Forums

Satyr wrote:

In their tiny minds there can only be one who thinks the way Satyr does...who else would be so "foolish" right?
And, what woman would ever agree with Satyr?

She would have to be a very very manipulated and flat-chested female....

Mentally and physically abused with very low self-esteem, an ego of a mustard, to believe masculinity and creativity Necessarily go together as an existential imperative.

She could only be Satyr's mom.

She can only be a 'he'.

lolzz...

Callosum wrote:

Lyssa wrote:

Why is Moreno acting all innocent?! He finds the fact that you didn't show up with your name dishonest?
These are the group of people who advocate gender being a social construction and rave about any significant difference existing between male and female; and now Moreno accuses 'Sabina' of not being upfront of his/her gender??! That's the point! The exposure of their own hypocrisy.
If gender is so meaningless, then why do they all give such a shite?!
Why do they?!

I don't Think gender is a social Construction, though there is construction going on - as the Feminization of Man certainly entails, for example.  Anyway, I don't Think men and women are the same.   I don't Think we are blank slates either.  I've made that clear there.  Now of course you don't read so much there so how could you know?  But then, yeah, how could you know, so why are you assuming everyone has the same beliefs there?

What does it give you to see a monolith and have this wonderful horrible THEY?

Just to promote the idea that Lyssa and I are one and the same person, I respond, before she does ...or before I do using her moniker.
 

Everyone does not have the same beliefs there, but most, the majority, share in some fundamental beliefs concerning humanity, sex, and morals.
If you had integrity you would use the same moniker here as you do there. I suspect you don't want 'them' to know, or you are ashamed of coming here.
I don't even know who you are THERE, so how can I know what you post THERE?

As I said elsewhere, ILP is a microcosm of the macro. This means that in the 90% there will be a 10% who are intelligent.
The 'THEY' refers to that 90% and, more importantly, to the admin and moderators who protect that 90% by finding excuses and justification to include them and to force others to respect them.
Because THERE, it's all about the numbers/quantities, whereas HERE, it's about qualities ...or, at least, we try. 

Callosum wrote:

I kinda doubt my issue was with him needing to show off his personality.  The broken record had to do with seeming to be saying the exact same things as he used to but in a cut and paste way, now.  Which made it even more irritating that someone else was going to come and literally cut and paste his ideas.   I mean, seriously, if that had been a woman coming to ILP and cut and pasting his ideas, what interesting and sad psychological twitching that would be.   Especially with the anticipatory victimized stance in there also.  Whatever you Believe about women, that would be someone who needs to get a Life.  That it was Satyr and some collective funneled through 'Sabina' is actually pleasant to hear.

Repetition occurs when the other side declares victory or claims to have responded to a position but avoids addressing the issues involved in it.

Looking through your forum I see nothing BUT repetition, for there are only a few philosophical points of contention dealing with the human condition.
THERE, some ides are taken for granted.
 
Why would I waste my time writing something new, when I knew I was going to be banned, dear lady?
A female created the moniker and sent me the password so that I may circumvent the lifetime ban, to re-inject the ideas you freaks ignore into the hum-drum conversation.
If you agree with me then you are like a shouting woman in a windstorm of flatulence, over THERE, with THEM.

The intent was to attracts people like you, who are bored with the same shit, and with the duplicity and with this 'taking for granted'.
Mission accomplished.

A lot of shit has been said about me and my supposed "followers," and my vitriolic "style", and yet when I did not insult those who are definitely simple and dumb, but played along with the pseudo-respect of your modernistic social platitudes I still got banned simply for being the Satyr.

Know why?
Because even if you agree with me, as you say, and say what I've said over THERE, amongst the THEY, you don't make it real for them.
For you it's all theoretical and abstract.
I make it real.
I say, if women are inferior to men intellectually then they should shut the fuck up, about intellectual matters, because they do not have a clue, except for some notable exceptions.
Who, the fuck, wants to listen to a dumb-bitch like Blurry or Kriswest running around posting one-sentence positions of personal taste, and motherly advice and butch, tough-girl commentary with no substance?

I say that if the world is full of morons then why should they be included in a forum where serious, and honest, conversations about life, the world, and the human condition are to be had?

If you people, you as being a part of THEM, feel a moral obligation to have retards, and infantile minds running around, injecting every thread with a redirecting stupidity, focusing all conversations upon them and their narcissistic desire to be seen and heard then YOU, as being part of THEM, by tolerating this as part of some rule or shared ideal you feel you must surrender to, should not expect to be taken seriously.

Callosum wrote:

It wasn't like some weird compulsion took me over and I found myself typing.  
I was somewhat curious to see if there was an independent mind in Sabina and to see what she had to say, for herself, if anything.   They created a very large amount of noise and distraction.  And while I could sympathize with irritation aimed at what 'Sabina' was supposed to be, there's not much need to express that irritation more than once.  Ignore is a perfect function for that.

And let's face it, what intrigued you enough for you to come here was the possibility that Sabina was a female, and that she came from here.
I assure you she is, and she is a member here.
But I, being Satyr, find it fascinating how Lyssa and her eloquence, saying almost the same things as I, but better, gathers such a male entourage in a matter of a few weeks.
Reminds me of my own glory days.
And here you are, trying to see if it was really a female that made you think, and made you feel inferior, and made you hot and bothered.
You had to verify if Sabina was truly Satyr or a female, as she said she was.
If it were some middle-aged dude named Satyr, you would not have bothered.
Proof?
Yes, here you are posting a response to Lyssa, and not to Satyr who presumable, according to the rabble on ILP was behind the Sabina moniker.

I assure you, most of the posts made using the Sabina name was by a female member.
I did post a few things, but not much, and it was obvious simply from the change of style.
It's why I was discovered. 

Don't worry, hopefully Lyssa will respond when she has the time.
I'll leave you with her, to enjoy her mind and to wonder how she looks.
Nothing like the Kriswests, and the Blurries of this world, I assure you.
Those are a dime a dozen.

Callosum wrote:

I would be interested to see what would happen if Satyr came over there, to see if something has developed in his positions and approach.

Seem like a no lose situation, except for the mods who will have to be like police at a rock Concert for a while.  But that would just be a phase.

I would be curious to see how long they could ignore me or how the shit-Smear would try to insult me and troll my threads, before your "unbiased" moderators intervened.
A sociological experiment.
How long before they find some excuse to ban me and say: "A-ha!!! See? I told you what he was like!!!"

If we take this last Sabina incident as an example then rest assured the same process will repeat.
Did you notice how every thread posted by Sabina was inundated by those few morons, when they suspected that I could be behind the scenes? 
Go to the thread titled Trolls and Trolling, which was a cut and paste posting made by me.
The original can be found here.
Read through it. Enjoy the irony, given the thread topic.
See the methods for censorship?

Callosum wrote:

Nah.  If you are permabanned, then it does not matter if you are polite, once they figure out who you are they will get rid of you.   This has happened with people whose ideas were hardly challenging.   I doubt Humean read through Sabina's posts to see if Satyr was following rules.  Or was shocked at the Power of his ideas and threatened by them.  I Think it was....  Oh, it's Satyr...gone.   There's no need to make it more dramatic or consider it proof and start waving flags.

Without wanting to be too arrogant, I will tell you that you are partly correct.
Those others being banned is not the same as Satyr being banned.
You don't know the circumstances.
Others may be real disruptive elements, trolls as they call them, but Satyr was not ...at least not originally.

See, this last intrusion was a repetition of what had happened back then, only the players were different.
Faust, for one, was a mod, back then.
Now he goes around trying to have a "serious" philosophical conversation when back then he was reprimanding me for telling him that you cannot allow children and retards into a forum supposedly dedicated to serious thinking.
His position was to "chill out" and have fun.
The more the merrier.
He, being Carleas' dog, was doing his master's bidding, trying to make the forum profitable, popular.
Quantity over Quality.
Well he got his wish, and look at ILP now: continuous gossip, threads being redirected and ruined, infantile exchanges, men-children posting pics, exchanging banter, bragging, one-line declarative statements, feel-good emotive thinking, the usual dismissive, defensive tactics against certain ideas, sarcasm, cynical aloofness ...


A stupid fuck claiming to know the absolute is tolerated as if he were sane, but Satyr is ill, right? 

