Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 8/15/06 06:16 PM, Kingbastard wrote: Hahaha, you lot crack me up, so much misdirected animosity, fun to read.
As for the worst artist, hmm, a tricky one. I would like to be diplomatic and say that it's all subjective and there's no real bad artists, but that's bollox. As for naming specific people I wont be doing that, so this post is useless, bye bye.

LOL you utter bastard. You just took away 10 seconds of my life. Heres some stuff i have to write to get the reply/quote ratio correct.

I stole the idea from pratchett's trousers of time theory.

so to extend my questioning further, if these parallel realities exist, is it ever possible to reach out and touch them, and to speak to these other you's ?

after all, you'll share the same brain and experiences up to that point...

I clearly should've imitated a mods account for that post, it would've been worth getting banned for.

ah well.

A bit of philosophy/metaphysics. (still not sure if metaphysics is the correct word, lol)

Is it possible that for every time you have to make a decision, up until you make that decision, all the possible results of that action exist as an alternate, perhaps parallel reality?

i think i fail at philosophising, let me know if i do.

News report : spamwarrior has been found hanging by his guts from a tree. A mysterious graffiti tag on the victims face reading LJ GOT YOU FOR WHAT YOU DID, BITCH has left police mystified.

The party starts in 5 minutes, BYOB.

Learn the read the relevant parts. I told zenon n darkloUd to shut the fuck up unless they have something funny to say, cos if a flame wars going to be public, it should at least be entertaining or informative. I called it as i saw it, so fucking what?

If people havent got the sense to not be offended by some chemical reactions in a tube, projected onto a screen, thats their lookout and not mine. sure, its a selfish view, but if you're gonna rely on big bad mod or someone else to look after your emotions for you, then you are a shallow and weak character.

And if you think i'm actually angry, then you are making the claim that you a) know me well and b) are actually fucking psychic.

also, on the matter of the big bad mods banning me, OH NOES, I'M SCARED, DONT LET THEM MOD ME!!!!!!ONE!!!!!!

perhaps you hope that by provoking a nice big page of irrelevant-to-the-topic stuff, i'll get myself banned, and out of your way?

see previous statement, the one in big shiny capitals.

what happened to people learning to stand up themselves? what happened to people knowing that if you let yourself be offended by someone, OVER THE FUCKING INTERNET, its actually your own fault for giving a flying fuck what someone else thinks on the issue?

I see, so when i try stop two people arguing over something inherently stupid, and it blows up in my face, YOU will lord over me and tell me that i'm mean and belittle people just for laughs.

And as much as you're entitled to tell me to shut up and do whatever, i'm equally entitled to tell you to kindly a) shut the fuck up, this matter REALLY doesnt concern you

and b) see a)

At 8/15/06 04:43 PM, LJCoffee wrote:

At 8/15/06 04:22 PM, Noe3 wrote: Let's discuss wheather this glass is half empty of half full!

Wouldn't it be better to first determine if it is actually a glass?

Interesting, does the glass actually exist, or is it merely a range of electrical energy made to look like a glass?

Personally, I don't subscribe to the half-empty / half-full (or rathar half-fool) nonsense.

It's just an oversimplified exercise to make a base determination of ones outlook on life used to classify someone as a pessimist or an optimist...

If everything were so simple that it could all be boiled down to a binary state; happy/sad - hot/cold - pessimist/optimist - heterosexual/homosexual - right/wrong -then we would have no need for philosophy at all...

Hmmm, an intruiging point *bites own tongue*

And along those lines, how do you think that personal philosophy affects morality? Now apply it to others... Does it still fit?

Hmmm good and evil.

Can people be said to be entirely good, entirely evil, or something in between. Is it in fact, possible, for someone to be entirely good or evil.

What can be said to truly define a human being, is it their attititudes and intents, or their actions?

If a man who works hard, cares for his family, gives money to worthwhile charities and looks out for his community, goes out and commits horrific rape and murder and keeps it from his family, is he truly evil? My instinct says, YES, but my mind says, "eeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, probably, but i cannot actually PROVE it"

any thoughts anyone?

