reference itself [cf. Kant, Gö-del, et al.] & could be said to be in a state[ment-is] of cryostasis, and on the other hand, that "sound" is it's result. oh no The world around you does effect you. These people with a lack of meaning in their lives are the same kind of people who need religion in their lives...it's a commonality, is what I am saying. There are kinds of people who cannot find meaning within their own self. It's a common trait throughout most of human history. You are seeing the nihilating of the world at large, right now; these people aren't born nihilated...they are nihilated because they have no meaning that they can hold on to without it being turned into dust and flying away into the void of space. Does one think if you just had infinite amounts of tidings and work, and these progressives weren't around, that you wouldn't ever struggle with your quotidian existence?...I'm just saying, it ain't all that uncommon as a regular defining human trait, in existence, as opposed to just some "new thing". oh gosh, it's just like you guys say! gasp! People are incapable of processing information critically, in the online domain [the pedagogy of the damned]. People often use critiques posed by other people [usually their betters] as an offensive or defensive attack against views that they loathe [usually from repetition, quotidian redundancy, or indoctrination], and usually without having sussed the views that the critique they are appropriating from the critic actually are [that is to say, the work hasn't been done to investigate the critique by one's own inspection]. This makes information inherently dangerous. oh but you'll never see it! Deductive reasoning is key, but the suppositions needs meet a leap of faith: truth in objective terms, which must always been heeded as only "potential" without circumspection, and therewith, afterwards, one follows the clews which lead to the truth thereby deduced to be able to be found, by asking, primarily, the question which was based not on induction [signifying only an adducing within a paradigm already well-explored], or simply the deductive reasoning [wherewith you may or may not be totally true, but in all probability, are sussing some kind of truth, even if minutely, whereby it can be sussed, or not] of asking the question that hasn't been evinced by empirical evidence [that is to reason by tautology, but only using the principal of sufficient reason], but by reasoning what is something to be looked upon and searched for within reason and then found - so both induction and deduction are twain in this very regard, for science to even persist, these two things are both needed, are both integral. cause you're being cowards There is an objective reality. It is called "the universe". That is the objective reality. The rest is utterly subjective, and where at least the tools are concerned [the technics and organs/bodies we use to manipulate those technics, the mechanical but also 'machinic' aspects of ourselves], we are only able to use these tools interpretively. You need numbers to have objective fact, but numbers are moving all the time, at an objective rate, but this rate is arbitrarily "objective" [it's ostensibly only a vicissitude of systems in universal terms], that is, it's effectuated by subjective forces [you, and I]. Where our subjective realities meet in objective terms, is through bodies, thru affects [read Spinoza- objectively, not as a religious aspect, but as an essentialist theory]. It is thru the psychegenic faculties of consciousness that we interact, in the vast sea of data. But, essentially, you can suss objective reality thru mathematics, and using physics- mass & gravity are the two harbingers of the ends of this objectivity. Then after that, is the notion of an aether. Photons are what make up the universe in it's finest aspect, all time and space is subject to it. Chronons [and the asymmetric counterpart Chorons] make up the spacetime fabric of our quantum 6x6 orthogonal universe of sinusoid waves of floating points, at rest only in illusion, constantly in spin. Science [with math, not just "I see, therefor..."] can deduce what philosophers and spiritual teachers have said for quite awhile now. And if you were just dreaming, then I'm you, so...think about it. [This is sussed using the principal of sufficient reason.] and i've already done did "transcended" ya'll Some people can have experiences of a certain sort, that they confuse as "God", when really it's just "Being". Coming into Being. Being is that which is without a known cause and without language or reason, this is the place where "morals" come from, because in such a way, one's system of thought, and thusly, ethics, that