A revolution in thought - Page 700

davidm · #**17476** 05-26-2012, 06:07 PM

We're almost to 700. :grin:

davidm · #**17477** 05-26-2012, 06:09 PM

CELEBRATING
700 PAGES
of
EMETIC

DRIVEL
:MMMM:

Party On!

peacegirl · #**17478** 05-26-2012, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidm

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

Is this "germinal substance" inherited from both parents or only one of them?

If it's inherited from only one parent, is it inherited from the mother or the father?

Lone Ranger, all he meant by "germinal substance" is the substance that we're all derived from, as I've already expressed. A and B, which represent the sperm and the ovum, don't die even though C, which represents the individuality of each person at birth, does die. I can't believe I'm doing this but I will post one excerpt from this chapter, but whether you like it or don't like it, understand it or don't understand it, tell me its nothing but crap, please let's not discuss this right now because one question leads to another, and this chapter is not what I came here to discuss. Lessans knew the importance of his third discovery, which is why he wrote the following:

Before I discuss the educational system in the new world and how
it will drastically change the way children learn, I shall reveal my final
discovery which will absolutely shock all mankind. In fact, I consider
it the most important discovery ever made on our planet, and it will
make you very happy. It is not easy to follow the reasoning but take
your time, and you will understand.

Decline and Fall of All Evil: Chapter Ten: Our Posterity pp. 497-498

Because you
are conscious of your existence and individuality during those years in
the present, write a book, build a home, make a lot of friends who cry
when you die, doesn’t take away from the fact that you are a
combination of A and B which continues in existence even while you
are alive, and regardless of what happens to C. Consequently, the
consciousness of your individuality without understanding that you
are not only C, which represents the hereditary differences that die,
but the germinal substance A and B which never die because they are
carried along from generation to generation and when united develop
into your existence, makes you perceive an improper relation. Simply
because the entelechy of A and B develops into the consciousness of
C, which permits the recognition of individuality, does not negate the
substance from which C is derived.

Even if all the individual
characteristics lie potential in the germinal substance, this still has
nothing to do with consciousness which is not an individual
characteristic like your face. The word ‘I’ or ‘you’ not only reveals this
individual difference between yourself and others, but your
consciousness of this. There is no actual difference between the
potential YOU who died one month after birth, the YOU who will die
in a relatively short period of time, or the YOU who lived for many
years. If you had died a hundred thousand times in the uterus of
somebody, eventually YOU, which is a word describing the
consciousness of differences about yourself after your parents create
you, would have been born.

I was eventually able to parse this gobbledygook because I read the other stuff that Lessans wrote on this topic, and it became quite evident that his views are shared by Tom Clark at naturalism.org and also by Wayne Stewart, who has posted online an entire book on the subject called "Metaphysics by Default." I've referred to this before.

Lessans is making a claim about consciousness, as are Clark and Stewart, so in fairness I think he is using "germinal substance" in a metaphorical way, but even if he isn't, his claim is still about consciousness. The claim is broadly consistent with a monistic idealist metaphysics.

Tom Clark's paper on the subject is here.

There is nothing metaphysical about "germinal substance", and just because Lessans' discovery on death is explained in terms of consciousness does not automatically mean that what he is saying has anything to do with what Clark and Stewart are saying. I'm not asking for a response. I was making a statement.

peacegirl · #**17479** 05-26-2012, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidm

You know, I had forgotten that comment by The Great Man, thanks for jogging my memory.

This just shows everyone that you have a convenient selective memory. Your memory needs a lot more than jogging. How can anyone understand any book, for that matter, when there are huge chunks of information that have been skipped over?

Do you really think you're in a position to be criticizing other people's memory?

You missed the word "selective". To have a selective memory means that you only remember what you want to remember, or you remember the few parts that you actually read which is no indication of true understanding.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

If I bump my questions again, will you attempt to answer any of them? [Yes or No]

No, because I can tell that this concept is much harder to explain than I thought and it will only frustrate you and everyone else.

LadyShea · #**17480** 05-26-2012, 07:28 PM

Quote:

There is nothing metaphysical about "germinal substance"

LOL, of course there is

Quote:

Originally Posted by dictionary

Philosophy .
a.
concerned with abstract thought or subjects, as existence, causality, or truth.
b.
concerned with first principles and ultimate grounds, as being, time, or substance.
3.
highly abstract, subtle, or abstruse.

Quote:

Glossary Definition: Metaphysical
referring to an idea, doctrine, or posited reality outside of human sense perception. In modern philosophical terminology, metaphysics refers to the studies of what cannot be reached through objective studies of material reality.

peacegirl · #**17481** 05-26-2012, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyShea

You've told every group that they were the mean/obnoxious/terrible, that they were jumping to conclusions, that they weren't giving you or Lessans a chance, that they were closed minded, etc. etc. etc.. In all this time online you've yet to find a group of people who have responded the way you want people to respond.