Oh yeah, no offence noe3, but you best insult me or you'll get 0'd by darkloud, thats if you find score at all important.

so, just to help you:

noe3, i'm amazed you got conceived what with your dads drunken lack of aim and skills.

First he got drunk, (er) failed to notice he was naked when he went to the bar.
Aimed to talk to the pretty girl but she wasnt impressed when he fell off the stool.
Then when he went to go be sick in the toilets, he missed the sign that said toilet and instead ended up in the managers office.

He missed hitting the floor when he got thrown out and landed in a pile of his own vomit.
Then he didnt notice that the woman he chatted up was in fact, double equipped.

Then, when it came to the wedding, well, he was drunk(er), shot some cats and missed his own wedding.

Then on honeymoon, he somehow "missed" and stuck your mama in the wrong hole.

Months later, your mom thought it was bad constipation, but the sad fact is, you were born in the toilet.

congratulations noe3, despite being full of shit, you're alive!

Just why is it, that the less i care what morons say, the more they love to follow me around and provide me with free entertainment?

i'll give you that line about getting incapacitated by a lawnmower tho, darklord, that was pretty funny. cos as a matter of fact...

no.

But, just for you that i stole off someone else:

I'm so cool and spectacular, that i have a little stalker! Say hello darkloud!

The value of silence has already been done. John Cage, 4"3'3 i believe, tho i may have got the " and ' the wrong way round.

If you want to fuck with your mind try find an anechoic chamber. Theres one in paris apparently, not sure where other ones are.

At 8/15/06 03:56 PM, Chronamut wrote: I dont see how it matters as once again you have totally hijacked a thread and scared everyone away from posting in it - if this thread gets locked so be it - its already dead.

Nope, i have followed the topic, whether people want to talk about other aspects of philosophy is not my responsibility. Dont blame me just cos people seem to have said all they're going to say. Also to darkloud, yay, i have a moron who considers me so important they have to follow me round and insult me. Thank you for boosting my alledgedly galaxy sized ego, really.

Much as chronamut wants to strangle me, i doubt he'll thank you for spamming up "his" topic. Go away, you horrible little man. Our disagreements about your ability to talk sense and say anything of interest already have a topic thats been hijacked, so i'll meet you in there if the fancy takes me.

and deflektor,i dont know you, and whilst you previously seemed reasonable and have some sense, you currently seem like a mindless nerd, so i might have to start a thread where people who have no idea what the difference is between a heated debate and a flame war can see the difference.

All in favour of saving this thread ignore this post.

At 8/15/06 03:37 PM, Chronamut wrote: spamwarrior STFU and move on.

my thread - my rules.

erm, no, cos you're being a fascist tbh. IN your own interests do not bother replying or trying to fuck with me on this topic, specially when i'm actually being on topic and not particularly personal or rude, or it'll end up in a pointless flamewar that'll just get locked, and then your thread will have died an ignominious death.

At 8/15/06 01:52 PM, Erkie wrote:

because really neither of you are making any grounds over each other

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about.

I pour my soul into these responses and I'm seeing lot of budging from spamwarrior.

I'm not budging at all, so i really dont know what you mean.

I have no problem moving this discussion somewhere else but I'm getting pretty god damn tired of people saying shit like this.

OH NOES, ARE YOU GOING TO CRY COS I DONT AGREE WITH YOUR VIEWPOINT. GONNA STAB ME TO DEATH WITH YOUR PEN?

fuck what you think, i have issues with moving this discussion somewhere else. I'd say this is a topic that shouldnt be hidden behind closed doors, it should be there if people want to read it, not hidden away.

just answer, what has the academic philosophy achieved for mankind in the past 100 or so years? i mean, even I can think of a possible answer, and i'm against the subject for fucks sake!

At 8/15/06 01:49 PM, Chronamut wrote: ok erkie you've made your point.

Now you and spamwarrior shut up or more this to AIM of the pm's and let actual debate about actual philosophies continue.. not the pholosophy of philosophy itself - thats just ridiculous and at this point your seeming hatred towards each other will cause both your useless bantering to continue for all eternity - because really neither of you are making any grounds over each other - whether it being your inability to make the other see things from your poinf of view or your inability to understand the other's point of view.

oh i see, cos i'm not playing by your rules, you dont like it anymore, and therefore my comments shouldnt exist.

saying debating the philosophy of philosophy is like saying that scientists shouldnt play with chemicals and study plants anymore. Its as valid a topic as anything else for a philosophy topic.