they were ingrained with [or not] in their life, breaks down, and they must think totally for themselves...at this stage, you could experience vivid visions because your thoughts are conceived of so lucidly they they flash before your eyes. When a certain reticulating system in your brain's neocortex is stifled [which you do induce with maddening devices such as automatic writing, or something], you lose track of the constant semiotic flow from your mind [and it's extension to the outside world, from your head]. This can be experienced and you can summarily come back from it. This would mean it isn't schizophrenia but another kind of experience which is met temporarily- then you come back to a meet lucidity of normality. However, most people think of this as a "religious experience" [your brain has centers for such processes, you know], and while it technically is...people thinking of that as "God" have always been...aloof and mistaken. And yes, if one experiences this, one can be on track for a mental breakdown. This kind of thing has been known to provoke a mental breakdown. It's also possible to not have that occur- perhaps if this kind of thing is induced, it's easier to come back from- I don't know. and have already covered your ground. =) the enervated have ceased to be able to put up a line of opposition, so they must retreat. but they will, in big blocks of text, tell me how i need to "narrow things down", make it smaller...make it better for them. always. § [S]egmenting the "machinic" from the "vital" aspects of mankind will not induce anyone to forsake the malfeasance of human kind in their high places, and synarchic lines will continue to unfold, in a manner unbefitting for "a commons". The "tragedy of the commons" is not wrong, and synarchic lines will continue to proof the efficacy of human malfeasance. § Conflating progressive ideology with "communism" at every turn is really showing how lacking in education most people are, in respects to anything outside of their typical "domain" of experience. If institutions/corporations imbibe "woke" progressivism to relieve monetary debt, they are not being communists, they are being socialist-capitalists. § Subsidies are an issue. Mortgage-backed securities are an issue. No wonder subsidies & cheap mortgages are being pushed on the market—tender floating for land use, big business, etc., is a driving factor in the economy; your housing isn't—but banks still need your cash or credit. § Modal systems of world-building made from predilections, as opposed to necessary explanatory systems: the world-at-large. § It's convenient to believe that "money" & "religion" can't control people with complicity from synarchic lines of the holders of said money & the overseers of said religions, that is, 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 media being implicit in their decision making. The medium = the message. § After enough layers of lies, they are impossible to discern from one another. Truth is ignored. § If "the path of light reflecting from a mirror, the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection", then that would mean that light having a curve, at all, is indicative of a curvature in space-time, or hence, the earth itself. § What if reality is nothing but people's subjective interpretations, and what is termed "objective" is just notional? that is to say, what if the "objective" is merely a instantiation of all perspectives, held at once, and that the "truth" is simply what we engender in the world? § Just some speculation. No one can say what is or isn't objective and what is or isn't subjective, without stepping into the realms of both at once; the subjective [which is a supposed "limit"] and the "objective" [again, being supposed as a "limit"] being twain at this level. § An encapsulation of Tradition: sitting at table, old and young, merry conversation, sup, and agreement. § There are memes regarding generational gaps, in both directions of past and futurity, which are currently extant in usage, which don't serve Tradition. § [A]ll these notions called "communism", "socialism", "capitalism", "fascism" [especial to take note of this "third position"] are ideographs, they can be used for any advantage that's liable to be fitted to it's use, per se. Hence the worry about "the meme's affects", here and there. Memes can also be used against the one which fits the meme the most, even in the positive sense. § Memes are borne straight from the minds of men who enact their desires, without conforming to a triangulation and a "conservative movement", a movement which doesn't exist as is, without triangulation. § 'Being-made-to-fit' [triangulation]: a premise [thus extension] for