Forums

Irony.

Ironic actions are the product of people who do exactly that; disconnect words from deeds. When one claims to see irony in a situation where there is no irony, that is ironic in itself. One who knows oneself and others can avoid acting ironically and can better detect the irony in the actions of others.

Sil is being ambiguous by only expressing the supposed observation of irony, without giving details. That leaves the possibility that he's the one here with the most relevant knowledge and that the irony he sees is something which others here have difficulty seeing. Doubtfully, he believes he's the most knowledgeable here, but perhaps he believes he has an ace up his sleeve pertaining to human understanding. Perhaps he believes that there is something being held back by those here, justifying his own reticence.

Maybe there is knowledge being withheld here, but for every claim made there's pages of explanations made available. The thread "People Reading" being a relevant example.

Why would one make allusions to being an imbecile, and simultaneously show undue arrogance? Maybe a conscious act of setting oneself up for failure, or simply the act of one who doesn't know how to properly define himself and doesn't understand the value in an admission of lack of knowledge or of just simply remaining silent.

You call your father Daddy? And emphasize playing, well that explains alot

He might find your lack of indifference a tad... undignified.

Satyr wrote:

I don't want to change a thing.

He, as part of a herd, is something I must analyze and understand.  

Kovaks wrote:

what the fuck are you doing?

Sport.

What are we to make of somebody who does not want to change a thing?

Satyr wrote:

I'm angry at the fact that this turd, and those like him, actually vote, affecting my life.
He's no authority.

That they are content to be angry, and merely observe? To poke... and expose. Expose to whom? A real authority? There is clear resentment here that this type is being blamed as holding back a preferable existence for you, yet you do not wish to change this? Are you a punchbag?

You are certainly not changing even by accident, as your style does nothing more than provoke another assailant, a dissident to your own values, to dig in their heels even harder, cover their ears and believe even more fervently that their position is justified.

You are intentionally ironic? Pushing others who already make your life worse to make it even worse? You know that I understand irony, but do you? As previously set up, are your accusations of ILP not just as easily applicable to KT (do you see this yet)? By itself, it doesn't even matter if ILP is pathetic. this alone does not automatically absolve this place from patheticalness. That I am no longer part of ILP should suffice to show you that I am not merely defending some herd, but simply using a situation as an example to illustrate my point.

That said, a seasoned absurdist as I am, I do enjoy the sport in which you partake. I acknowledge my lot, do you?

Quote :

You are certainly not changing even by accident, as your style does nothing more than provoke another assailant, a dissident to your own values, to dig in their heels even harder, cover their ears and believe even more fervently that their position is justified.

Aren't we, all?
Such is the nature of argumentation.

phoneutria wrote:

Quote :

You are certainly not changing even by accident, as your style does nothing more than provoke another assailant, a dissident to your own values, to dig in their heels even harder, cover their ears and believe even more fervently that their position is justified.

Aren't we, all?
Such is the nature of argumentation.

So why do we do it? Catharsis?

For the audience

Satyr wrote:

choose the one that flatters you, and/or makes you feel good.

Imbesil wrote:

What are we to make of somebody who does not want to change a thing?

maybe describing the world, as it is, is not a complaint at all.

Pikachu, I choose you. This one flatters me and I choose it to flatter you too. And why not raise up others as well as yourself?

Maybe one does explore reality, but you do not focus on the positives, quite the opposite.
The self most certainly is not the only one anyone has any possibility to gain control over. That you feel otherwise is the issue at hand.
Exposing the boil and nothing more is also the issue at hand.
How are you helping your own other than circle jerking impotent protest?

You appear to have inserted some Mensa reference into a quote of me, which I did not say. Can't you leave out my qualification for one post? Just one, please? I ask politely.

Satyr wrote:

To get to the real one must cut away the social personae.

I agree. That you are genuine is not the issue. That you accept and present the full extent of who you are is another issue.

Satyr wrote:

I've known my lot for a long time.

And what is that?

Quote :

How are you helping your own other than circle jerking impotent protest?

Help?
We but gather the crumbs that fall from his feast.

On a side note, do they not teach punctuation in smartass school?

Meant nothing by it, dear.
Nothing, but to express my humble expectations... in a way that pleases you, of course.
Such that our bright boy, here, might be impressed by the devotion of yours truly, your humble subject.
While you, knowing exactly what I mean, might take the offense where it is due.

Satyr wrote:

Imbesil wrote:

Pikachu, I choose you. This one flatters me and I choose it to flatter you too. And why not raise up others as well as yourself?

Am I a christian, like you?

I have no idea whether you are a Christian.
Perhaps raising up others as well as yourself only makes sense to you out of Christian "selflessness", so maybe you are. As for me, I am reckless with flattery, I just let it spill where it may because it is meaningless to me. I owe you nothing and need nothing from you, but I offer anyway out of absurdity and passiveness. If you don't like it then I can only apologise and move on.

Satyr wrote:

Imbesil wrote:

How are you helping your own other than circle jerking impotent protest?

There's the "protest" shit again. I said I am not protesting, but describing, but your MENSA brain can't let go of the candy cane you've been sucking on for years.
Maybe you need a new schtick...

I chose the explanation that you are not complaining at all in my last post, because I know you think that's your tack. I know what you think you mean, I just don't believe you.