Only_Humean has a personal grudge against Satyr.
He, being the defender of weakness, of the modern ideals, of democratic bullshit, of equality and rights and respect and civility.
I, being the one exposing all that for what it is.
He prefers others who believe the things i do because they cannot defend those positions like I can ...nor like Lyssa can.
He enjoys the typical "racist" and sexist, redneck, because he can belittle them.
Not so with Satyr.
By banning me he makes sure his own simplicity is protected.

Callosum wrote:

If Satyr is allowed in I'll mod the mods - not that I have any special Power there -  and Point out hypocrisy if he is held to a higher standard.  Or if others are allowed to simply bombard him with insults and ad homs. I suspect those of us pushing for his return will not be successful, but who knows.

Did you not notice?
This already happened.
That was the intent of me coming there.
I not only knew what would happen but I did not try to avoid it.
I wanted to expose the hypocrisy of that place ...one more time.

Now, you are welcomed to post anything you like here, or you can go back there.
Humans like numbers and parties with lots of females and food and crowds make most feel safe and like they are involved in something special and important, so it is also expected that you will prefer it there, rather than here.

The rules here are simple:

-Say anything you like, but remain on-topic.
Insults are permitted if along with them content is provided.
If you really want to express your feelings about someone in particular, start a thread on it, do not go around mind-farting in every thread.

-Do not flood the forum with posts.
Less is more.

Nobody has ever been banned here.
We close them up in our Dungeon where they enjoy unprecedented freedom of expression. they can even moderate themselves there.
But we do clean house every so often, deleting members who have no visited the forum for a long, long, period of time.
It also eliminates any possible sock-puppets that some insist on using to hide themselves behind, for no reason at all.

Callosum wrote:

Lyssa wrote:

Why is Moreno acting all innocent?! He finds the fact that you didn't show up with your name dishonest?
These are the group of people who advocate gender being a social construction and rave about any significant difference existing between male and female; and now Moreno accuses 'Sabina' of not being upfront of his/her gender??! That's the point! The exposure of their own hypocrisy.
If gender is so meaningless, then why do they all give such a shite?!
Why do they?!

I don't Think gender is a social Construction, though there is construction going on - as the Feminization of Man certainly entails, for example.  Anyway, I don't Think men and women are the same.   I don't Think we are blank slates either. I've made that clear there.  Now of course you don't read so much there so how could you know?  But then, yeah, how could you know, so why are you assuming everyone has the same beliefs there?
What does it give you to see a monolith and have this wonderful horrible THEY?

Did I not single out 4 names - schizo-smears, kris, blurry, tentative?
I define a forum and its quality, not by its healthy members, but the kind of Sickness and Illness it Tolerates, and what it allows to go Unchallenged.
Satyr's already told you 'Sabina' was a shared account by himself and another girl. The one telling kris, "you are acting crazy" and affirming violence was indeed a female. Before she could place her reasons, Humean banned that account too. He's already mentioned sock-puppetry for banning Sabina, meaning there were two IPs. You can confirm it with him.
The last time Satyr and I shared an account "Lyssa" and partcipated there, Satyr clearly announced and differentiated his views from mine by changing his fonts to a very large size, using colours and underlinings. And yet, he was banned for being provocative and his "troll-like" manners, for his egoTism. He was accused of being an Ubermensch when he himself never made such claims, for being irrationaly dismissive of another's views, for being racist, for being sexist, "for repeating the same old politically incorect views" - something 'Moreno' came here personally to lecture him about the last time,,, in short, for being Male.

From my perspective, it shouldn't matter at all; if gender differences mean nothing, and that's something the forum tolerates, if Masculinity should be censored, and only exchange of ideas and rational discussions count, then that's why 'Sabina' participated there the way he&she did to put gender-insignificance to Practice. To prove real-time, that if male and female should approximate each other, and only Ideas matter, there should be no concern of who or what genders or any personalities whatsoever. Yet, it did matter to krisy, schizo, tent, and blurs, right from day 1. They couldn't rest without constantly obsessively bringing up Satyr/Lyssa, etc. This exposes their own hypocrisy and the kind of two-facedness that forum tolerates. 'Sabina' was meant to expose precisely that bigotry.
Watch that thread where Kris starts off telling "only a male" would believe in aggressive ideals and violence, and just yesterday, she does a double-back with a nervous laughter and proclaims she's pro-male, and she's pro-female both,,, except we all know what male and what female she is pro-...  the blank kind that are interchangeable. Enough said; the  duplicity is open for all to see.

Quote :

Quote :

The last time Moreno was here, he spewed some condescending lecture on you needing to deal with ideas alone and not show off your personality like some "old broken record"...

I kinda doubt my issue was with him needing to show off his personality.  The broken record had to do with seeming to be saying the exact same things as he used to but in a cut and paste way, now.  Which made it even more irritating that someone else was going to come and literally cut and paste his ideas.   I mean, seriously, if that had been a woman coming to ILP and cut and pasting his ideas, what interesting and sad psychological twitching that would be.   Especially with the anticipatory victimized stance in there also.  Whatever you Believe about women, that would be someone who needs to get a Life.  That it was Satyr and some collective funneled through 'Sabina' is actually pleasant to hear.

Its good to have you acknowledge that a second time!! And only adds to prove what I've been telling here.
That its the CONTENT that irks them and you. Not the manner of presentation - whether its done flagrantly [that was the reason given in the 'Why is Satyr Banned?' thread started by myself the last time on ILP], or in a very 'civilized' manner or in a cut&paste format... what's "sad" is You coming from a forum called 'I love Philosophy' to whine about how his ideas are same-old,,,, except that's what philosophy IS - again and again engaging, challenging, tackling old ideas with newer eyes. Is Plato dead? Is Aristotle? Is Descartes? Is Nietzsche? N. might as well be dead to those there - "giving up N. was a fascinating thread, arguing "its cooler" and a sign of "maturity" to give up and overcome N. after you've read him once or twice - then you're done with the subject. THIS is what is meant by Doing philosophy. Doing philosophy apparently means scanning a book, getting the gist of it, chatter about it a couple of times, agree to disagree and then be content that you are done with the same old ideas... and how you have already heard it a hundred times before.
We all know what Plato said..
We all know what Nietzsche said...
Don't we?
What could be more pathetic and sadder than a forum claiming to love philosophy caricaturing that very subject from the vain pretense of over-familiarity with the subject?
Lets face it, truth is, like you confessed here just now, engaging in "same old ideas" is supposed to be un-cool and boring and therefore not really philosophical...
Thanks for clarifying that Moreno.

Quote :

Quote :

 but like he says there, even he can't help pointing out the real trolls derailing the threads were those 4, not 'Sabina'.
Even he can't help saying that... that's how openly they were trolling.

It wasn't like some weird compulsion took me over and I found myself typing.  

Lets just say I was surprised to see You capable of taking a balanced view there, and the only way I could rationalize it was, because those 4 were being such open trolls, even the mods. couldn't ignore them without losing face.

Quote :

I was somewhat curious to see if there was an independent mind in Sabina and to see what she had to say, for herself, if anything.  

There were Two Independent Minds there.
One Satyr, one certainly a female.

Quote :

They created a very large amount of noise and distraction.  And while I could sympathize with irritation aimed at what 'Sabina' was supposed to be, there's not much need to express that irritation more than once.  Ignore is a perfect function for that.

I would like for you to point out even ONE post that was "meant to be" noisy and distracting. Every single post was on topic and had something relevant to say. You would be lying if you do not acknowledge that Sabina did not also try Ignoring. Count the no. of posts derailed by Blurry with her idiotic nonsense about black widow spiders and smears taunting with his garbage and kris constantly sniffing around saying 'i smell goat' and then check if Sabina didn't try ignoring them more than once, 2 times, 3 times,... Is there anyone more miserable than Blurry trying to constantly insert her social news about her life wanting everyone to know how she's shifted into a new home or such personal advertizing BS in the middle of a serious discussion on gender by many others?! Its because Sabina DID Ignore, Stoic_Guardian had to step in to warn that Idiot blurry and smears to stop smearing the thread.
Go figure.

Quote :

I would be interested to see what would happen if Satry came over there, to see if something has developed in his positions and approach.

HA! Funny... you expect a 'development' in his positions? hahaha  you mean like a 'change of heart'?
Why don't you just cut the chase and announce what kind of positions you wish he would seriously consider? Be Honest.