war, for language itself, for communication, for action, for society, and the ethnos. § Mimesis [on the otherhand] is 𝗻𝗼𝘁 so bad. It allows communication to transcend [transmit fully] a dedication in producing desire, and connection [even if it's still limited, alas- "three's a crowd"]. On the transverse end of this equation, you also have a transmitted "fill" when gaps abound; this can be disheartening but ultimately, it's something to be worked-thru, and actually it proves helpful, implicitly. § Most people tend to get joy out of sociality [and then there are sociopaths & psychopaths]. This shows that our end goal is just and righteous. It's just getting there that's seemingly impossible. Probably because we have become [or always were] dysfunctional. § We have lost the "ground" that our forebears delineated and are now driven not by our personal proclivities, but instead, by our misplaced & selfish desire to have those individual proclivities dispossessed for the sake of conformity—to mimic what we've forgotten. § Beauty in comedy is an ugly place; the art of which can only be sussed in the making of tragedy, and turning away from the earnest to [the] core of the loss in the most significant way, as the subject of the tragedy is always the object[ive] of the comedy. § Comedians generate laughter by injections of micromemes into syntax: this is how, for example, one can simply engender the audience [of a medium] to imagine a 'sweater', if you will, for when I say the word they are primed, even in a context of a line of pure gibberish. § Art and politics really are like oil and water, they are essentially a form of modern art [and postmodern art is like setting on fire, and admiring the results, but again, metaphorically speaking—we are also practical & use axiomatics for discretion of provable knowledge]. § Maybe that's what a Philosopher is? an artist that failed to not get bored: what is this 'boredom' at all if not the distinct distaste for the times which one gets lulled into it? what is "boring" other than that which is that which is a manifest disgust in one's current station? § Both scientifically & artistically we are working inversely from properties of elements that are mathematical/precipitable by way of perception, consciousness, intuition, whereby thru induction [mathesis] philosophical/sophisticated constructs are manipulated. § Science is merely contrived apparatuses & assemblages [extension-machines], models of predilections, statements of hypotheses, statistics, and codes of conduct [arbitrary recognized signs of reasoning qua empirical denotations of translation into code], via language + mathesis. § Ever since science could be considered to be 'right', it's at least been rather poetic. anybody can come here to see me foregoing these two their own histories. §1: To adduce linguistic theory in the order of perfection and completion, one must consider the malleability of language, in and of itself, q.e.d. §2: Claiming that a "linguistic theory" being weaponized thru the notion that "relationships between signifier and signified are arbitrary" doesn't evince any "wrongness" to the theory, but does show an instance of the arbitrariness to the use of the theory. §3: Usage would dictate how a linguistic theory settles the 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 of words (specifically), via semantic processing—ideograms hold sway psychologically based on semantic framing, then pragmatics are affected, afterwards, based on usage, if & only if [words] are defined. §4.1: One needs words [sound-image/sound-tokens] to explain concepts, and those words need to be agreed upon, in usage. §4.2: (This isn't an argument about a claim of 'weaponization', it's a claim about how that [some] (most) {all, actually} signifiers/signifieds are 'arbitrary'; which I defined the usage of "arbitrary", above, accurately, in this instance.) §⁂: Symbolic logic/language = Idealized forms ≠ Elements [of Form] = "Nonsense" — Terms of Form = ie., ideologies, thought-forms, concepts, words, etc. §∞:The infinite thought[s] Godsmile-creator: §Ʊ: (All I have said was/is true. You think "their relationships are not arbitrary" but they are. 