So, either everyone is the wrong kind of people, or you have no idea who the right kind of people are so can't find them, or the material and your presentation isn't convincing.

I told you that presenting a major discovery to a philosophy forum was a wrong approach from the very beginning. You say the material isn't convincing, but you didn't read the book LadyShea. I saw how you quickly dismissed his proof that man's will is not free, and we never did get to the actual discovery.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Why you continue to post here, with the worst most obnoxious of all, is the big mystery

I'm posting less and less. And I am not starting with another forum for the reasons I just mentioned.

peacegirl · #**17482** 05-26-2012, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

No Spacemonkey, your conclusion is not only inaccurate, it comes from a form of brainwashing. You don't realize how often this type of discussion proves falsely that the premise is wrong. I'm not going to talk to you any further because I don't think you are hearing me.

Really? Wow. Who is responsible for this alleged brainwashing that has resulted in my conclusion that you are mentally ill?

Here you go again talking about my mental status. I'm not interested.

peacegirl · #**17483** 05-26-2012, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidm

CELEBRATING
700 PAGES
of
EMETIC

DRIVEL
:MMMM:

Party On!

Unfortunately, it's 700 pages of wasted bandwidth. :yawn:

peacegirl · #**17484** 05-26-2012, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Strangely, you are projecting onto other people exactly what you are doing to yourself. I will continue to ask: What is your reason for being here if you believe Lessans was wrong? Why? To stop others from hearing what he has to say is censorship. Is that what you want? I am at a loss Spacemonkey. Do you want to be seen as the one who dethroned Lessans for no reason other than you didn't like what he had to say? Is that what it is? If that's it, then I give you the throne. I will now bow down to Spacemonkey.

My answer to that question is the same as it was the last time you asked, and the same as the last hundred or so times before that.

The reasons you gave wouldn't keep someone here this long, at least not in my mind.

peacegirl · #**17485** 05-26-2012, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidm

LOL. What happened to the blame-free enivronment? :lol:

I wanted to add this: How can we apply the principles when we're not in the new world yet and the transition hasn't begun!!! And you think you grasp this knowledge? :doh:

peacegirl · #**17486** 05-26-2012, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyShea

"This one forum", yeah, you know your other posts on other forums are still online, right?

I didn't mean that this is the only forum I've been to. I know that my posts are all over the internet. I can't do anything about that. I've learned a lot from each one, even if it's not what to do again.

Angakuk · #**17487** 05-26-2012, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

This knowledge doesn't excuse the behavior of the past, it prevents it.

So, this knowledge also confers the ability to travel in time and alter the past. That is just so awesome!

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

And why would you condemn him for putting forth a conclusion based on ASTUTE observations which ultimately brought him to these conclusions?

Calling Lessans observations astute, even in all caps, does not make it true. There is very little evidence that he made any actual observations and no evidence at all that any of them were even the least bit astute.

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I trust in myself that I can convey that message even if I can't convey that message in this one forum.

You haven't yet been successful in conveying your message in any forum or any other venue. What grounds do you have for trusting that you will do better in the future?

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Do you want to be seen as the one who dethroned Lessans for no reason other than you didn't like what he had to say? Is that what it is? If that's it, then I give you the throne. I will now bow down to Spacemonkey.

What throne did Lessans ever occupy such that Spacemonkey, or anyone else, could topple him from it?

peacegirl · #**17488** 05-26-2012, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidm

World Pleads: Make It Stop!

Inhabitants of the world pleading with God – or with someone or something – to “just make it fucking stop.”

FREETHOUGHT-FORUM.COM (Internet News Service) – Make it stop, the world pleaded on Saturday.

“God, if you’re up there in heaven, make it stop. K?” pleaded Tammy Edgars, 7, of Baton Rouge, La.

In a similar vein, Myron Oshkosh, the manager of a Blimpie’s franchise in Toledo, Ohio, petitioned Jesus “to make it stop.”

“Please, Jesus, just make it stop. Won’t that be all right? Pretty please?”

At the headquarters of NASA in Washington, D.C., a team of scientists announced that from now on, NASA will aim rockets at Mars and other worlds “just as if we see them in real time, and not in delayed time as we actually do, if doing so will only make it fucking stop.”

“Please, make it stop,” NASA spokesman Headly Barnes begged. “Yes, we promise to shoot rockets off into space just as if real-time seeing is true. All the rockets will miss their targets and billions of dollars will be wasted. But that is a small price to pay if doing so will just make it fucking stop already.”