Quote :

Nah.  If you are permabanned, then it does not matter if you are polite, once they figure out who you are they will get rid of you. This has happened with people whose ideas were hardly challenging.   I doubt Humean read through Sabina's posts to see if Satyr was following rules.  Or was shocked at the Power of his ideas and threatened by them.  I Think it was....  Oh, it's Satyr...gone.   There's no need to make it more dramatic or consider it proof and start waving flags.

Lets see. 'Flagrant' approach and being a Male, being onself is not tolerated.
Politeness doesn't really count.
Challenging ideas have never been the reason for a ban.

If its none of the above, then you are admitting its a pure emotional hatred against a person Satyr for being who he is, is why he's banned...

You seem to have all the answers. You tell me.
Tell me all about ILP and its open-mindedness.

Quote :

Seem like a no lose situation, except for the mods who will have to be like police at a rock Concert for a while.  But that would just be a phase.

If Satyr is allowed in I'll mod the mods - not that I have any special Power there -  and Point out hypocrisy if he is held to a higher standard.  Or if others are allowed to simply bombard him with insults and ad homs. I suspect those of us pushing for his return will not be successful, but who knows.

That's for Satyr to decide and answer. Its upto him.

Satyr wrote:

And here you are, trying to see if it was really a female that made you think and made you feel inferior and made you hot and bothered.
If it were some middle-aged dude named Satyr, you would not have bothered.
Proof?
Yes, here you are posting a response to Lyssa and not to Satyr who presumable, according to the rabble in ILP was behind the Sabina moniker.

Yea... for someone addressing Satyr directly there, and claiming he was really curious about Satyr's positions and possible new developments, he ignores your direct address to him here, and responds to me, and no, that's not because of any eloquence, but because it pricks him that I mentioned his own behaviour and his condescending lecture at you here the last time. He's come here to clarify he's not a hypocrite like the rest on ILP. But is he all that different? Does he have any serious reasons to justify your ban other than stating your ideas are same old, reinforcing my own statement that its your ideas that irk them...?
Even the lowliest dungeons of this forum highlight what Philosophy IS 'regurgitating' on the myth of Sisyphus... What is Moreno in comparison then?! with his deplorable and inadequate accusation you were repeating old ideas?
Moreno is going to show me what Doing Real Philosophy is and how he is Not even below, way beneath the simple wisdoms in the most lowly dungeon...

I find it interesting that "old ideas" is somehow an insult, when all ideas are old.
People, like that, think that dressing up communism in a technological garb and calling it The Venus Project makes it fresh and unique and new. 
At the same time many, like him, support morals which are Judeo-Christian, very ancient, but under a new heading: secular humanism, or a bit older Socialist or Marxist, or Liberal.

The modern mind is obsessed with newness. 
He must be current.

But Traditinoalism is about returning to the past, and identity is based on discovering the past and consciousness is a looking back.
He wants to say "primitive" or "overcome" but he does not dare because then he would have to support this with a position of his own, showing what has been overcome and by what.

How can something be overcome when it hasn't been dealt with?
Evading it, banning it away, association it with evil, trying to shame it into silence, dismissing it with casual declarations, is not dealing with it.

And the beat goes on:

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

And, yet, not once was this retard called a retard by Sabina. not even after she declared, in a well-crafted statement, that homosexuality has nothing to do with the sexual act, and that anyone who thinks so does not have her knowledge on human nature. 

And I quote:

Blurby wrote:

You assume homosexuality is about the physical act of sex, and as such can be labelled a "fetish" and controlled. This is such a major misunderstanding, and one that usually occurs among the very religious, from what I've observed.

The "girl" clearly explains her motives and methods:

Burpy wrote:

By the way, I don't call someone a homophobe when they have a different opinion than I do, I call someone a homophobe when they try to use homosexuality as an argument to disparage people.

So, if in her opinion a position is hurtful to another, then the "phobe" comes out of her anus to save the day. 

My sarcastic response - sarcasm being the only form of "disparagement" permitted, for it is a feminine tool which I yield gladly:

Sabina wrote:

Excellent point.

To speak the truth, which may be negative is to disparage, people.
Fear is the only explanation for it.
I will assume that disparaging those who disparage others, is how you deal with your fear.

It is also true that how the other's emotions are affected is part of how we must perceive and express reality.
Philosophy for the emotionally motivate.
If not selfless love, then fear and hate.
The world through the gaze of a child.


Yes, when we think of homosexuality or sex, we never mean copulation, we mean spiritual union.
Male and female are not sexual terms, of a specialized type evolve to reproduce. It's really a universal way of uniting spirits now that we've been cast apart by the evil forces of Satan.

And it is true, when we think of male homosexuals the last think on our mind is one inserting his penis in the anus of the other, or two lesbians grinding on one another.
It's Platonic.
Brothers and sisters getting together to share their lives.
A sexless love.

Her reply?

Read for yourselves. 

In this world, reflected in ILP, you can be as stupid and emotional as you like, just as long as the cultural protected manimals are not under threat. 
You can allude to any senseless crap, if it is a shared mythology and it sounds good to the ear. If asked to clarify, or to justify your positions with reasoning, you can use the usual methods of evasion, shaming, cynical sarcasm, and bovine aggression.

A girl like that can speak with the testicles of a bull-dyke because the "males" there are castrated by morality and social rules.
He who challenges the bovine codes will be assaulted.
They must respect her, though she's repeating cultural nonsense with an "I dare you" attitude. 

She feels safe there.
There's no Satyr there.
When she got a whiff of him, because the cow Kriswest had acquired the smell for it, she sort of went away for a while.
When the beast was driven off by the shepherd, she pops-up all disturbed, and with her fake testicles up in a knot.
 
She can utilize the same shit hyper-masculinity does.
She has the "right," you see.

What the bull-dyke is alluding here, is that old Platonic kind of love, only us humans are capable of.
You know the idealistic, pure, unsoiled by animal crap that was integrated into Christian lore.
Here it has the secular cleansing spirit where love is placed on some kind of pedestal where no earthly creature can touch it with its filthy paws.

Surprisingly romantic, when you consider the fact that it's coming form a bull-dyke wearing the balls around her neck like jew-elery.

An example of why 'the masculinization of mankind' does not apply, except as a compensating, symbolic, reaction to feminization.

The bull-dyke, snarls, huffs, postures, like a man, but in the end she can't help but think like a female.
The men-children watch, unable to respond, because society has made them ashamed of being men.

And, of course, Moreno, cannot tell the difference between complaining because I was banned and stating how my banishment exposes the hypocrisy there.
He still can't get it through his mind, that it was all intentional, expected, and part of the plan.
He thinks I want to be there, for a reason other than sampling the vast array of specimens of decay available over there.

He still does not get what a Satyr is.

And the beat goes on...

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

The usage of the argument that it will be an "experiment" tells me he's read my posts here.

ILP has always been a petri dish for me ...a human zoo ...a supermarket of modern goodies.

Moreno dreams for a watered-down, tame Satyr. 
Someone who will take him seriously. 

Isn't it interesting that he wants me to go there, but he does not come here?
 

Satyr wrote:

I find it interesting that "old ideas" is somehow an insult, when all ideas are old.
People, like that, think that dressing up communism in a technological garb and calling it The Venus Project makes it fresh and unique and new. 
At the same time many, like him, support morals which are Judeo-Christian, very ancient, but under a new heading: secular humanism, or a bit older Socialist or Marxist, or Liberal.

The modern mind is obsessed with newness. 
He must be current.

But Traditinoalism is about returning to the past, and identity is based on discovering the past and consciousness is a looking back.
He wants to say "primitive" or "overcome" but he does not dare because then he would have to support this with a position of his own, showing what has been overcome and by what.

How can something be overcome when it hasn't been dealt with?
Evading it, banning it away, association it with evil, trying to shame it into silence, dismissing it with casual declarations, is not dealing with it.

Exactly. Moreno says, he "knows" all about Feminization and agrees with the social condition outside, etc. - he's got the gist of things, but in actual practice, he won't trace back the roots of this feminization to J.-Xt. nihilism and puts it on the corporates and capitalism run by some individual technocrats.
He says he "knows" all about Feminization, but what is Masculinity to him, if his advice to me to you is to "ignore" people who spew nonsense, to state just one example.
Its just same old information to him, because he can't experience the ramifications and into how many directions your essay branches, and what it means, and all that is at stake.

What does Moreno consider the greatest loss owing to Feminization? What could he possibly value when he doesn't even get what the masculine spirit is! and Philosophy to him means nothing more than exchange of "new ideas"...