'Usage' is what is "naught arbitrary", concerning language—and regarding linguistic theory, if it's sound, sure it can be weaponized, but it's also still 𝒔𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒅 [eg., "holds water"].) § Apolitiea is suburb for grounding one in ratiocination, over "rationalization" [and "empiricism" of feelings]. § The phrase "now you're talking my language" has turned from a common idiom to simply "$". From basic communication (koine) to the idiom, to the hopelessly abstract. This is the quickest way to define the fine line the brain-trust of social society needs to make. § All ideologies are correct and simultaneously gnoseological. § Where is the flow release valve everything is accelerating. § Yo, it's just them memes and desiring-machines, welcome to the world. § The contemporary philosopher has two options: to attempt to naturalize the mystical, or to reify the virtual- that is the theory of an "organic unity" in sociality or "functional economy"- anything less is not "objectively real", but it is 'virtually' acceptable. i wrote this a few years ago 𝙸𝙽𝙴𝙵𝙵𝙴𝙲𝚃𝙸𝚅𝙴 𝚁𝙷𝙴𝚃𝙾𝚁𝙸𝙲: 𝙾𝚅𝙴𝚁𝚄𝚂𝙴 𝙻𝙴𝙰𝙳𝚂 𝚃𝙾 𝙼𝙾𝚁𝙴 𝙲𝙾𝙽𝙵𝙻𝙰𝙶𝚁𝙰𝚃𝙸𝙾𝙽 §1: [T]he point of effective language is to belittle and disdain the opponent as weak. §2: n an appropriate context this can help to make a point clear and concise, like a good slogan or epigram. But it's overuse can dilute the power that word holds over your opponent, but even worse, it can lead to giving more ammo to your opponents. §3: t simply becomes ineffective that way, and thus lends to them being able to formulate their own desiccation around it; those then become bullets, more ammunition for them to use. LOL! §1: Subjective realities and objective reality are two different things. What do you all have of the building blocks of reality? what do you know outside of unreality, of "matter"? Reification, duplicity. The objective reality is the plenum. We are all flowing points in waveform. §2: Our minds are containers [so to speak] of floating data points, and memoragic neuronal structure—cells—and the dynamic make-up of energy which sets it all in motion—which without [that] we'd be unbounded, collapsed into zero. [Wavefunctions 'collapse' into existence. Weird.] §3: Beyond that which subjects encounter as experience in this waveform, we are all One. A projection of reality itself, within white holes, or "pores", aqueducts of actual reality [actual motion]. lol, i've already wrote all the things you two are talking about. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA § Intuition and conjecture are the elements of thought qua thinking-cognitive process, but not more: the basic necessities before the conclusive 'whyfor'. § These such statements should [be] considered heuristic at a plateau [double-bind] which can affirm a better conversive model [truer statement]. § The world and it's history, contemporary politics and civility, society and it's antecedents, are all tied to a conundrum of mass proportions. Hence, many a conjecture will have plenty of room to be wrong, as well as potentially right, in any given circumstances. § There will [usually] be errors in ones' predilections. All my assessment & findings collated together [the good—the bad—the contradictory] compile a road map of my automath education. § If something "breaches scientific convention" and yet still works in "an occult fashion" [cf. Leibniz vs Newton], it's validity holds true, regardless of the fashion in which it keeps hold [cf. Special Relativity]. § There should be made clear the distinction[s] between established fact—insuperable fact & established fear—insuperable fear. § Before...we were tools of our own ambitions, but production of our own desires. Then before that we were unknown creatures of a fœtus of a mass concrescence of cells which dwelt in darkness & hidden movements in the lightning jungles of carnavaleux-masques. § ℬℯ𝒻ℴ𝓇ℯ '𝓌ℯ' "𝓌ℯ" 𝓌ℯ𝓇ℯ 𝓃ℴ𝓉𝒽𝒾𝓃ℊ. 𝒴ℴ𝓊, ℴ𝓇 ℐ, 𝒽ℴ𝓌ℯ𝓋ℯ𝓇, 𝒾𝓈 ℴ𝓃ℯ 𝓉𝒽𝒾𝓃ℊ 𝒶𝓁𝓉ℴℊℯ𝓉𝒽ℯ𝓇 𝓈ℴ𝓂ℯ𝓉𝒽𝒾𝓃ℊ 𝒹𝒾𝒻𝒻ℯ𝓇ℯ𝓃𝓉. literally everything! that's why you were liking what i was saying before, Shaman...until you had one line of contention with me [probably a misunderstanding] and you get defensive when i shoot you a rating for nigging me? lol, run away, dude, you can't take the heat. Quote: sure, cultist. §1: What needs be accounted for is even the smallest things [within reason], seeing that anything less would contradict the principal of a sufficient reason, in and of itself, being that one does not want 'wrong' or 'harm' done to their person [reasonably so]. §2: But that 'not accounting' so for even any one thing is sufficient to betray that principal; hence, the contretemps of the courtroom and judges [of corruption], and madmen, and like contraindications of multiplicities. §3: [W]hich multiplicities make needs for the state-proceeding of leveling what is small with proportionality: a making small of that which is big, and then visa-versa, in penalty and 'coercion of justice' [economical-gearshafts], or ie., the prison-body. ta-da! alrady got you guys covered, so you two don't even need to waste all your precious time spewing all those wasteful words! =D but here is where you get sad: § Language does create a curve-time warp and woof. § But no, rather, language 'distributes' itself across this plane. § The refraction for the wont of representation creates the inflection of all chaos. oh but...but language is just wasteful! boo-boo, the academics were WRONG! says two people who think they are smarter than all academia. Edited by akira_akuma (12/24/19 06:24 AM)