At press time, God acknowledged that he had heard the world’s prayers to “make it fucking stop.”

“No,” God replied, in a thundering voice from the heavens.

In a thundering voice, God continues... Here's how you can make it all stop. Just leave the dam thread!!!

Angakuk · #**17489** 05-26-2012, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyShea

"This one forum", yeah, you know your other posts on other forums are still online, right?

I didn't mean that this is the only forum I've been to. I know that my posts are all over the internet. I can't do anything about that. I've learned a lot from each one, even if it's not what to do again.

It is quite true that the thing you have not learned is what to do again. However, I think you meant to write "what not to do again". If that is the case, then it is not true that you have learned "what not to do again" because you clearly keep making the same mistakes over and over again.

Angakuk · #**17490** 05-26-2012, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I really don't get it because you are supposed to be the best of the best...

You have stated this on several occasions. Where did you get the idea that the posters at :ff:

are supposed to be the "best of the best"? I am pretty sure that we have not made that claim. Did someones else tell that we were the "best of the best" or is that just something you came up with all by yourself?

naturalist.atheist · #**17491** 05-26-2012, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Quote:

There is nothing metaphysical about "germinal substance"

LOL, of course there is

Quote:

Originally Posted by dictionary

Philosophy .
a.
concerned with abstract thought or subjects, as existence, causality, or truth.
b.
concerned with first principles and ultimate grounds, as being, time, or substance.
3.
highly abstract, subtle, or abstruse.

Quote:

Glossary Definition: Metaphysical
referring to an idea, doctrine, or posited reality outside of human sense perception. In modern philosophical terminology, metaphysics refers to the studies of what cannot be reached through objective studies of material reality.

peacegirl meant (P) germinal substance.

naturalist.atheist · #**17492** 05-26-2012, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angakuk

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I really don't get it because you are supposed to be the best of the best...

You have stated this on several occasions. Where did you get the idea that the posters at :ff:

are supposed to be the "best of the best"? I am pretty sure that we have not made that claim. Did someones else tell that we were the "best of the best" or is that just something you came up with all by yourself?

It just the manipulations of a fourth grade teacher.

naturalist.atheist · #**17493** 05-26-2012, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angakuk

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyShea

"This one forum", yeah, you know your other posts on other forums are still online, right?

I didn't mean that this is the only forum I've been to. I know that my posts are all over the internet. I can't do anything about that. I've learned a lot from each one, even if it's not what to do again.

It is quite true that the thing you have not learned is what to do again. However, I think you meant to write "what not to do again". If that is the case, then it is not true that you have learned "what not to do again" because you clearly keep making the same mistakes over and over again.

peacegirl means (P) learn.

naturalist.atheist · #**17494** 05-26-2012, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidm

World Pleads: Make It Stop!

Inhabitants of the world pleading with God – or with someone or something – to “just make it fucking stop.”

FREETHOUGHT-FORUM.COM (Internet News Service) – Make it stop, the world pleaded on Saturday.

“God, if you’re up there in heaven, make it stop. K?” pleaded Tammy Edgars, 7, of Baton Rouge, La.

In a similar vein, Myron Oshkosh, the manager of a Blimpie’s franchise in Toledo, Ohio, petitioned Jesus “to make it stop.”

“Please, Jesus, just make it stop. Won’t that be all right? Pretty please?”

At the headquarters of NASA in Washington, D.C., a team of scientists announced that from now on, NASA will aim rockets at Mars and other worlds “just as if we see them in real time, and not in delayed time as we actually do, if doing so will only make it fucking stop.”

“Please, make it stop,” NASA spokesman Headly Barnes begged. “Yes, we promise to shoot rockets off into space just as if real-time seeing is true. All the rockets will miss their targets and billions of dollars will be wasted. But that is a small price to pay if doing so will just make it fucking stop already.”

At press time, God acknowledged that he had heard the world’s prayers to “make it fucking stop.”

“No,” God replied, in a thundering voice from the heavens.

In a thundering voice, God continues... Here's how you can make it all stop. Just leave the dam thread!!!

But alas, peacegirl only listens to Lessans. Sorry god.

peacegirl · #**17495** 05-26-2012, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angakuk

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

This knowledge doesn't excuse the behavior of the past, it prevents it.

So, this knowledge also confers the ability to travel in time and alter the past. That is just so awesome!

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

The factors that led to the actions of the past are prevented from arising. What's so hard to understand?

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

And why would you condemn him for putting forth a conclusion based on ASTUTE observations which ultimately brought him to these conclusions?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angakuk

Calling Lessans observations astute, even in all caps, does not make it true. There is very little evidence that he made any actual observations and no evidence at all that any of them were even the least bit astute.