Satyr wrote:

And the beat goes on...

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

The usage of the argument that it will be an "experiment" tells me he's read my posts here.

ILP has always been a petri dish for me ...a human zoo ...a supermarket of modern goodies.

Moreno dreams for a watered-down, tame Satyr. 
Someone who will take him seriously. 

Isn't it interesting that he wants me to go there, but he does not come here?
 

That is one satyr-obsessed woman. Why is she so concerned abt. what happens with you here? Can't that dumb bitch just get over you? Does she have anything to say there other than letting others know how she moved up the social ladder and shifted to some new place? pathetic.
Its fascinating to see how she uses and subverts the men there to get back at you here.

How she places implants in men's minds, trying to shame Moreno... what a fe-mule...

Callosum wrote:

Lyssa wrote:

Exactly. Moreno says, he "knows" all about Feminization

Um, no I did not.   I did say that the idea of feminization of man must include acceptance of some degree of Construction.

Saw this in passing.  Keep up with those assumptions, which are working for ya.

Is that an assumption, or did you not say the last time, how he sounded like a broken record repeating the same things you've already heard and how you know gender construction is certainly a part of Feminization happening.
If you think Feminization is not just that much, then why keep repeating he's got nothing new to offer?

Laterz.

Callosum wrote:

Satyr, many pardons for taking what you said in ILP as honest.   You seemed Confident you could be yourself there and that the problem was really other people reacting to Satyr. 

Are you seriuos?

If I were myself there, as I was before, guess what they would do?

Your people want hypocrisy, lies, fake civility and respect.
Only those, like you, can sustain that level of bullshit without actually biting into it.

Callosum wrote:

I now see you Think you could only be there watered-down and don't actually want to be there.

But that's what you and your kind want, dear boy.
you aren't interested in honesty, in reality, you want to converse with aloof apathy, with that pseudo-intellectualal, pseudo-civil air of the aristocratic, which all the slaves love to perform.

You know what's funny, even back then whan I was being attacked, nisulted, and only I was reprimanded for reciprocating in kind, I was still holding back.

you saw the reenactment when I participated in the moniker Sabina, to soften me up with a female presence.
What happened?
The same insults, trolling, derailing of threads, the same characters refocusing everything back to their simple, boring, lives.
It was the ideas, not my "vulgarity", because not once did I insult or fight back in kind.
Did I?

All you want there are bombastic fools claiming they know the absolute truth or that perspective mans all perspectives are equally valid, and teenage minds mind-farting all over the place.
Enjoy yourself, if that's what you like.
for me that place was and is a human zoo.

Callosum wrote:

 You were just out helping people with a strafing run or Lyssa was or something.   I have trouble keeping track of all the contradictory statements but I am sure it doesn't matter.

"Strafing"?
You mean when someone says stupid shit you simply remain silent?

I mean, at what point will you realize that this tolerance is what is destroying culture?

Callosum wrote:

But it's good you've found a Place where people take that stuff seriously.  A niche.  A Culture.   All Cultures have their limits and footbinding.

Boy, you are caged, not I.
I am willing to confront any one of your buddies, here or there.
Are you?
Are they?

My views are honest, direct, clear and posted everywhere.
You will find a synopsis on this Forum in the Agora, top of the page.
Find something you disagree with, and let me have it.

Otherwise, shut the fuck up and go back where you belong: in YOUR niche, amongst the sheeple.

Callosum wrote:

Why is it so important to defend Lyssa's mistakes?  

Sure, one can generalize, one can generalize about ilp.   But she was not simply generalizing, she was assuming that I would have a certain position.  One not held by a number of people.  One of the 10% if your Estimates are correct.   That was a stupid assumption.   Not that she characterized the forum a certain way.

What on earth are you talking about?

What assumption did I make?

Callosum wrote:

Why is it so important to defend Lyssa's mistakes?  

Sure, one can generalize, one can generalize about ilp.   But she was not simply generalizing, she was assuming that I would have a certain position.  One not held by a number of people.  One of the 10% if your Estimates are correct.   That was a stupid assumption.   Not that she characterized the forum a certain way.

What mistakes?
I'll let Lyssa respond.

Callosum wrote:

Know thyself, Satyr, but only in moderation.

What?
You have got to be kidding me.
Say you did not just say what I think you said.

Moderation in knowing yourself?
A limit to self-awareness?

Do you have a clue what moderation means and why it was important to the Greeks?

Callosum wrote:

The part of your posts questioning why I post there, however, does have merit.  That I will mull over.

Take care.

Bye.

Not only why, but how.
The how, is important.
You do there what you came here to do: mediate between the rabble, open to all kinds of filth, and us, who are discriminating and proud of it.
You don't only participate, but you defer, you give them respect, you accept their moralities and feel ashamed for thinking they are morons, even when it is obvious.
you came here to tell me to grovel before some douche-bag who is running a forum, named Carleas, so that I will gain the privilege of socializing with a group within which we have shit-Smear, Blunderpuss, Krissy the housemother, a moron who thinks perspectivism saves him from his own stupidity, and some pompous ass declaring the invention of a system that proves absolute knowledge.

Side note
Tell Blunderpuss that her bull-dykeness is intimidating enough to keep even a Satyr at bay.
What chance does a goat have against a cow?
Tell her to hang those balls higher up her navel so that they look like breasts.

Oh, and then we have a Nietzsche crotch-sniffer, Sauwelios, who is closing off over a decade of worshiping and idolizing the idol-breaker, representing the antithesis of everything that man valued, and also a former moderator, Fausty, the drunken sailor, who set the bed and then refused to sleep in it, now coming around, forced to title his threads "serious", to keep away the retards he once claimed deserved to be there.

Wait ...wait...
You thought I wanted to return and that my multiple banishments were not expected and desired?
Really?
The only thing philosophical about ilovephilosophy is the title, and it should be reported as false advertisement.

Dear boy, you may still be obsessed with numbers and noise, and being included in a crowed, but I am not.
Less is more, Live lightly, μηδεν αγαν ...know thyself.

Better silence than the sound of noise.
Better to say nothing, than to listen to inanities, or to pull shit out of your arse to fill in the silence you find so uncomfortable.


Dear Moreno, other than feeling sorry for me, over there, in that self-gratifying patronizing way you humble Judeo-Christians are known for, because I fail to be part of the clan, which is easy for me can I ask you a question?

What "growth" to you allude to in your post, over there?
Tell me, what have you and your kind grown into which I must copy?
I'm curious.
From what I know growth happens out of necessity, and not 'just because'.

Because, if I understand what you imply correctly, then I must tell you that what you consider "growth" I do everyday in my real life.
You fucks are everywhere.
Every fuckin' day I go out there and I pretend, like you people do everywhere, calling it civility.
It's easy.
Do you actually think that a person like me, with my insights into human nature, would not be able to fit in?
Dude, I can make anyone like me ...it's a gift.
Know why?
Because I can read people. I instantly know what the other wants from me and I give it to them - I adapt.
Easy shit.

My weakness?
Stamina....patience.
I have very little of it.
I can pretend and play the game, but not for long. Stupidity just becomes too much for me to tolerate.

How long can I pretend that a moron is making sense before I feel like pulling his eyes out?
I can do it on ILP, if I were to use a different moniker, because on-line I can come and go.
I actually did, as Sabina, even though someone else was part of it.

But then I have another question, making it two in total, so far:
If I cannot be honest and speak my mind on-line, when discussing philosophy, of all things, which is about reality, then where the fuck can I be so bold and direct and honest?

If in the very discipline dealing with reality as it is, and not as I wish it were, I cannot say my opinion openly, honestly, directly, and without reservations, then what the fuck is philosophy for you people?
Is it another tool for faking it?
How do other people's feelings factor into your conception of speaking honestly?

Let's play a game, okay?
If you convince that moron running ILP to let me in, I promise to not insult your fragile flock with direct insults.
I'll stick to the topic and the subject, and we will see how your herd of bovines behaves.
An social experiment, no?

All I'll do is post my ideas, openly, directly, succinctly, and honestly, and I will respond only to someone who understands what I've said and has posted an equal to it challenge.
What say you?

Put your self-identifications to the test, boy.
Show me the quality of your herd.
Because I know that here not one of them would last a week.

Hey look another one of your herd is here, in the Dungeon.
Will you watch?