| |||||||
|
Stranger Registered: 02/19/18 Posts: 419 Last seen: 3 years, 11 months |
| ||||||
Quote: The greeks and Romans trunk lifted the bulk of their work from prior civilizations that maintained deeper knowledge/understanding. This is not to say there is some ancient meta magic secret out there.. Instead it is stated to take note of a natural cycle that occurs at many different scales : The unaccredited ovewriting of original ideas/understanding by lessor minds. If you've studied enough about history and a read enough, you can see the tell tale signs.. Typically lots of excessive language and redirection.. Skirting around the truth that they got the original idea elsewhere. Once you find the original author, ah' it just flows through your mind and out your finger tips and tongue (the understanding). One of my big breaks along my journey was understanding that a lot of history was bogus and a lot of true pioneers unmentioned because they didn't fit 'the narrative'. I got off into ventures into these people's lives and thoughts and found profound things over time. Plato and the other famous greeks/romans don't even register beyond my formal education which extends to a high level. I always found the material dry and void of life.. After I graduated and began pursuing deeper truths, I came to understand why. These people formalized a language around constructs that weren't their original thoughts or deeply understood thoughts. This extends to the highest reaches and especially to the outer reaches of math too.. physics and so on and so forth. The formal 'languages' of these disciplines were made by flawed human beings and from their cultural/subjective lensing. It's buried deep within it and compounded with time over longer runs. In this I realized that there are certain points in history when one most break the chains of such histories/languages/well accepted bodies of work, begin again with first principles and replumb from the ground up. For, the corpus becomes such a heavy and inefficient thing to carry, that no one can progress with it. This sentiment is not held among the academic who is indoctrinated in the 'institutional mind'. It is reserved for the pioneer. One who carries the knowledge of the institutional mind but has a certain lack of respect for it so as to be able to see its flaws and transcend them. This person has it especially rough due to the nature of what occupies their mind and at what level they must perform. The high chance of failure and a complete lack of support from their peers. The gatekeepers will stone you to death at the mere utterance of such contempt for their body of knowledge. Alas, we stand on the verge of 20/20... and a bold new frontier. Theories of the micro, meso, and macro shall be ripped apart and redressed based on new first principles. Old beliefs resigned to the past. A new belief front and center for the future. Until a new generation down the road comes to same cross-roads and strikes the iron while its hot.
| |||||||
| |||||||
| Shop: |
|
| Similar Threads | Poster | Views | Replies | Last post | ||
![]() |
Limitations of Language | 2,236 | 17 | 07/11/03 07:08 PM by Strumpling | ||
![]() |
math is a language. | 1,853 | 13 | 02/26/06 11:42 PM by Cowgold | ||
![]() |
Spiritual Language | 1,260 | 14 | 09/15/06 06:02 AM by Gomp | ||
![]() |
Honesty and the Arbitrary | 1,597 | 14 | 04/24/06 09:56 PM by SkorpivoMusterion | ||
![]() |
A critique of modern language ( |
1,676 | 24 | 10/31/09 03:14 PM by rebus_minus | ||
![]() |
Should an international language be encouraged? ( |
3,564 | 40 | 08/05/07 02:50 PM by BlueCoyote | ||
![]() |
The language barrier ( |
3,314 | 32 | 02/18/06 01:21 AM by gettinjiggywithit | ||
![]() |
Language ( |
2,778 | 25 | 01/24/09 11:08 PM by Bernackums |
| Extra information | ||
| You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum 1,742 topic views. 1 members, 5 guests and 9 web crawlers are browsing this forum. [ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ] | ||


_ 







that is, when it suits you to, when it "makes you feel better", you can make hyperbolic claims of my insincerity, but when it comes to coming up with a counterargument, it's nothing but more exaggerations, only of the sort where "i'm just so-and-so" and how you're not gonna deal with that!...it's the same with all you hardheads who think you know it all.

