Thursday, April 12, 2007

What We Have is a Failure to Communicate

Now, there was a time not too long ago that I wasn't a writer, and I would still never presume that I am. Rather, I am always struggling to reach the level from which language arises -- or more properly, descends.

In fact, that's the hard part. We're not just talking about the distinction between "facts" and "prose," or information and rhetoric. Rather, especially when writing about spiritual matters, one must always pursue the impossible task of trying to make language conform to the object -- or Subject -- under discussion, an inexhaustible subject-object that must always elude exact description, even though it can definitely be described with exactitude.

This presupposes an ability to clearly perceive an object that transcends the physical senses. But once perceived, there is still the matter of avoiding using language in such a way that one distorts, misleads, or misinforms. Much "God talk" is just so much worthless and annoying pneumababble at best; even if technically "accurate," it is undermind and certainly heart as a result of the absence of radiance, beauty, rhythm, harmony, majesty, and other linguistic categories that transmit knowledge of God in a more direct and unmediated way -- very much in the manner that music conveys information about the very same object that it is.

In other words -- or notes -- a great work of music is at once a profound object and profound information about the object: ultimately, there is no describing the music outside its own unfolding description of itself. Thus, the musical object simultaneously elucidates and demonstrates, as do all objects.

That is, objects always "stand for something else," and are therefore language even before they are objects. No, they are objects because they are language, a language that may be read and understood by subjects. Put another way, if objects were merely objects, not only would knowledge of them be impossible, but there could be no subjects in the cosmos. There would be nobodies to say nothing about anything, just like a leftist humanities department.

This is what proper language of God should accomplish: to make spirit experientially "present" even while discussing or describing it. To the extent that words fail to do this, then they will remain on the plane of mere mental knowledge, or of (k). When writing or thinking about God, we should always be in the mode of O-->(k). (An important exception apples to revelation, which is a form of "special k" that we will discuss later.)

Especially when commune-icating with and about God -- one might add, "obviously" -- there is the spirit and the letter, and one can never do so without being especially mindful of the former. For example, this is why atheists are not only wrong about God, but not even wrong, for it cannot be ungnosised that their coarse language is inadequate to the lofty subject it can never reach. Truly, they are like the tone deaf person who dismisses musical beauty just because they can neither hear nor express it.

Put another way, if one truly understands and appreciates the capability of language to store and convey immaterial spiritual qualities, this poses an insurmountable obstacle to atheism, if only because there is no materialistic/Darwinian theory that will ever account for this mysterious property of language. The moment a Darwinian struggles to express his ideas in an elegant and aesthetically satisfying way, he is no longer a Darwinian. To the extent that he believes that truth is what one is ethically bound to believe -- just as good is what one is obligated to do -- he is no atheist.

Let us stipulate what is not a tautology -- that Truth is truth, and that it is mankind's unending task to make the one conform to the other. Whenever anyone -- even an atheist -- says anything, he is presupposing a universe in which a thing called "truth" may be encoded and passed from mind to mind through a medium called language. These are huge presuppositions, and only serve to re-emphasize the crudity of the atheist mind. Unless an atheist is an abject nihilist, then he doesn't have the courage of his absence of convictions.

For example, what can it mean that a thing called truth may be encoded in vibrating air molecules or squiggles on paper in such a way that they "cause" a state called "understanding" in the consciousness of another? What kind of causation is this? And is there any materialistic philosophy that can account for it? When you deeply comprehend a profound truth, is it really no different than kicking a can, or is this just so much philosophical cant that should have been given the boot long ago?

Consciousness is the interior of the cosmos. Like the exterior, it has form, structure, content, laws, levels, and modes. You might say that these more or less stable (but subtle) characteristics are the "exterior of the interior," just as the platonic realm of pure mathematics (or biological archetypes, for that matter) represents the "interior of the exterior" cosmos. Ultimately, both the interior and exterior converge upon, and are reflections of, the One.

In other words and numbers, there is a reason why the equations that describe the deep structure of the physical world are beautiful -- and in fact, could never be ugly, or "less than beautiful." Such a thing would be strictly inconceivable in any ponderable universe (which any universe must be), just as accurate information about God could never be ugly (one a priori reason why we know that the Islamists, Chopras, and Sharptons are so misgodded).