Permit me one last question, or multiple questions focused on a central idea, to make it three:

Does every challenge to an opinion constitute a challenge worth replying to, particularly when it states what has already been answered or shows a misunderstanding of what is being said?

What is a "one trick pony" and why is it for you and your ilk such a derogatory comment?
Is one-trick insulting to the no-trick bovines?
From what I know my tricks are multiple, if you want to call them that.
I have positions on metaphysics, politics, psychology and not only my sociological treatise you all know as The Feminization of Mankind.
But you fucks only want to talk about my stance on sex and how it is being affected in our modern western culture of no culture.

Does reality change at such a rate that one must change his mind continuously, or is changing your mind an indication of open-mindedness and not of an inability to avoid error?
If you are continuously changing your mind on a matter, then perhaps you are stupid, and not open-minded at all.
When an idea is not contradicted, but surpassed using the usual methods of evasion, as exhibited on your forum ILP, does this mean one must forget it and go on?

You people discuss the same subjects over and over again, and then you accuse me of repeating my positions?
Very hypocritical, no?
I do not believe in uniqueness, as some of you do, so for me being called unoriginal simply states that I am in tune with a reality others have already seen and I agree with. Your own positions are older than dust, but you spruce them up with new words, convincing yourselves that you are progressing, because "progress" for your type is superior for its own sake.
 
You are lovers of change, and change is what leads to chaos, whereas order is the very definition of repetitive, consistency and symmetrical patterns.

A very naive tactic on your part to try to deal with a position you cannot deal with rationally, by accusing it of not changing ...wanting it to change, so that you do not have to be confronted by it.

Unfortunately for you and your kind, shit like that does not affect me.
I know what you are and why you are like that.
Challenge my positions or ignore them, but don't tell me I have to change them for you, just because that's what modern minds consider hip and cool and progressive, and growth.

Callosum wrote:

look, Everything seems to be nicely resolved.

Satyr just wants to drop in sometimes to demonstrate the hypocrisy, which he can do as a banned person.

You guys can have the Culture of mind Reading and your odd hermeneutics which you obviously appreciate even if it runs counter to your beliefs about what is possible.  (and of course everyone should want to be in such a Culture)

Everyone wins.

I am actually surprised by how everyone's wishes can be met.  This is rare.

Moreno, did you run away... again...? How is it a Resolution when you haven't even bothered replying to Satyr's response:

Satyr wrote:

Let's play a game, okay?
If you convince that moron running ILP to let me in, I promise to not insult your fragile flock with direct insults.
I'll stick to the topic and the subject, and we will see how your herd of bovines behaves.
An social experiment, no?

All I'll do is post my ideas, openly, directly, succinctly, and honestly, and I will respond only to someone who understands what I've said and has posted an equal to it challenge.
What say you?

Put your self-identifications to the test, boy.
Show me the quality of your herd.
Because I know that here not one of them would last a week.

Hey look another one of your herd is here, in the Dungeon.
Will you watch?

Permit me one last question, or multiple questions focused on a central idea, to make it three:

Does every challenge to an opinion constitute a challenge worth replying to, particularly when it states what has already been answered or shows a misunderstanding of what is being said?

What is a "one trick pony" and why is it for you and your ilk such a derogatory comment?
Is one-trick insulting to the no-trick bovines?
From what I know my tricks are multiple, if you want to call them that.
I have positions on metaphysics, politics, psychology and not only my sociological treatise you all know as The Feminization of Mankind.
But you fucks only want to talk about my stance on sex and how it is being affected in our modern western culture of no culture.

Does reality change at such a rate that one must change his mind continuously, or is changing your mind an indication of open-mindedness and not of an inability to avoid error?
If you are continuously changing your mind on a matter, then perhaps you are stupid, and not open-minded at all.
When an idea is not contradicted, but surpassed using the usual methods of evasion, as exhibited on your forum ILP, does this mean one must forget it and go on?

You people discuss the same subjects over and over again, and then you accuse me of repeating my positions?
Very hypocritical, no?
I do not believe in uniqueness, as some of you do, so for me being called unoriginal simply states that I am in tune with a reality others have already seen and I agree with. Your own positions are older than dust, but you spruce them up with new words, convincing yourselves that you are progressing, because "progress" for your type is superior for its own sake.

You are lovers of change, and change is what leads to chaos, whereas order is the very definition of repetitive, consistency and symmetrical patterns.

A very naive tactic on your part to try to deal with a position you cannot deal with rationally, by accusing it of not changing ...wanting it to change, so that you do not have to be confronted by it.

Unfortunately for you and your kind, shit like that does not affect me.
I know what you are and why you are like that.
Challenge my positions or ignore them, but don't tell me I have to change them for you, just because that's what modern minds consider hip and cool and progressive, and growth.

Tell me Moreno, were you sincere coming here? Or what matters to you ultimately is the Majority being happy?
Which is it?

Are you going to let Blurry shame you in telling you what to do and how to behave and then for you to speak of Feminization as if you Know all about, yet its right there happening @ you, with Blurry and Kriswest trying to regulate opinions there?

And while you are still dabbling in your nonsense making of Know Thyself and Nothing in Excess being a syllogism in the way you have skewedly presented it there, that's another laziness on your part, without addressing Satyr's response in the Breeding thread on that very issue:

Satyr wrote:

"To eyes that have never seen, any light above darkness, would be excessive.
Pain flowing through the nervous system, entering the central hub, like a knife blade.
The brilliance of exiting the cave.

Who shall endure suck brilliance?

To eyes that have lived in the twilight any prolonged exposure to it would be excessive.
It would tire, its mind would want to close itself off, to lower the lids, and find peace in darkness.
Who can endure seeing for long?

Nothing in Excess, we are told.
Μηδεν Αγαν!
Who can exceed his own ability to cope, who can lift a mass that will break him?

Who comes to philosophy thinking he has the stamina to endure what will be revealed?
Μηδεν Αγαν!
Why not consider your own endurance and close your eyes before you are broken?
Μηδεν Αγαν!
Do not know more than you can deal with.
Μηδεν Αγαν!
Do not see more than your eyes can bear.
Μηδεν Αγαν!
Do not understand more than what you can psychologically endure.

Seek darkness, ignorance, mediocrity, and settle for it.
Why do you come looking, if you doubt your own constitution?
Would you drink in excess?
Would you eat in excess?
Would you work in excess?

Who are these children who think themselves worthy of seeing, or knowing, of understanding?
Did you think thinking was an equal opportunity discipline?
Do you go to the gym seeking the heaviest weight to lift?
Do you consider your frame durable enough, the equal to those other monsters beside you?
Do you envy them? Are you this "humble"?

Μηδεν Αγαν!
Why do you despise the one who reminds you that you are not equal to the task?

Why?
Because you've bought into the crap about parity in potentials.
Your fragile ego will not let it go.
You remind others of it - you tell them of their ego - and yet there you are, overestimating yourself before them.

Μηδεν Αγαν!
What does this mean to you, poor child?
Does it mean a median all are forced to live beneath?

Μηδεν Αγαν! in knowing yourself, the child shouts, thinking he has found a chink in the metal.
A warning:
Do not know yourself, nor me, excessively.
The body has a limit, as does the mind.
How does one determine this limit, and then seek balance?

γνῶθι σεαυτόν
As much as you can endure, as much as possible, and then...
μηδέν άγαν

How does one forget what one has never known?
How does one return to being a child, when he's never been a lion, nor a camel?"

This is why I said let no idiots come from ILP here preaching open-mindedness and fair-game when they are going to run away and not stick around to address issues Philosophically. Then again, what goes on for philosophy at ILP is only playing around with new concepts; re-assessing and engaging in old ideas are so un-cool and those who do that are obsolete and "harmful" fit to be locked away only in the rant sections.

You going along with Kriswest is Pathetic Moreno; that was a nice sample of your sincerity.

You are an idiot.

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

I wonder if the next step to being part of a boring, pretentious club of gits, who are presumably intelligent, is this phase of bitching about how "above" them you are.

What is funny is that the members claiming to be part of Mensa, and also too cool to participate, have never exhibited anything of any intellectual value on the ILP forum, and participate, happily, in an online forum populated by a majority of morons. 
Too good for Mensa, then, but good enough for ILP. 

