A revolution in thought

[The Editor]

They did, indeed, laugh when Einstein played the violin.

--Ed.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

What the hell do you mean by that Stephen? I can't even conjure up the nutty thoughts that are contained in your head.

He means Lessans filed a lawsuit rather than merely writing President Carter a letter.

Maturin is one of our resident shysters...damn lawyers always reading law stuff

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

shysters

Racism!

[LadyShea]

Well yeah duh!

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

What the hell do you mean by that Stephen?

So you're really unaware that your father actually sued President Carter, rather than merely sending him a hebephrenic letter?

You do not understand this work at all. Looks like it's back to square one. Please read the foreword and post a thorough summary in your own words. I will review your summary and correct your misunderstandings. If your misunderstandings are too extensive for correction -- which is highly likely -- we will start over.

[ChuckF]

It reminds me of that time in college when I called the White House for a meeting with the President because of this awesome idea I came up with between bags of storebrand cheese puffs, and I thought the CiC really needed to know about it, BUT THE SWITCHBOARD WOULD NOT EVEN PUT ME THROUGH, DAMN! How am I supposed to set up a meeting if I can't even get through on the phone HELLO! So I sued the President in his personal and official capacity in the US District Court fo the District of Columbia, for a writ of mandamus to force him to meet with me, because this is a completely non-crazy thing to do. (I also sued for damages because the President then directed the FBI to inform my parents every time I was high by tapping the message in code on the water pipes.) In retrospect, I'm no longer so sure that we could get all the monkeys to jump at the exact same time, but I still think it was worth exploring. I don't drink that much anymore.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

So you're really unaware that your father actually sued President Carter, rather than merely sending him a hebephrenic letter?

You do not understand this work at all. Looks like it's back to square one. Please read the foreword and post a thorough summary in your own words. I will review your summary and correct your misunderstandings. If your misunderstandings are too extensive for correction -- which is highly likely -- we will start over.

You are way too amused by your own rhetoric to make it worthwhile for me to even talk to you, let alone do a summary for you.

[specious_reasons]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Maybe it was my fault. So instead of bitching, help me make the introduction better. Then I will believe you have sincere intentions of helping instead of purposely causing harm. Hey, I'll even let you redo the whole book if it helps to bring this knowledge to light.

No. Why should I? I've made it abundantly clear in the past that even if I qualified it as "may be", I don't think that it's at all likely Lessans work is either true or valuable.

If you think the work could be improved on by a better editor - hire one!

[Stephen Maturin]

You are way too amused by your own rhetoric to make it worthwhile for me to even talk to you, let alone do a summary for you.

And yet here you are, talking to me.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

It reminds me of that time in college when I called the White House for a meeting with the President because of this awesome idea I came up with between bags of storebrand cheese puffs, and I thought the CiC really needed to know about it, BUT THE SWITCHBOARD WOULD NOT EVEN PUT ME THROUGH, DAMN! How am I supposed to set up a meeting if I can't even get through on the phone HELLO! So I sued the President in his personal and official capacity in the US District Court fo the District of Columbia, for a writ of mandamus to force him to meet with me, because this is a completely non-crazy thing to do. (I also sued for damages because the President then directed the FBI to inform my parents every time I was high by tapping the message in code on the water pipes.) In retrospect, I'm no longer so sure that we could get all the monkeys to jump at the exact same time, but I still think it was worth exploring. I don't drink that much anymore.

What would you have done if you had been in his position? I'm sure you know the answer being that you're so empathic and understanding.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

And yet here you are, talking to me.

Which means a whole lot, considering that this was the first time you weren't a complete and total son of a bitch.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by specious_reasons

Lessans work may be the incomparable work of a true genius, but he presented it like an arrogant, deranged crackpot - and I think part of that is your editing of the book.

Maybe it was my fault. So instead of bitching, help me make the introduction better. Then I will believe you have sincere intentions of helping instead of purposely causing harm. Hey, I'll even let you redo the whole book if it helps to bring this knowledge to light.

Originally Posted by specious_reasons

No. Why should I? I've made it abundantly clear in the past that even if I qualified it as "may be", I don't think that it's at all likely Lessans work is either true or valuable.

So if you don't, why do you care how the introduction sounds? Why would you try to help someone to improve on a book you believe is valueless? That makes a lot of sense.

Originally Posted by specious_reasons

If you think the work could be improved on by a better editor - hire one!

As Suze Orman says: "Show me the money."

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

Hey peacegirl, why do you reject the undeniable mathematical proof of the woodpecker theorem, or peckerwood axiom as the case may be?

Because that's a contingent truth, not a necessary truth.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

Hey peacegirl, I thought you said you were leaving about, oh, eight dozen times?

I know, it's just that when I leave I miss you too much. Not.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by davidm

You are savagely criticizing the Woodpecker Equation despite the fact that it is udeniably true. What's wrong with you? You need to understand that Vivisectus is in the position of another Edison or Einstein.