Also, i'd take it to private messaging, but i couldnt be bothered to "debate" with erkie in private, mainly cos i want other people to put their views in.

now I heard someone say that they think their life is predetermined but there are choises to make - its fate - but you do have choices - so you do have a bit of leeway.

think of it this way - in the past there were oracles - who could apparently predict the future - problem is - they COULDNT predict the future - at best they could predict "A" future - because hell we all know that if someone says "you're gonna die" you might actually change your course of events in your life and

a) either change fate or

b) be set on a course of events triggered by the oracle's message that actually makes you die when they say you will - all because they told you to - when in reality if they had just shut up you most likely would have been fine.

or it might even be that some higher power" lets say "god" for this instance regardless of whether you believe in a god just homour me on this one - knows you personality so well that he knows what choices you WILL make - based on your personality - he might send an "angel" lets say to steer you along - he might know that if you are told something you will follow that path - or you might do the reverse of what they say because you don't believe fate to be concrete - thus inspiring yourself to make the right decisions - or a giant course set up in your life interwoven with other people's fates might change you for the better - or the worse.

my advice is to just live your life - noone knows if fate is real or not and all your choices might have already been made for you - the point is to do what you think is right - as long as you do that you will be fine.

thats a nice piece of writing and advice, but what if what "you" feel is right involves going out and on the streets and fighting with people you dont know, not even for a purpose, not even for laughs, it just happens?

At 8/15/06 12:49 PM, Erkie wrote:

inally, something of relevance and use. But still, what can the academic study of philosophy achieve today. Just where is it relevant for pushing mankind into a better life?

Educational systems only go as far as teaching to attain knowledge, but as far as teaching philosophy itself, all colleges teach their own ideals, including religious ones, so I think you can imagine the mess it makes. It is part of man's journey to determine which philosophies he finds most relevant in his life.

You'll find that it's another religious ideal and institution that things are gauged based on society and it's progress. Most people pretend that they're happy when they're not, making it unreliable. If we he was purely happy, he wouldn't be afraid to give you complex reasons.

BUT WHAT HAS THE ACADEMIC STUDY OF PHILOSOPHY ACTUALLY ACHIEVED.

The morality of each man must be taken independantly and selfishly, only then will you see a kind of happy society, not a guilty one.

BUT WHAT, HAS, THE, ACADEMIC, STUDY, OF PHILOSOPHY, ACHIEVED FOR MANKIND IN RECENT YEARS.

Fiction = made up storys
History = written by the winners, rulers, and governments.

Indeed.

ergo, history = fiction

so the main achievement of philosophy, is people that spurn it and regard it as worthless to study? If a form of thinking could be said to be alive, this one is suicidal.

What do you mean?

you said philosophys achievement is, it creates people "like you", meaning me.

Why should I, people who study philosophy always like to think they are better than people who dont, even if they dont talk about it.

Well, let's see the criteria:
You're debating philosophy without knowledge of what it is or it's proper uses, with a student of philosophy. And what does it look like for someone to talk about something they don't know about? Pretty embarrassing if you ask me.

oh i see, this quest for knowledge and thinking you so dearly love, is embarassing. well arent i a brave little soldier for trying to learn something then.

Please show me an example of these "concretized facts" that philosophy bases itself on, the speculation based on it, and the factual benefit to mankind, that can be conclusively PROVEN.

Philosophy isn't one giant clumped orgy, there are hundreds of philosophies independant of eachother in explaining the world, you'll have to bring a philosophy to me first, and I can find their concretized facts through it's fundementals.

so, philosophy, AS A WHOLE, never mind the academic study, cannot give us anything conclusive to work with?

Some philosophies advocate destruction of man, and some advocate the power of man. These philosophies are accepted based on his sense of life, that is, how he says the world before he decides to question it.

STUDY ACADEMIC, ACHIEVED, WHAT, HAS, FOR MANKIND, THE, OF.

So the study of philosophy on a college university level, prevents war? I thought I had a god complex, but jesus h christ.