Here, the articulate, and gifted ILP member Gamer, offers some comments on art and being a "loser":
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I guess the evolutionary reality of 'necessity is the mother of invention' eludes this "winner" of games - for he is a gamer, after all. 
If language is defined as an art-form, because it is, then we can say, using Gamer's insights, that humanity is a species of losers, which it is.
Social behavior evovles amongst populations who cannot survive on their own - geentic losers joining forces. 

The supermodel need not think, when the successes of the past are inherited in the form of symmetry.

And Europeans, Caucasians, are those "losers" of Africa who returned as conquerors and slave owners, to capture and exploit those "winners" of the past, who did not have to change, and so they didn't.
We are supposed to feel ashamed of this.

Pain is a motivator - no pain no gain.
Simplest shit ever.

Satyr wrote:

What is funny is that the members claiming to be part of mensa and also too cool to participate, have never exhibited anything of any intellectual value and participate, happily, in an online forum populated by a majority of morons. 
Too good for Mensa, then, but not so for ILP. 

The most amusing part of that thread was when Magsj claimed to have a high IQ, but just missed out being categorized as such because of illness.

 
Really?
She did that?

I must have missed it.
Incredible.

Magsj wrote:

I have a very high IQ... contrary to what you may think Silhouette

I see having it as something to live up to.

Magsj wrote:

...it's near to 2% at the Mensa UK certified level, but I was going through the most stressful experience of my life ever at the time I took the test, and I enquired if this would affect my result, to which the answer was yes, but I still scored highly considering the traumatic gulf I was in

Why would anyone sit an IQ test or any kind of test if they were under extreme stress, rather than postponing it? And if they didn't how can they have scored so highly as she claims she did whilst under all that pressure? Apparently, being very intelligent is 'something to live up to', whatever the fuck that means.

I wouldn't be surprised if her IQ was sub average. The people who come across as genuinely intelligent like Silhouette and Gamer are the ones who naturally score highly, whilst Magsj appears slow and only capable of simple, mindless responses.

She's a member of a philosophy forum because she feels inadequate about her low intelligence, hence all her responses are in some way designed to conceal this fact or divert attention from it. A terrible situation to be in I imagine. Silhouette always gets the better of her, and she clearly feels inadequate when dealing with her.

Callosum wrote:

Dear Satyr,
I know via email that you have sent me a PM.   What a priviledge!   But given, I realized, that you know what I am really thinking, why I really do things, what I am up to, what I am avoiding, it really makes more sense for you to handle our dialogue on your own. 

I guess your own words, the only thing I have to go on, should be ignored, because in your "inside", in your "soul," in the deepest, most private recess of your being, you are not your words, nor the thinking these words symbolize.
For you moderns you are something mysterious, because appearances show you to be dullards and morons, and how can that be so?

Trust me, if you were here, before me, you would be an open book.

Callosum wrote:

So I didn't bother to read it.  You would know my side better than I do, and I would only muddle things with my more limited view of what I think and my motivations etc.

Yes.
Perhaps "no excess, even in knowing thyself" can be misconstrued as the ramblings of a coward and an imbecile, but if you say so, we'll have to postpone judgment, in the hope that one day you will produce something different from everything you have in the past.
Typically modern.

Your entire past, as you present yourself through words, ideas, opinions, exposes you.
But you have a fall-back excuse: you are not appearances, so you are nothing which manifests in reality. You are some mysterious essence, brilliant, fabulous, eternal...and you only appear to be an idiot.
 

The fact that you choose to socialize with imbeciles, on ILP, agreeing with them when they slander the vile Satyr, exposes you, dear boy.
You say you agree with me, here, but there you cower and mouth the popular mantras, like a good little boy, who doesn't want to get hurt by the bovine herd's stampede.
Hypocrite. 

Satyr = goat-man. Goat, as in scapegoat (the sacrificial symbol of a community's shame, and a living representation of its secrets; the repressed parts of its civility. It is consumed, reabsorbed, by deconstructing it into digestible parts.)
Dear boy, I place myself before your alters to see your souls.
I wanted to see your blades and your fangs glitter in the moonlight.

I'm a teacher, not a guru.
I ask for nothing in return.

I use real living specimens, no dead words and references and deferences, and theoretics.
ILP has served me well. A cesspool of post-modern decadence, populated by a variety of Judeo-Christian fecal matter.
I used you as examples to prove my points, to those who come here wanting to understand.

CallosumOnce wrote:

 I would have said that this was part of a kind of solipsism on your part, seeing your own mind when looking at others, I now realize how efficient this is for everyone, and explains some of the efficiency, and perhaps claustrophobia, of knowthyself.

You would, because you are part of a herd that repeats it continuously, and here you are pretending not to be of them repeating their words.
But, I suspect, if asked to defend this position you would flee, or make some vague excuse to avoid - such integrity your sort has.

Claustrophobia, from one belonging to a herd that closes itself off?
Ha!!!
Dear child, here we are, waiting for your sort to come on over.
Someone with substance, and not d(63, in a drunken rage, who coems hee, every so often (when his testies drop), to call me out and to tell me that he hates me.
A true hero of the people, he is.

Test our beliefs, or what you think our beliefs are.
We are not permitted into your safe barn, where you "open-minded" ones gather to repeat the same hypocritical lies, or to talk about "what you did last night," (on a philosophy forum!!!!) or how you invented a method to prove absolute knowledge.
And we are the arrogant and ill ones?
 

Did you not see yourself fleeing to cast aspersion where you thought nobody would touch you?
No balls for here, huh?
Even now you do not dare approach the subject of your last words.
You run and then taunt from afar how the other is a coward.
 

The "you are projecting" turns to "I know I am, but so are you" crap.
Do you fucks ever grow tired of your own lies?
Why do I repeat myself?
Because you fucks never change, and you fucks are the majority, growing by the minute.

Here is what is solipsistic: living in your own brains, repeating the shared common lies, and inhaling each other's mind-farts, within the confines of a cage that keeps the world out, but you call "openness".

Have you got the balls to test your lies here?
I don't think so. 
Go off now, little boy. Return to the cage where everything outside is called "inside".
Nihilism is all about reversals.

Remember: nothing in excess, including health, integrity, honesty, honor, and intelligence.
What a dumb fuck you are.
You thought I would want to be part of a group where you are considered intelligent?
 

Callosum wrote:

  A little bit like the scene where everyone is John Malkovich in the restaurant, only in this case it is more like you are Solaris simply trying to help.

All the best,
C

However you like to comfort yourself is fine by me.

If we could only count the no. of times the cripple d63 has begged Satyr and others to a realtime chat showdown, and then run away with nothing more than:

"[06:55:59 04/09/13] d(63 : lick your wounds, morons."


1

Once again: when we gonna do that chatroom thing?

2

Once again, brother, when we gonna do that chatroom thing?

3

Satyr?

4

When are you gonna prove your true metal to me?

5

Let's do it in "real time".

6

That said: when we gonna do that chatroom thing?

The cripple then has this saying on ILP:

"I mean note this common narrative among these drones that I "cut tail and ran".
What would I have to run from? What do you lose when you have nothing to win?"

d63 was the coward who picked up my private message to him and never responded to, I quote:


Case 1.

Quote :

D63 is an obsessed Weakling, going about throwing challenges and showdowns with KTS/Satyr/"Neo-Nietzscheans", only to NEVER SHOW UP HERE.

If he's too chicken, any of the ILP-Lurkers here or his Plebian friends like Schizo-Smears who sees teddy-bears and fantasizes on cyber-rape, are welcome to take up from the hot air he's left off.

I can't imagine any serious Nietzsche-journal taking a clown like D63 seriously, when he says, "the right approach to becoming a Nietzschean Overman" AS IF it was a 'project', an 'enterprise' open to all, AS IF N. did not specify this was for a SELECT species of men with certain dispositions and temperaments *and* genetics, AS IF N. did not specifically state anticipating morons like him that the Overman was precisely NOT to exist for the sake of humanity and the weak.

"Fascism" rooted in a "mis-reading" of N.? Someone tell that clown, I can't wait to hear his manipulation of the "right reading" of N.

And while whoever's at it, someone tell him to grow some, and show up, drunk and all for the extra bravery.


d63 wrote:
Of course, no one will agree with me.

I mean: who would want to confront something like a dragon?

And those Neo-Neitzschean kiss asses on KTS?


They don't know shit about the will to power.