BTW, Lessans' stuff is flatly incompatible with Einstein's SR, so it makes you and your father look especially stupid and duplicitous to invoke Einstein.

You can't get it out of your head that there is no incompatability with SR. No one is challenging Einstein.

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

As we can now all see, the validity of this perfectly geographical idea is being denied by people whose bias does not allow them to see that eating more woodpecker is the only thing standing between us and extinction from climate change.

You are wasting your time. This board is frequented by hooting, savage jackals who know nothing of free thought and care only about preserving their precious ornithological status quo. They will gang up and smack you vigorously about the crotch with the canoe paddle of groupthink. It is only a matter of time before they gang-rape you. Probably literally!

I suggest that you build goodwill by focusing on a different project, one that can't generate any real controversy.

For instance, everyone love safety, right? Hey, I'd take a bullet for safety!

Everyone also loves going to the beer garden/pool hall/jiggle joint to get gooned up with the fellas, shoot some 9-ball and ogle some scantily clad, very young goils. On a really good night, one might even get to play a bit of the old slap 'n' tickle with a goil other than one's spouse!

As delightful as the foregoing activities can be, they can also be quite dangerous, especially if word thereof gets out to the wrong people. A book describing in detail how to engage in such pleasurable actions safely would be a tremendous public service, and you're just the man to write that book!

I suggest writing in a cartoon character with a catchy name to serve as the book's purveyor of the applicable safety rules. That'll keep the readers engaged, which is no mean feat when one considers that the target audience is horndog barflies. Perhaps something along the lines of:

show spoiler

When you become a widely renowned safety expert, people will be more receptive to your geographical discoveries.

[Doctor X]

Is he an ally or foe of Foreskin Man?

--J.D.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Now who looks mentally ill?

Not me says the cookie in the cookie jar! Now that response surely shows you I'm mentally competent.

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Which means a whole lot, considering that this was the first time you weren't a complete and total son of a bitch.

Come on now! I wished your son well on his oral exams, and I'm glad he passed. Can't have too many first-rate radiologists, dontcha know!

Excepting that, though, I admit having no basis in fact for opposing the "complete and total son of a bitch" moniker.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

What would you have done if you had been in his position?

Instead of suing the President for no reason? How about seeking some help from a mental healthcare professional. That seems like a good step zero.

[specious_reasons]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

So if you don't, why do you care how the introduction sounds? Why would you try to help someone to improve on a book you believe is valueless? That makes a lot of sense.

It's well established that I have an unhealthy fascination with crap. I'm giving you some of the reasons why I think this book is crap, it's a study in anti-aesthetics to me.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

As Suze Orman says: "Show me the money."

Good luck with that. I don't think the book is worth anything more than a sad chuckle. If you think that the book is the greatest gift to mankind, then it's worth it to you to fork over and improve its presentation to the world.

[Doctor X]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Instead of suing the President for no reason?

This interchange is an

--J.D.

[thedoc]

I believe this thread, in spite of the spirited debate has somewhat missed the most important point. The participants have been dancing around on peripheral issues but have not addressed the main idea that is clearly stated in the title of the book. Lessans states that by addopting certain ideas and implementing specific principles we can eliminate all evil from the world. At face value this appears to be a grand and noble idea that seems obvious at first glance, and who would argue against it? However just as any other concept, it must be considered form all sides, indeed failure to do so have lead to many historic errors of policy. Lessans claims that implimenting his ideas would lead to greater economic prosperity, but is this true? In reality it would be an economic disaster. To eliminate all evil would first of all eliminate all crime, after all crime is a kind of hurt, and without crime there would be nothing for criminals to do. That is a lot of people out of work and that would be only the first blow to the economy. Without criminals there would be no need for Law Enforcement, indeed there are to be no more laws as everyone would be honest, and know what is right and wrong, and have no desire to do wrong. That would eliminate the political bureaucracy who make the laws, along with the IRS, since everyone is now conscientious and honest all taxes would be paid on time and in full. There would not even be a need to check the returns, just deposite and dispurse, a largly automatic system. There would also be no need for the court system or the prison system, thats a lot of people out of work, unemployed, on welfare. And probably most detrimental to society and the economy is that there will be no jobs for Lawyers. Can you imagine the chaos and havoc with these unemployed Lawyers on the street with nothing to do, all the street gangs and motercycle gangs will be hiding in terror, rather than pursuing their normal productive activities. No friends the onset of the 'Golden Age' would be a complete and utter economic and social disaster, there aren't enough Burger joints to absorb that many people flipping burgers and frying fries.

PS. Did I mention that the medical profession would be decimated with the elimination of all those stress related illnesses. On the up side all those unemployed Doctors and Psychiatrists on the street would help to keep the lawyers in check, have you ever seen dueling golf clubs?