Did I say philosophy?

it was the implication of why philosophy is so almighty, powerful and worthwhile.

Or did I say rationality? Rationality is a devise to the best philosophies.

You cannot deny that a discussion between groups the equal to a flamewar will have the structure and rationality to keep them from their throats, or to further segregate themselves.

"John, I have no reasons to tell you you're wrong, you're just wrong because I think you're a faggot."
"Bill, your wifes a whore, a big one. That's how you're wrong."

I'm willing to be proven wrong, only i'm failing to see anything worthwhile

You have yet to answer the question, what could the study of philosophy at university level, learning dead mans words, achieve for mankind NOW.

WHAT CAN THE ACADEMIC STUDY OF PHILOSOPHY AT UNIVERSITY AND COLLEGE ACHIEVE IN THE MODERN WORLD

Answered above.

not at all. COMMON SENSE is something that prevents war, as is clearly demonstrated by this word equation

2x angry groups of people MINUS common sense EQUALS violence.

fact is, anyone who's got siblings can learn that peace and respect are worthwhile aims, cos they prevent personal and physical pain.

EVERYONE questions something.

They question and question and question, but the way most society brings up their kin is almost entirely away from philosophy; they're left to answer their own angsty questions, the most popular one is: "Believe in yourself, believe in who are you."

university study of philosophy, cannot, in FACT, solve any of mankinds issues. All it does is give us some knowledge of how and why people act, but as to the solution? nothing concrete, none of these "concretized facts" that you like and refer to.

so, yet again,

WHAT CAN THE ACADEMIC STUDY OF PHILOSOPHY ACHIEVE FOR MANKIND IN THE MODERN WORLD.

It cant be preventing violence, as after all, war in the middle east = because of people studying philosophies and history.

MAIN COUNTER FOR THOSE THAT HAVE NO PATIENCE:

Keeping peace between people in a country? Thats socialisation, being brought up correctly. I've yet to see a small child study philosophy at university level, and learn the appropriate ways to behave from that.

SO WHAT HAS, MANKIND, STUDY, THE, OF, ACADEMIC, PHILOSOPHY. ACHIEVED, FOR.

At 8/15/06 12:57 PM, darkkloud wrote:

As for worst artist... other than me, This guy, just for making the first song on the list... Now that really is noise...

i retract my zeenon statement....this guy in the link needs to die...

and as for your emo comment, i realy dont give a fuck what you think. me denying anything, would mearly be an admition of your stupidity, so believe what you shall.

Yes, cos that makes sense. Get off the pc, your mum says, "you fail at the internet honey bunny, now go make me a cup of tea"

episode with the professors birthday.

I'd like to point this out, darkloud is clearly emo, since he didnt deny it at all in the slightest, and instead chose to rip on me for getting his name wrong, which i dont really care about tbh.

Stop making a cock of yourself on the forums, thats my job you little turd basket.

AND AS FOR YOU ZENON,

ZZZZZZENON.

(vague futarama reference to anyone who gets it)

At 8/15/06 09:37 AM, Love_Hate_War wrote: ah...the bbc...what cant they do?

display commercials between programmes?

Wanted, dead or alive. Superdrummer146
Crime : serial conversation killer.

I've heard of metal drummers breaking, metal and carbon sticks before. Mad crazy people, love them.

This is starting to cross over, where science meets philosophy, this is what i call metahphysics, tho i'm probably wrong.

See, is the universe as we perceive it, or are we ENTIRELY wrong, and both the concepts of predestined course and freedom of action exist. Sure its paradoxical, meaning that by our understanding both answers are mutually exclusive.

I dont think an understanding and right answer to any of the greater questions can be put into human words. You either reach understanding or you dont. To understand that you can never understand the universe whilst alive is a good start, tho paradoxically, it may be wrong.

And, no pitters, this isnt about personal gripes, this is about me having no idea why philosophy is so respected today, and if the answers what i think it is, i really dont like it.

As far as i'm concerned, philosophy doesnt deserve money and time put into it, since all of the thinking about where we should go has already been done, what use is studying dead mens texts? oh yeah, and the occasional womans if there were ever any of note.

