A revolution in thought

[Florence Jellem]

OK, boys, Flo has received this Very Strange private message from Peacegirl. What do I do? It sounds like she is offering quite the deal. (I had no idea peacegirl was African and involved somehow with Nigerians.) Could there possibly be something amiss here? Let Flo know; I’m an old broad whose critical faculties have been eroded by drinking whiskey, masturbating, and watching Fox News.

Here is the pm I got from peacegirl:

Subject: Dear Respected One,

Dear Respected One,

GREETINGS,

Permit me to inform you of my desire of going into business relationship with you. I got your contact from the International web site directory. I prayed over it and selected your name among other names due to its esteeming nature and the recommendations given to me as a reputable and trustworthy person I can do business with and by the recommendations I must not hesitate to confide in you for this simple and sincere business.

I am peacegirl; the only Daughter of late Mr. and Mrs. Seymour Lessans. My father was a very brilliant man who made Astute Observations and Adored his Wife’s Genitals before he was poisoned to death by his Nigerian business associates on one of their outings to discuss on a business deal.

When my mother died on the 21st October 1984, my father took me and my younger brother HASSAN special because we are motherless. Before the death of my father in 1991 in a private hospital here in Abidjan. He secretly called me on his bedside and told me that he has a sum of $12.500.000 (Twelve Million, five hundred thousand dollars) left in a suspense account in a local Bank here in Abidjan, that he used my name as his first Daughter for the next of kin in deposit of the fund. He also wrote a Secret Book, in which Chapter Ten is the Most Important Fucking Chapter of All.

He also explained to me that it was because of this wealth and his book and his Astute Observations and some huge amount of money his business associates supposed to balance his from the deal they had that he was poisoned by his business associates, that I should seek for a God fearing foreign partner in a country of my choice where I will transfer this money and use it for investment purpose, (such as real estate management). Madame, we are honourably seeking your assistance in the following ways.

1) To provide a Bank account where this money would be transferred to.

2) To serve as the guardian of this since I am a demented old lady of sixty plus years old.

3) To read, and promote, my father’s Stupid Fucking Book.

Moreover Sir (Or Madame, as the case may be), we are willing to offer you 15% of the sum as compensation for effort input after the successful transfer of this fund to your designate account overseas. Please feel free to contact me via this email address

E-mail address [REDCATED BY FLO JELLEM]

Anticipating to hear from you soon.
Thanks and God Bless.
Best regards.
Peacegirl

What do you boys think about this? Does it sound legit?

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Why do you refuse to answer questions after admitting that they do apply? Is it because you are too stupid? Or because you are dishonest? Or both?

Bump.

[Stephen Maturin]

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

How strange. You don't seem to have any trouble telling other people what their supposed motives and reasons are. Hypocritical much?

She ascribes motives to me once a week at least.

[Stephen Maturin]

Which is kind of impressive, especially after she concluded that "[y]ou are too angry for me to even communicate with you" on her first day at .

show spoiler

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Florence Jellem

OK, boys, Flo has received this Very Strange private message from Peacegirl. What do I do? It sounds like she is offering quite the deal. (I had no idea peacegirl was African and involved somehow with Nigerians.) Could there possibly be something amiss here? Let Flo know; I’m an old broad whose critical faculties have been eroded by drinking whiskey, masturbating, and watching Fox News.

Here is the pm I got from peacegirl:

What do you boys think about this? Does it sound legit?

People, this is what I have to deal with. I can see why lurkers choose not to participate for fear that they, too, will be intimidated. I cannot stomach Davidm and Maturin. Why they think that their comments will prevent the truth from coming out is beyond me. This is not something unexpected. Many discoverers down through the ages have had to deal with this kind of hatred; the tomato throwers, the big shots, the hecklers; you know, the ones that have to put you down to make themselves feel superior. Their heckling may slow things down for a bit, but not for long. Their efforts will never stop a genuine discovery from coming to light. This is what I hate about unmoderated forums. Posts that have no point but to intimidate do nothing to create an environment where true learning can take place. I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place because the moderated ones aren't much better. These hecklers are mean-spirited, vindictive individuals that have tried to turn my father's reputation into dirt. They will go to extremes to do it, just because they don't think he was right. They are crazy!

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

People, this is what I have to deal with.

Yep, people are now just openly making fun of you, as you've proven yourself to be too dishonest and too evasive to engage in any kind of discussion.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

These hecklers are mean-spirited, vindictive individuals that have tried to turn my father's reputation into dirt

Don't worry, Peacegirl. They're not anywhere near as good at that as you are.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

They are crazy!

Well, someone here certainly is.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Bump.

Bump.

[LadyShea]

Are you seriously back to believing in imaginary lurkers? Lol

Start your blog, maybe they will follow you and hang on your every word. If you disable comments nobody can heckle you and your lurkers can read and absorb in peace.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Are you seriously back to believing in imaginary lurkers? Lol

Start your blog, maybe they will follow you and hang on your every word. If you disable comments nobody can heckle you and your lurkers can read and absorb in peace.