That's why this thread is a waste of bandwidth. At the very least, I could have gone through the book in a step by step fashion (which was not done) in order to help you grasp these difficult concepts. But no, everyone just wants to talk about my mental health. It's more than absurd.

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I trust in myself that I can convey that message even if I can't convey that message in this one forum.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angakuk

You haven't yet been successful in conveying your message in any forum or any other venue. What grounds do you have for trusting that you will do better in the future?

Because I will use a different strategy. Also, when I contact certain individuals who could be instrumental in helping me publicize the book, I will make sure they read it in its entirety, not piecemeal. I can't imagine anyone who reads this book the way it's meant to be read would not think that there is something to it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Do you want to be seen as the one who dethroned Lessans for no reason other than you didn't like what he had to say? Is that what it is? If that's it, then I give you the throne. I will now bow down to Spacemonkey.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angakuk

What throne did Lessans ever occupy such that Spacemonkey, or anyone else, could topple him from it?

I wasn't being literal Angakuk. I could have said "dismissed" him. I am just at a loss as to what is holding people back from actually taking the time to study this work. It doesn't make sense to me, and people are truly missing out, no joke.

Angakuk · #**17496** 05-26-2012, 08:30 PM

Here is my humble contribution to the entertainment for the party.

Napolean XIV - They're Coming To Take Me Away ...

LadyShea · #**17497** 05-26-2012, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Strangely, you are projecting onto other people exactly what you are doing to yourself. I will continue to ask: What is your reason for being here if you believe Lessans was wrong? Why? To stop others from hearing what he has to say is censorship. Is that what you want? I am at a loss Spacemonkey. Do you want to be seen as the one who dethroned Lessans for no reason other than you didn't like what he had to say? Is that what it is? If that's it, then I give you the throne. I will now bow down to Spacemonkey.

My answer to that question is the same as it was the last time you asked, and the same as the last hundred or so times before that.

The reasons you gave wouldn't keep someone here this long, at least not in my mind.

You are responding to someone who thinks you are mentally ill, do you think he considers you of sound judgment regarding other people's motivations?

peacegirl · #**17498** 05-26-2012, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angakuk

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I really don't get it because you are supposed to be the best of the best...

You have stated this on several occasions. Where did you get the idea that the posters at :ff:

are supposed to be the "best of the best"? I am pretty sure that we have not made that claim. Did someones else tell that we were the "best of the best" or is that just something you came up with all by yourself?

LadyShea keeps referring to this. She says that there are biologists, lawyers, philosophers, etc. who are very capable. I'm sure they are, but what she appears to be saying is that if these people don't agree with Lessans, then it can't be right. That in itself is a big problem because it's not the knowledge and what it contains that matters the most; it's the opinions of those considered "the best of the best" that matters most unfortunately.

LadyShea · #**17499** 05-26-2012, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I am just at a loss as to what is holding people back from actually taking the time to study this work.

You removed access to the work for one thing, dumbass. Everyone is either working from memory, or from YOUR statements and excerpts, except those few that might still have hard copies.

My hard copy went kaput with my harddrive

Additionally, when we've tried to engage you seriously, as we did about the circular reasoning and modal fallacy found in Chapter 1, and asked for sources of the "observations" that led him to his conclusions, you simply asserted we were wrong and didn't understand anything. You couldn't adequately defend a single sentence and I tried to get you to address it for pages and pages. Go look at the first twenty pages of the Part Two thread.

LadyShea · #**17500** 05-26-2012, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angakuk

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I really don't get it because you are supposed to be the best of the best...

You have stated this on several occasions. Where did you get the idea that the posters at :ff:

are supposed to be the "best of the best"? I am pretty sure that we have not made that claim. Did someones else tell that we were the "best of the best" or is that just something you came up with all by yourself?

LadyShea keeps referring to this. She says that there are biologists, lawyers, philosophers, etc. who are very capable. I'm sure they are, but what she appears to be saying is that if these people don't agree with Lessans, then it can't be right. That in itself is a big problem because it's not the knowledge that is center stage; but the people who are doing the critiquing without a clue as to what the actual content is about.

Um, the biologist knows a lot about anatomy and biology and proved Lessans was wrong about the anatomy of the eye

The philosopher knows a lot about fallacious reasoning, and demonstrated Lessans modal fallacy very specifically and accurately.

The physicist pointed out the impossibility of Lessans claims about real time seeing.

You could not answer or refute any of these professional critiques about the content. You are inadequate at defending the work.

The lawyer pointed out the hilarity of suing the President is all.