Science fiction and futuristic action movies have more relevance and education, for cheaper than philosophy can do. And they provide more laughs too.

babies, i dont know who started this, and i dont really care, but can you both least try to be funny if you're gonna hijack someone elses thread for a flame war. Pair of boring bastards.

Darklord, stop being so whiny and emo you... emo, if you were metal you'd have either drank yourself stupid by now, and / or flown to australia to try bite jarrrrrrydns face off.

Zenon, stop taunting and fueling the flames. Since when did you care what anyone, let alone some noob thinks, you emo... emo.

in conclusion, to the both of you. YOU SUCK. NOW SHUT THE FUCK UP IF YOU'VE GOT NOTHING FUNNY TO SAY.

At 8/14/06 09:39 PM, Erkie wrote:

so ethics isnt a matter of rationality? Isnt a matter of what is "right" and "wrong"

I said there are no grounds to solve it, except rationality to decode the necessary answer, the answer is as simple as whether or not it's good to shoot an innocent man to what should constitute an innocent man.

finally, something of relevance and use. But still, what can the academic study of philosophy achieve today. Just where is it relevant for pushing mankind into a better life?

History IS fiction.

Fiction.
History.

Fiction = made up storys

History = written by the winners, rulers, and governments.

And what have they achived for the benefit of mankind.

Short answer: People like you.

so the main achievement of philosophy, is people that spurn it and regard it as worthless to study? If a form of thinking could be said to be alive, this one is suicidal.

Not upon their own faults, but your's to misinterpret them by a blatant form of presumption.

I fail to see how the speculation described here can have any useful bearing.

Because you have no idea what the Is/Ought dichotomy is. Goes to show how much YOU involve yourself in philosophy.

Why should I, people who study philosophy always like to think they are better than people who dont, even if they dont talk about it.

Defend philosophy, or piss off. As it is i fail to see anything worthwhile.

I fail to see how the speculation described here can have any useful bearing.

Speculation is an assumption or opinion based on incomplete information, in order for philosophy to be concretized for others to accept, the situations which the philosophy bases itself on requires concretized facts. Without such, it is not philosophy, it's just an uneducated opinion.

Please show me an example of these "concretized facts" that philosophy bases itself on, the speculation based on it, and the factual benefit to mankind, that can be conclusively PROVEN.

With the Is/Ought dichotomy, I have already told you that in order for philosophies to be ethical propositions, it must be based on why it was created; the now.

There is no factuality in speculation. You telling me, that without the concept of philosophy, the result would be war?

That without the ability to reason with someone else, yes. If you cannot rationalize to other men the issues of the world and of issues of your backyard, the arbitrary takes over and you have men who escalate their own personal involvement in the subject.

So the study of philosophy on a college university level, prevents war? I thought I had a god complex, but jesus h christ.

And for the people that actually create, build and destroy things?

Generalization, you are discussing the humanities, you are asking for results of philosophy, I'm telling you there are none, because the peopel out there are as

I'm willing to be proven wrong, only i'm failing to see anything worthwhile, perhaps cos you are failing to break things down to my level. Whilst i'm not the most stupid person in the world, i dont understand philosophy speak.

You have yet to answer the question, what could the study of philosophy at university level, learning dead mans words, achieve for mankind NOW.

stubborn as you. Only they have a deeper presumption preset by something else to tell them it doesn't work. Not reasonable explanations given; "That's just how it is".

Religion IS a philosophy!

Indeed it is. That is why I labelled philosophy "evolutionary ideals vs religious ideals" for that particular comparison, I did not negate it's stance as a philosophy, only an arrogant and close circuit one.

people ignore philosophy because it cant come up with any more definite answer than "this is the way things are".

The first philosophy defines is how things are, the next thing they do is explain how they ought to be, but in the case of Nihilism and Surrealism, they say that everything as it is and how it becames is all that it will be, you will be unhappy and die, but it doesn't matter, because we don't exist.

OK, i get you, but as you might have guessed, the theme of this and all of my posts in this topic is : WHAT CAN THE ACADEMIC STUDY OF PHILOSOPHY AT UNIVERSITY AND COLLEGE ACHIEVE IN THE MODERN WORLD. or is it a secret?