I understand that you revel in the perversity of incessantly and at length merely "describing" certain specific things in such a negative light, only to deny any wish for them to change. You say it's passion and an assertion of individuality, I say you've only gone half way. This is the whole reason why I asked what we are to make of someone intentionally inconsistent between what they feel, versus what they wish to be done. Possibilities include that you are just kidding yourself and you either do really want things to change but you are too impotent to cause this, or you actually enjoy how things are and kid yourself that you are against it. Perhaps you are a masochist and enjoy the tension and thrive off the frustration. Perhaps you are an ironicist and merely performing for the sake of effect. All of these require a self-deception, which is what makes it so unacceptable on a form specifically entitled "know thyself".

You are exploring but you certainly aren't changing in relation to reality, you are the same as you always have been. If you think that the self is the only entity over which one can have control then this would confirm the impotence hypothesis. Exposing a boil to expose underlying infection equally does nothing except raise awareness, but what good does awareness do by itself - for your self, your own or even for more than that. If you think making "your own" merely aware then you merely condone impotence.

See, none of your attempts to evade the accusations of protest add up. This is why I don't and cannot believe you, and this is why nobody else does. And this is no doubt why you resent them so, to protect your ego. You have admitted that you are a narcissist, but it is not complete honesty to admit that you are a liar.

If you were truthful to "love self", you would acknowledge the common ground that all humans have as well your differences. I know you are narcissistic but not even you are so very different. The truth no doubt is that you are in fact terrified of the possibility that you might have something in common with these others you "don't care" about. Thus the overcompensation to distinguish yourself and the projection of common ground into this external "herd" entity which whom you are constantly in combat. That you are so hypnotised by their spell and cannot let go of them is only more proof that you are one in the same, though you will not admit it. Presumably you got hurt by them and needed to invert reality to save your pride, to convince yourself that it was you who rejected them.

Perhaps now a sarcastic and insulting comment to attempt to dispel my psychologising and maintain your facade?

More of your disingenuousness is revealed through your addiction to jumping to conclusions, filling in the blanks with your own imagination and relying on this hyperbolic, binary interpretation of the world where "if not one then the opposite", and "if some of something then all of something". If one sees the positive it is insufficient to conclude that they only see the positive to maintain some delusion. That I share a mensa qualification with your fellow actor (who you have turned into a scapegoat and nemesis, embodying all that you deny in yourself) does not equate us. And it is you who accuses others of believing that all men are created equally - yet more evidence of the truth leaking through your act, that this enemy of yours is in fact yourself.

Since you cannot find happiness in your perpetual inner turmoil, you are suspicious of anyone who has - they must be the ones lying to themselves. One must suffer, and suffer correctly - as you do, else they must have a miserable existence. You invert the world twice so that you may pretend to fit in with it, but think you have only inverted things once. You are the own architect of your refusal to fit in and must exaggerate this into a martyrdom wherein you must live and die alone, in order to think yourself noble and a sportsman.

There's this version that makes perfect sense when matched up with the evidence, and there's your cop-out that flatters yourself. Cut away at that persona of yours! Change your schtick.

I'll just write all of this under "uncontrollable urge to crush".

I could just as well give you the same advise

Having in certain moments of weakness engaged the frustrating endeavor of addressing you in ideas, I must say that although I acknowledge the merit in them, I would rather talk about the weather

Engaging, also isn't

a: Apples.
b: Have you considered crab apples?
a: Oranges suck, you are an idiot.

Lovely day, isn't it, dear... sunny... fluffy clouds...

phoneutria, your snappy comebacks do tickle me. Thank you  

Oh, I do love to tickle, dear.

Must add a little winkety wink, to make it charming...



Dear, leave my visage out of it... No pretty face can live up to your words.

What has gotten into this man?

Here

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Pardon the coarseness, it's a 5 minute doodle.

So you stop by every now and then and do a search on your own name?
Cute.

Fixed cross is speaking pretty objectively despite all the shit satyr gives him.

Oh, so that's the joker. I see.
Hello dear. Still eating garbage in Seattle?

Have you, dear, come up with a response... a course of action?

perpetualburn wrote:

What's the point of using words like "darling" "dear" "sweetheart" etc (like this MagsJ person at ILP and phoneutria) without any substance behind it to give the word spark... makes me cringe... it's like an attempt to patronize the other while ultimately being ineffective and shallow... Or worse, it's just their "style"

I can only speak for myself, dear . It is nothing but courteousness. I always honor my interlocutor with manners, and I do my best to avoid letting the heat of arguments take that away.
A term of endearment, when used by me, is always a display of affection.
Charming.... as in intended to charm.
Pity that you don't find substance in it, dear. It's in there... deep in there.

Satyr wrote:

KT is popular, these days, amongst the sheeple.

You make an online "career" from being an impossible dick.

I did sign up over there, but couldn't get a post approved. Not that I've bothered to try all that much... barely have time to post here. I suppose my garbage is not good enough to float with theirs. How rude... no way to treat a guest, I'd say.

I can be your mouth-piece over there if you desire, Satyr. I just created an account there again. Time to slaughter some sheep at the ILP barn.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

reasonvemotion wrote:

AEon wrote

Quote :

Other than that, yeah, allemotion you probably should listen more and talk less..........

Oh, I'll just have to make the biggest fuss over you, won't I?

If there's anybody who knows how to give a girl a good time, it's AEon!

Formerly known as Silent Soliloquy?  Or are you just another pin up doll?