(It's a lot easier, and a sign of a weak will, to stand with the strong than it is to go down with the weak


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


d63 wrote:

At the same time, I have to oppose the KTS continental approach in that I believe the only right approach to becoming the Neitzschean Overman is doing so for the weak. It seems to me the only reason that God, or fate, or whatever you want to call it, would determine an individual to be as such would be for the heroic. It would be a gift and should be treated as such.


d63 wrote:
Anyway, I feel like starting shit with someone tonight. And why not Satyr on KTS?



d63 wrote:
Having read his interview, it seems I have found an unlikely ally in the far more scientific minded thinker of Hillary Putman –and on 2 fronts. On the Satyr/KTS front, I have his distinction between compassionate ethics and “macho ethics” which I have previously described as the neo-Nietzschian gospel filtered through Social Darwinism and Ayn Rand. He further associates this to Fascism rooted in a misreading of Nietzsche.

Quote :

Satyr wrote:
Lyssa wrote:
I've sent a Private Message to the clown D63 saying:

Hey You

SHOW UP or don't.
Do you expect a response, in between alcohol binges?


A coward should be exposed for being a coward. What better way than to have him expose it himself by not showing up after the "daring" private messages and posts he has sent! HE is going to prove himself he is a spineless coward.

Quote:
I doubt if any of them has a stomach for anything outside the popular.
Their imagery is set.


The annoying thing is at various places he's expressed his blatant hatred for N. and Nietzschean elitism, but then he also wants and desperately wishes N. were not so, and so says, people have "misread" him.
The popular parts of will to power diovrced of all contexts is what attracts cowards.

Case 2.


d63 was the coward who ran away yet again from the thread
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Case 3.

d63 ran away even yet again after whining something about creativity needs pacifism and war-like conditions make the emergence of war-affirmative philosophers next to impossible, and so N. was an idiot.


Case 4.

d63 keeps running away even when asked on-topic questions as is the case currently with him on the Imports thread in the dungeon.

Case 5.

d63 even runs away from his own forum and his own thread on ILP when cross-questioned.

d63 says he has nothing to win, but he's boasted on ILP he wants to shake up Satyr.
He's boasted here, he wants to jam, provoke, debate.
d63 runs away from everything.

d63 is the most pathetic cross between a pussy in a petticoat and a papertiger.
I wonder how he can live with himself. This is where the alcohol comes in.


Did that uglylooking bitch Blurry think Apaosha was Satyr and call Apaosha/Satyr a motherf---ker?!!

Talk about obsession, rejection, paranoia, hatred; why doesn't the bitch come here and give satyr a piece of her mind if she had one, instead of whining, backbiting like a little whore spreading her complaints to all over there?
What a mental case and a nuissance polluting that forum with her personal rejection issues and preventing people from exposing the cripple d63's cowardly performance.
That bitch is begging to be f---ked in a mental asylum LOL

And Moreno talks about knowing what feminization entails haha

haha

Moreno comes using the victim card, to excuse his mental scurvy and participating in any real debate saying its because Satyr has assumed everything on Moreno's behalf, Moreno need not be here.
I like the overture. How he inverts the same thing I told him  - when he said he wanted to see a "change" in satyr and satyr's positions and I remarked why don't Moreno just give him a script.

What happens if even the excuses to chicken out are plagiarized?

If there was a championship to take away the crown for the biggest coward, Moreno would defeat d63 by one sober finger. god knows d63 has no balls, and on top of that a drunk cripple. Moreno is king easy sneezy.

laterz idiots.

Lyssa... wrote:

when he said he wanted to see a "change" in satyr and satyr's positions...

This part is of interest.
Here we have the very essence of modernity and what we call progressive thinking. 

Change must be part of intellectual discourse, as a necessary attribute of integrity.
No matter how superior your positions are, how ordered, they must give way to entropy, to chaos, to change. 
Although change is a matter of necessity, and compensating for altering environments, for the average moron, who must change his delusions every so often, so as to harmonize them with what is fashionable, or tending at the moment, it is an indication of integrity - not stupidity, but intelligence.

The feminine mindset has its own fail-safes. 
If you can't confront what is above you, let time force it to lower itself to your level.
If it does not it is denying the "truth" what is self-evidently fact, though he cannot prove it or justify it. 

I imagine christian deists talking amongst each other about atheists:

Moron 1:
He makes some points I cannot respond to. 

Moron 2:
Have faith brother, God will set him straight.

Moron 1:
He doesn't believe in God.

Moron 2:
Give it time, he'll come around. When he gets old and feeble and death looms large, he'll accept Jesus into his heart. 
Everything in time changes.
God is outside time, so He never does, and we as faithful believers need never change our minds. 
We know the absolute truth. 

Moron 1:
Amen brother.
Time will force him to change.

Moron 2:
I luv you brother.

Bill Willtrack has started a tongue-in-cheek (I hope for him) thread on the "superiority of African-Americans," and knowing Bill from earlier threads - judging him from his past - I can safely say that it is, more likely, an attempt to make a point by using humor and reverse psychology.

Shit-Smear misses the intent, because he is an example of modern obtuseness, and that 'value judgment', again, is based on his past performances in threads, over time periods spanning years. 

Shit-Smear is trying, I'll give him that.

Shit-Smear wrote:

First off, it requires a value judgement. You might think that throwing statistics about this or that will give you some way to add a little quantitative oomph to your value judgement, but it doesn't. Statistics can't do that. You know this, I know this, and most people, I would hope, should know this. Value judgments are the beginning of the end of any claim to a proper scientific understanding that you may try and paste onto this racist tirade. You can't pimp logic g, and it's content neutral. All it does is clarify language, it can't tell us that one object is superior to another, unless we arbitrarily define a criteria for what we want "superior" to mean, then even if we satisfy that criteria, we've gone all godel-incomplete because our explanation is going to only be able to speak to that narrow, controversial definition of "superior" that we just came up with and as you can see above, we know that the fact it's an arbitrary criteria is going to be it's downfall. We're outside the description having to reference the tautologies we've rested the description on in order to talk in circles past one another in a way that technically doesn't make sense.

But intelligence is the value being judged, and nobody asks for a perfect definition of intelligence when evaluating a chimp and comparing it to a worm or a wolverine, because its behavior, in the present and the past, reflects this intelligence.
But I, the Satyr, have provided a definition for intelligence, as I have for what we mean by the word "human,"and the morons, on ILP, choose to think I am talking about anecdotes and personal tastes.

Most certainly we must define what we are valuing as superior and, most importantly, what defines the organism we are measuring this value within.
If I say cheetahs are superior, I must state that my standard is speed, and my comparison is with that of a turtle. 
I would say that what sets humans apart from all others species is not their strength, their flexibility, their speed, their size, their stamina, their sensual acuity, but their creativity, their mind, their imagination. 

And how do we determine intelligence without a tool or an object to measure?
Behavior.
Past and present behavior, performance. 

Do we know that a dog is inferior in intelligence to a human?
Do we know that a dolphin is more intelligent than a crab?
If so, how?

We study their behavior.
We take samples, from the past, and compare them with samples in the present, and we come up with an approximate hypothesis.
We extrapolate from a small sample group, general averages. 
That's what science does.

We all know what organism, what type, is superior in intellect when we compare other species, but suddenly we draw a blank when it comes to humans.
All of a sudden we need absolute definitions, more refined criteria, and still we remain skeptical, not wanting to judge prematurely or be hurtful, inviting hurt upon ourselves.
Suddenly skepticism makes us wonder about everything and all, and where we have no trouble passing judgment when dealing with a species we think can have no social effect on us and our reputation, we try to find excuses, explanations as to why one group of humans outperformed another, and why in the fields we know demand creative intelligence, the same types hold the highest positions of our esteem over time.

At the same time, we, we modern buffoons, cannot offer an alternative to explain how intelligence evolves if it is evenly distributed across populations and if environment, over time, has no effect on the brain, but only the body.
Why are not all species just as intelligent as humans (or are they? ) if no splintering-off happened, and genetic isolation did not develop higher intelligence in one group and a lower one in another?

What is selected, then, only looks?, which are, supposedly, superficial? 
Is all Evolution Theory a sham?
Is science a big joke, because it uses small samples to generalize and simplify, creating categories, types, groupings?

In the meantime, this retard says this:

Just another ILP retard wrote:

 
You know this, I know this, and most people, I would hope, should know this. Value judgments are the beginning of the end of any claim to a proper scientific understanding that you may try and paste onto this racist tirade.