I have no idea if there are lurkers or not. That wasn't the point I was making. Hurtful comments change the opinion of people who are listening in, especially if they are not independent thinkers, which is most of us. People trust the loudest and the meanest. I'm not saying anything new.. That is exactly what happens in forums where someone comes along that competes with an existing worldview, especially if science has already determined that the theory is fact.

[Stephen Maturin]

Maybe it's genetic. Seymour had hordes of imaginary rabbis that he bested in philosophical discussions, whereas peacegirl has hordes of imaginary lurkers just waiting for the right moment to bring the Golden Age into being.

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

especially if science has stamped it with the brevity of truth.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

Yup Maturin. What will you say then? Be prepared for the shock of your life, if you're still alive.

[Florence Jellem]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

People, this is what I have to deal with. I can see why lurkers choose not to participate for fear that they, too, will be intimidated. I cannot stomach Davidm and Maturin. Why they think that their comments will prevent the truth from coming out is beyond me. This is not something unexpected. Many discoverers down through the ages have had to deal with this kind of hatred; the tomato throwers, the big shots, the hecklers; you know, the ones that have to put you down to make themselves feel superior. Their heckling may slow things down for a bit, but not for long. Their efforts will never stop a genuine discovery from coming to light. This is what I hate about unmoderated forums. Posts that have no point but to intimidate do nothing to create an environment where true learning can take place. I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place because the moderated ones aren't much better. These hecklers are mean-spirited, vindictive individuals that have tried to turn my father's reputation into dirt. They will go to extremes to do it, just because they don't think he was right. They are crazy!

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Yup Maturin. What will you say then?

Can't imagine what you're yammering about, but regardless of when "then" is I'll probably still be too busy loling at your "stamped it with the brevity of truth" gibberish (you know, the stuff you edited out of your post to make yourself look less dumb and incompetent) to say much of anything. You might just as well have written "if science has fellated it with the flatulence of pickles."

[GdB]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I understand why compatibilists find it necessary to identify the capabilities that they believe would justify holding someone accountable.

But I think your understanding of that is different from how the compatibilists see it themselves: you think they want to stick to a praxis that essentially is not supported by free will, because free will does not exist. They try to escape by redefining free will.

Compatibilists however, see that free will never was something else than they define it: that it is based on the capability to anticipate the possible consequences of possible actions. 'Free will' as the capability 'to do otherwise in exactly the same circumstances' is more or less a Christian answer to the theodicy. It is also highly dependent on dualism: we, as individuals stand outside the causal universe, thinking and reflecting independently of any causal laws. However, if you are a physicalist, and correctly see laws of nature not as enforcing agents, but as descriptions of how events follow each other, the problem of free will cannot even be formulated. It is a pseudo problem.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Now that I've agreed with you, does it mean you have no interest in this discovery because you don't believe there could be anything to it?

Well, if you really agree with me, which I doubt you do, then it means the discovery does not need a denial of LFW. So no secret 'hidden behind the door of determinism'. Do you really think that?

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Please let me know how to proceed.

Well, present the discovery in your own words, so we can discuss it. But: if it turns out that the question is an empirical one, then I have to stand down. I am not a psychologist or sociologist. Neither are you. Knowing how you handle the vaccination discussion, I do not want to get in a link- or quotation war.

[Stephen Maturin]

Because I'm in a nostalgic mood this morning, here once again is the full text of the breathtakingly frivolous complaint Seymour Lessans filed against President Carter in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia:

The United States Government:

Because Jimmy Carter refused to grant an audience for the purpose of demonstrating how a scientific discovery can now unite all nations in a harmonious agreement that will break the vicious cycle of inflation and solve to everybody’s satisfaction the problems that are costing the people billions of dollars in rising prices and excessive taxes, and because this refusal violates my rights and his oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States which obviously includes doing everything in his power to solve these problems even to the extent of allowing someone outside the political arena to show him the answer, I, Seymour Lessans, representing the taxpayers who want to see a permanent solution, am taking Jimmy Carter to court as the only alternative to prove before 12 top ranking scientists, not political scientists, that his failure to faithfully execute his oath of office by investigating this discovery is a crime of the greatest magnitude and reason enough for the people who hired him and pay his salary to remove him from office. However, such removal is wholly unnecessary in view of the fact that no political party has the knowledge to cope with these complex problems. Therefore, if Mr. Carter will allow a demonstration in his office within 60 days from the date of this complaint there will be no need to go to court and he will be completely amazed and pleased with the solution even though it renders obsolete the age of politics, an age of opinions and promises by politicians who are voted into office only because we didn’t know what else to do.

The Lessans Family: We Waste Public Funds So You Don't Have To

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

Can't imagine what you're yammering about, but regardless of when "then" is I'll probably still be too busy loling at your "stamped it with the brevity of truth" gibberish (you know, the stuff you edited out of your post to make yourself look less dumb and incompetent) to say much of anything. You might just as well have written "if science has fellated it with the flatulence of pickles."