And you're trying to sucker in which demographic here?

Specific people as myself, no statistical information, just things I know for a fact; there is going to be one or two people out of a thousand who question.

EVERYONE questions something. What kind of question are you on about? Or you just trying to look sharp, cool, and mysterious for the internet community here.

ME. nuff said.

you think i'm just whoring? check out the barbie girl remix, you will hate me forever.

At 8/14/06 05:18 PM, Happy_24_7 wrote:

At 8/14/06 04:56 PM, SpamWarrior wrote: i apologise, you didnt swear at those that try help you, but you're still a prick

www.justfuckinggoogleit.com

SpamWarrior can go fuck himself though...I hate him

www.happy_24_7.JUSTGOTOWNED.com

Those water experiments are crazy, and if those results are for real and not doctored, then the world is just as bizarre and unexplainable as i expected it to be.

bah i'm supposed to be watching robocop, but sod it.

At 8/14/06 05:00 PM, Erkie wrote:

silly erkie philosophizing and debating arent the same

I never said they were, debating is the medium which philosophy carries itself out to others, issues, and other philosophies.

philosophies are based on "what if"s when CAN yes later on be proved right or wrong by science

If the issue involves science, the issue will need a scientific answer.

If the issue if ethical, there are no grounds for that then rationality.

so ethics isnt a matter of rationality? Isnt a matter of what is "right" and "wrong"

it would be indded a philosophy based on "what if's " and no real facts whatsoever

It is "real facts" that philosophies are based on, the What Ifs are based on the Is/Ought dichotomy, in the worlds of Aristotle:
"Fiction is greater then history, because history tells things as they were while fiction tells things as they ought to be". The ought distinction requires a real, physical distinction in the humanities in order define what it ought to be. This is how it is, this is how it ought to be.

History IS fiction. There might be some truth in it, but the whole truth of history can never be known. Not sure what you mean by the is/ought dichotomy, since i'm no philosophy student.

Philosophies of the moral kind are depicted in all fictional novels, all novelists and writers are philosophers to that extent.

And what have they achived for the benefit of mankind.

Philosophy is about speculation in the absence of facts.

Read above, philosophy serves as an Ought depiction to reality and humanity and ethical values, not scientific ones. In order to make those distinctions requires real world facts, how things are, and how they ought to be.

I fail to see how the speculation described here can have any useful bearing.

If you remove it's factuality, philosophy is no longer philosophy, it's arbitrary feelings and whims that are argued with no purpose and only a general idea on how it achieves it's end, what would ensue is much what happened in the Civil War, at least to it's own extents, physically, or mentally.

There is no factuality in speculation. You telling me, that without the concept of philosophy, the result would be war?

Instead i will ask you, what have individual philosophers achieved for mankind. and whether anyone could come up with anything new and helpful in todays world.

Aristotle is one of the earliest philosophers and offered his views of the world in a rationalized form, some of his works are ignored, but his best are used by most philosophers in existence.

And for the people that actually create, build and destroy things? Do they follow aristotles long dead words?

It is not our own fault that philosophy isn't accepted, it is because of ignorant minds that reject evolutionary ideals for religious ones. "Because god wants it and you're the devil", God and the Devil being concretizations of their definitions of good and evil, is their essential response to anything a philosopher lays down.

Religion IS a philosophy!

Ayn Rand created her own incomplete, one-sided philosophy that serves itself much like a sculpter rather then an open book. The results of that philosophy are individualistic in their conception, each individual usually takes what he needs from philosophy and builds his life off of those principles, the ending result is his own developed joy, rather then a midlife crisis. But because of so much ignorance, philosophies are disregarded and fought by many, the majority, no results can be achieved because people ignore it.

No one likes ayn rand. but seriously tho, people ignore philosophy because it cant come up with any more definite answer than "this is the way things are".

On the other hand, there's no fight to be fought, only the people brave enough to ask questions will recieve the best results, and they're what counts.

And you're trying to sucker in which demographic here? Sod it, i'm too tired for this.

Nothing makes me special. Fuck this, i'm out of here, you fail to amuse me.

i apologise, you didnt swear at those that try help you, but you're still a prick

www.justfuckinggoogleit.com