[Stephen Maturin]

You do not understand the two-sided equation, thedoc, nor have you read the treasure trove of lulz that is Chapter 6 of The Sacred Text.

Had you done your required reading, you would understand that in the New World all citizens will have a guaranteed standard of living. One becomes a citizen by taking a written test and signing a promise never to blame any fellow citizen for anything. The test will cover the two-sided equation among other topics. Lessans wrote that the test will be very easy to understand, even for little children. That claim is more than a little dubious, though, considering that in peacegirl's extensive sojourn around the Internet she apparently has not encountered anyone who understands the two-sided equation to her satisfaction.

Anyhoo, every citizen will get an ID number to be displayed on both a card affixed to the citizen's clothing and a tag affixed to the citizen's vehicle. All this is necessary to distinguish citizens from noncitizens during the transition to the Golden Age.

Once the United Nations is convinced that Lessantology is "scientifically undeniable," it will set up "IBM computer offices." Those offices will be linked to one another and to something called the International Bureau of Internal Revenue. All this is necessary to implement the economic guarantees of Lessantology.

Military personnel, police officers, politicians, the judiciary, lawyers, insurance industry employees, banking and credit industry workers, labor union personnel, etc. are out of work in Golden Age. Why? Because their jobs are inherently blame-related and there will be no blame in the novus ordo seclorum.

Actually, there may yet be room for some politicians, namely legislators. Earlier in this thread peacegirl informed us that there will be "lawmakers" even though there will be no laws. Personally, I think peacegirl's view on that subject is merely further evidence of a growing schism within Lessantology, a p. impressive feat for viewpoint with only one living adherent.

Be that as it may, every person who loses his or her livelihood as a result of the transition -- and in fact everyone who has a job at the time of transition -- is guaranteed his or her accustomed income level for life. That's right, everyone has the security of an Art. III federal judge in the Golden Age!

That shit rocks! Personally, I'm looking forward to a permanent blame-free vacation at citizen expense. It is my path of greater satisfaction. Fuck this work noise. To quote The Anointed One:

The launching of this Great Transition will be as smooth and uninterrupted as a well-oiled piece of machinery because when payday rolls around the displaced need only enter their weekly income in their book, and then send a withdrawal slip to the local Bureau of Internal Revenue so that this guaranteed compensation can be acknowledged and deducted. No one will tell these people where or when they should work, and if they wish to retire on this income for the rest of their lives, this is their business. However, when they fully realize that the money with which they are being supported could be used for other things the moment they take an available job and when they don’t they would be hurting us — the people who are supporting them — they are given no alternative under these conditions.

Oh yeah. $$ 4 life! Ol' Seymour thinks it'll be impossible to take the money, but I plan on proving him wrong.

No provider of goods or services will ever raise prices, nor would anyone strike for higher wages or better working conditions, since doing so would be a First Blow. It's okay, though, since consumers are free to pay much more for the actual price for the goods or services at issue.

Moreover, those pesky poor folk will finally stop bitching about their lot in life. After all, "[h]ow is it possible for these poor people to blame others for their own misfortunes when nobody is to blame for this economic plight? Obviously, this won’t put food in their mouths, clothes on their backs, and give them decent shelter in which to live."

No probs though, since taxpayers will be compelled, of their own free will so to speak, to provide the poors a "livable wage." That's right, the Koch Brothers, Rand Pauls and Rush Limbaughs of the world will be only too happy to care for the poors.

Srsly.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

You are wasting your time. This board is frequented by hooting, savage jackals who know nothing of free thought and care only about preserving their precious ornithological status quo. They will gang up and smack you vigorously about the crotch with the canoe paddle of groupthink. It is only a matter of time before they gang-rape you. Probably literally!

I suggest that you build goodwill by focusing on a different project, one that can't generate any real controversy.

For instance, everyone love safety, right? Hey, I'd take a bullet for safety!

Everyone also loves going to the beer garden/pool hall/jiggle joint to get gooned up with the fellas, shoot some 9-ball and ogle some scantily clad, very young goils. On a really good night, one might even get to play a bit of the old slap 'n' tickle with a goil other than one's spouse!

As delightful as the foregoing activities can be, they can also be quite dangerous, especially if word thereof gets out to the wrong people. A book describing in detail how to engage in such pleasurable actions safely would be a tremendous public service, and you're just the man to write that book!

I suggest writing in a cartoon character with a catchy name to serve as the book's purveyor of the applicable safety rules. That'll keep the readers engaged, which is no mean feat when one considers that the target audience is horndog barflies. Perhaps something along the lines of:

show spoiler

When you become a widely renowned safety expert, people will be more receptive to your geographical discoveries.

Thanks but no thanks. I'll leave that book up to the shyster lawyer who knows how to beat raps.