Science will one day stamp this knowledge with the brevet of truth.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

Because I'm in a nostalgic mood this morning, here once again is the full text of the breathtakingly frivolous complaint Seymour Lessans filed against President Carter in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia:

The Lessans Family: We Waste Public Funds So You Don't Have To

It surprises me how much time you spend here. I guess this is what stimulates your otherwise boring life.

[Stephen Maturin]

lol

[GdB]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Science will one day stamp this knowledge with the brevet of truth.

There is no way you can know this, because you do not understand anything about science.

[Florence Jellem]

TRENDS IN CYBERSPACE
Science Gives Crackpot’s “Discovery” Brevet of Truth in Hopes That Doing So Will Induce His Fuckwit Daughter to STFU at Last


FREETHOUGHT-FORUM (Internet News Service) – Science announced today that it was giving the brevet of truth to a bunch of half-assed words written by a lard head named Seymour Lessans.

As such, the half-assed words will become a military officer of higher nominal rank than that for which pay is received, and in the future will be addressed as “Brevet Half-Assed Words.”

“In giving these half-assed words a brevet of truth, we hope that the daughter of the writer of the half-assed words, peacegirl, will finally STFU,” explained Steven Hawking, speaking on behalf of all Science.

“I hope peacegirl is satisfied now,” said the evolutionary biologist Dick Dorkins, who immediately added a sexist crack and a gratuitous slur against Muslims.

At press time, Brevet Half-Assed Words had lost its nose. The nose was later spotted in the splendid Russian city of St. Petersburg, in a fine carriage. It was clad in a gold-braided, high-collared uniform, buckskin breeches, and cockaded hat.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by GdB

But I think your understanding of that is different from how the compatibilists see it themselves: you think they want to stick to a praxis that essentially is not supported by free will, because free will does not exist. They try to escape by redefining free will.

Compatibilists however, see that free will never was something else than they define it: that it is based on the capability to anticipate the possible consequences of possible actions. 'Free will' as the capability 'to do otherwise in exactly the same circumstances' is more or less a Christian answer to the theodicy. It is also highly dependent on dualism: we, as individuals stand outside the causal universe, thinking and reflecting independently of any causal laws. However, if you are a physicalist, and correctly see laws of nature not as enforcing agents, but as descriptions of how events follow each other, the problem of free will cannot even be formulated. It is a pseudo problem.

It's not worth arguing with you on this point. The compatibilist idea that a person has the capacity to choose "rightly" and therefore can be held accountable, is the compatibilist way of justifying punishment. Nevertheless, I understand why you need to hold on to this position.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Now that I've agreed with you, does it mean you have no interest in this discovery because you don't believe there could be anything to it?

Originally Posted by GdB

Well, if you really agree with me, which I doubt you do, then it means the discovery does not need a denial of LFW. So no secret 'hidden behind the door of determinism'. Do you really think that?

Behind the door of determinism, there is a storehouse of knowledge that has not been tapped.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Please let me know how to proceed.

Originally Posted by GdB

Well, present the discovery in your own words, so we can discuss it. But: if it turns out that the question is an empirical one, then I have to stand down. I am not a psychologist or sociologist. Neither are you. Knowing how you handle the vaccination discussion, I do not want to get in a link- or quotation war.

Neither do I. I am not inclined to start over in this thread. People have told me that they don't know how I was able to stand being the brunt of such hostility for so long. I believe you would get a lot out of this book if you would stop insisting that it has no value. The book is online. If you ever read it, I would be willing to discuss it with you.

[peacegirl]

Sounds like the conversation that goes on in here.

This Is Too Funny! Watch This Husky Imitate His Baby Friend | The Animal Rescue Site Blog

[GdB]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It's not worth arguing with you on this point. The compatibilist idea that a person has the capacity to choose "rightly" and therefore can be held accountable, is the compatibilist way of justifying punishment.

That is only one side of the equation: the other side is that it is a call to people to take responsibility in their actions, and not to fall in fatalism, because of determinism.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Nevertheless, I understand why you need to hold on to this position.

Same to you: you simply cannot imagine that your beloved father was wrong. Your holding on to efferent vision really is hilarious. Your faking that the experiments have not decided yet is unbelievable. Your statement that instantaneous vision does not contradict relativity show you have no idea about how space and time form the fabric of the cosmos. (Maybe you should read the book of Brian Greene with that title: 'The Fabric of the Cosmos')

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I believe you would get a lot out of this book if you would stop insisting that it has no value. The book is online. If you ever read it, I would be willing to discuss it with you.

I already know what will happen. in the end, by discussing the book with you, and reading the parts you pasted, I am 100% sure that I will find it just nonsense. And where it is not nonsense it is already said by others, and better. After I would have read the book and say this here, you will fist deny that I really read it, and then if it turns out that it is not true, you will say I have not understood the book. This happened to others, and I see no reason why you would treat me differently.

I think davidm has given a pretty good summary of the 'free will' argument and the discovery 'behind the door of determinism', but instead of saying it is a good summary, or if it isn't, correct him where he is wrong. You just say it is wrong, but you never say why. Therefore I assume the summary is correct.