In other words, science makes no value judgments?

Is mas not a value judgment?
What about speed, hue, direction, size?

What are numbers if not codes used for measuring, and what is science if not the discipline of judging?

So, if an alien race came down with technologies surpassing any we humans have ever seen, and with abilities no human can replicate or match, according to this retard, Shit-Smear, it is anecdotal evidence, and we need an authority to tell us what we are seeing.
These modern men-children have been so brainwashed, so terrified into not using their own senses, their own judgments, that they cannot form a hypothesis, cannot come to an opinion, reflecting their own understanding, without someone giving them the thumbs-up.

If we were not talking about vegetables, this moron would need a scientific graph and a paper on plants, to decide, to judge, what is ripe and what is not.
I'm surprised he gets out the door without calling a police-officer to tell him that it is okay to do so.

Thousands of years of experiences, the present as a backdrop, and we still cannot admit that there might be something to the idea that within the human species there might be divergences in intelligence, and not only in looks and athletic performances.
The fact that divergence is the very foundation of Evolution Theory and explains how species evolve and how they splinter off from common ancestors, is not enough for this imbecile, who dares to consider himself an intellectual, because he read an on-line philosophical thesis once or twice - probably skimmed though it, ignoring the parts that were over his tiny, scared, mind.

-------------------------------------------

Bull-Dyke reacting to the drunken lover d(63):

Bull-Dyke wrote:

d63, what the fuck?

Can I move to have this thread permanently deleted? We all talk about Satyr and KTS, but this stupid motherfucker is actually re-posting and responding to their shit here.

And that "value judgment" is evidence that she likes me.
She sees me everywhere.

You're me, I'm you. Everyone else here is too. Because they judge things in quantities, the idea of you being isolated flatters them.

I was looking through some of their threads for something to reply to, but there's so much thrash there now. Eyesinthedark is a good advocate for race realism, though. And Maia too, surprisingly. I remember her being much more liberal.
But any good topic gets shat all over by the usual half-dozen morons, like shit-smear the pothead, or D63 the drunk, that anything of value is quickly drowned in shallow waters.

An example, in the Academy sub-forum, which is supposed to represent a more high-brow debate format:

Drusuz wrote:

Havn't read wall of txt, but it has been well known for decades that IQ test only tests few intelligences in the wide spectrum of other intelligences.

Idiotic. He's responding to a thread title.

I constantly contrast it to here, where retardation is not indulged or protected: we do not need constant moderator intervention, because idiots are not protected from the consequences of their own stupidity. Thus an air of caution and restraint develops. An appreciation of the reality of danger.
There, complacency is the rule and anything that disturbs the collective somnolence is censored.

The reasons for this have been gone over at length: there quantity of participation, here quality.

I appreciate your intervention here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The drunk is obsessed with me.
He reminds me of Purple Dragon in many ways.

I love the Bull-Dyke's remarks. 
She sees me everywhere now.
Anything the reminds her of how stupid she is, is Satyr's doing.
I bet she imagines me in her sleep.

Her claim that she "knows human nature" that went no to declare that homosexuality is not about sex, is, along with the posted Shit-Smear post, one of the many reasons I keep on going back.
If you want a real-life, real-time, resource pool of what feminization, and modernity, and western decline, is all about, then visit ILP. 

Every stupidity, intellectual mutation, retardation, mental illness, cowardice, tolerated today in our "civil" western societies of equality and democracy, is there ...all except those that may break the spell. 
What do you expect when a liberal, douche-bag imbecile is the owner, and the moderators are twits?

I also like obe's last post.
The desire to imagine me in pain, because I am excluded from a bovine herd.
It's the payback for not being popular, amongst the depraved.
He feels bad when he is excluded, and so he wants to be included, no matter what the group is ...well except for Nazis.
Therefore, no matter how intelligent Satyr is, in his mind, at least he is hurt when the morons close the doors so he does not come in.

They can, at least, confront him with the door.

Posted on PN by Kuznetzova

Quote :

When it comes to the following topic, absolutely nobody here (and probably no one working for the magazine either) is qualified enough to speak on these issues. This is not the first time in my life I have had to hunt down a PH.d and contact him through email, because the questions I ask transcend the internet laity.

I was wondering if anyone knew a place on the internet where people discuss science and technology topics that are interdisciplinary. I would like a place where people actually read the books that are brought up and are capable of genuinely discussing the material inside those books. I'm currently working on material that is included within the following publications. I want to apply the material in them to actual simulations or chemical lab experiments (if necessary). I cannot simply sit alone in a room and just read books. I need to "bounce ideas" of those who understand what I am asking and what I am working on.

The materials I am currently working with are listed here:
•Kinematic Self-Replicating Machines , (Freitas Jr. R.A., Merkle R.C. ), (Landes Bioscience 2004), ISBN-10: 1570596905, ISBN-13: 978-1570596902

•Biology's First Law: The Tendency for Diversity and Complexity to Increase in Evolutionary Systems , ( McShea D.W. , Brandon R.N.), (University Of Chicago Press 2010), ISBN-10: 0226562263, ISBN-13: 978-0226562261

•Principles of Life , (Ganti, T), ( Oxford University Press USA 2003), ISBN-10: 0198507267, ISBN-13: 978-0198507260

•Protocells. Bridging Living and Non-living Matter , (Rasmussen S., Bedau M.A.), ( MIT Press, Nov.2008), ISBN: 9780262182683

•Signs Of Life. How Complexity Pervades Biology , (Sole R., Goodwin B. ), (Basic Books, Jan.2002), ISBN-10: 0465019285, ISBN-13: 978-0465019281

•Chemical Evolution and the Origin of Life , (Rauchfuss H.) , (Springer, Dec.2008) ISBN-10: 3540788220, ISBN-13: 978-3540788225

•The Origin of Species , (Darwin, C.), (Barnes & Noble Classics, Dec.2003), ISBN-10: 1593080778, ISBN-13: 978-1593080778

Like to talk to someone who has read at least one of these and is ready to discuss. I would be tickled pink. Thanks.

I think he is saying that aside from his own appreciation of his genius, he is still a modest man. Should I invite him, or has he already been here?

He, is a pedophile. He's known.

Well then, I am delighted I used a modicum of common sense and asked first.

Lyssa wrote:

If there was a championship to take away the crown for the biggest coward, Moreno would defeat d63 by one sober finger. god knows d63 has no balls, and on top of that a drunk cripple. Moreno is king easy sneezy.

Anyone seen the sight of one coward giving tips to another? Moreno giving tips to d63 is the funniest and demonstrates what I said above lol

Moreno the coward who cannot acknowledge the stupdity and vapidity of his own 'syllogism' of Know Thyself and Nothing in Excess even after Satyr's clarification and exegesis of the same, to him,,, is the one giving tips to another coward d63, who openly displays such selective dishonesty and mental retardation of Satyr's positions and tipsies about in his frock making frilly arguments and accusations on another in its likeness...

What does the coward Moreno advise the coward d63?

The coward Moreno says, "just say, yes Master and ignore them".

The coward d63 is jubiliant and prances about excitedly saying, 'yea brother, i hope to do that'.

The coward Moreno invited Satyr to the forum stipulating civility would def. not get him banned this time.
His pal Mo said the same, if Satyr remained to debate rationally with no sock-puppetry, he wouldn't be ignored.

But Satyr was banned again.

Goes to show Moreno, how ILP bans people purely on emotional hatred and emotional grounds.

How long can your 'honesty' ignore this and still affirm a supposedly "progressive" board for supposed "free-thinkers" that is so openly and blatantly un-Philosophical and bans people for no legitimate reason at all?

Coward Moreno, how long are you going to close your eyes and pretend you are a bigger person than Satyr?

Coward Moreno, how long are you going to be a hypocrite, teaching d63 "avoiding" and "ignoring" as a philosophical victory, and then joining the choir to praise philosophy as the most rational exercise of one's spirit?

"Open-mindedness" and "fairness" and "philosophy" in the mouths of cowards like you and d63 is a travesty of the lowest sort.
If your gonna be two faced honey, at least make one of them pretty. ; )

d63, what can I say? even if you were given point by point instructions on 'how to defeat Satyr', you'd still be shite scared living in those boots with your excrement...

 faggots.

It's gotten a bit much.
They see Satyr behind everyone with a mind they cannot cope with.
The universal scapegoat for the degenerates.

(S)He also claims to have been banned.