The philosopher of science Stanley Jaki refers to the problem of "a facile acceptance of phrases and perspectives which are imposed by the consensus as starting points with no further questions asked." In the end, one way or the other, the philosopher "will have to bring in through the back door the very objects the use of which his starting point failed to justify" -- e.g., objects infused with truth, and a consciousness that ardently seeks to understand truth and cause it to exist in other truth-loving subjects.

Most philosophies are intellectually closed systems, the conclusions of which are truly "foregone," as they are packed into the hidden assumptions with which the philosopher has started his errant quest. Needless to say, the growth of knowledge can only take place in an open system, in which truth is conveyed from mind to mind in the manner described above.

Or let us say that the mind is either an open system or a closed one; if the latter, then knowledge and truth are impossible; if the former, then knowledge involves "truth calling out to truth." It would also mean that the "book of nature" is indeed just that: it is full of truth just waiting to be unpacked by minds steeped in truth -- no, that are truth.

To emphasize the point: either the mind is truth (among other things, including beauty) or it is nothing. And either nature has an Author whose hands are all over it, or nature is an atheist who conveys nothing to nobody, so who cares?

The first and last Truth is that truth inheres in both objects and the subjects who understand it and cause understanding in others. As Jaki points out, "This truth cannot be evaded, let alone refuted, because the refutation itself is an act of communication, an implicit falling back on [the] objective means whereby alone can other [minds] be reached."

*****

Damn, I was just about to finally stream into my linguistic deustinocean, and now Future Leader is stirring. I'm still trying to find the time to find the words to rescribe what they are, to say the most. Mañana. In betweentime, don't let the headbugs bite!

The jazz musician goes onto the stage hoping to have an encounter with music. He knows that the music is there (it always is), but this meeting depends not only on knowledge but on openness.... It is a discrimination against mechanical pattern, against habit, for surprise, against easy virtuosity, for saying more with less, against facile emotion, for a certain quality of energy, against stasis, for flow.... [It is] an attempt, over and over, to reveal the heart of things. --Keith Jarrett

81 Comments:

Anonymous one big fat troll said...

Jeez, I'm nervous about being the first commentor, especially since I am a huge Troll.

But, here goes. Today's post is about intellectual positions, and I add my two cents that most positions are ego-inflating/supporting postions, not strictly intellectual ones.

Atheism is, of course, absurd. But that doesnt' stop people from posing as atheists, because when does so one gets strokes from certain other types.

Likewise, I am certain that being a raccoon involves an element of posing and preening as well. The raccoon position, which is that they are superior to the masses of lesser developed souls, feeds the ego quite nicely. God knows I pose as one as often as I can get away with it.

My intellectual position, behind the facade, veers from one anxiety to another, like I'm sure the other intellects of a vexed humanity do. Behind all atheists and raccoons alike the intellect is anxious, vexed, unsure, fearful.

Also behind all atheists and raccoons the soul resides secure, trying to be heard and felt.

The difference between the two is how the ego tries to get its strokes and how much the soul is allowed to come forward.

Intellect plays only a supporting role in the quest for a postition that allows the ego to feel good about itself. And this is why atheists persists in their assertions in the face of insurmountable evidence.

4/12/2007 09:05:00 AM  
Anonymous Geckofeeder said...

Wow, thanks Bob, this is a great honor to be in the
"Formidable Ladies Metaphysical Seed-Sowing Circle: Dame Edith Waterfowl, Sal, Gecko, Ximeze, Julie, & The Divine Mizz E" .

Ximeze, jimfodor.com is a website in progress for your angel search.

4/12/2007 09:10:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Bob,
Great post.

I like the new pic of we coons ‘who have your back’ that you snapped last night while we were waiting by the magical blue dish for the next post.
That’s me in the middle sporting my favorite pose, this time sans peanut butter jar.
I think that’s Ben in the background judging by his pose.

4/12/2007 09:26:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

jwm said...

Troll:
Point one.
What we are about is aprehending Truth as it is revealed in scripture and authentic religious practice. It has nothing to do with narcisistic stoking of the ego, or scoring points.

We are not superior beings, nor do we pretend to be.

"My intellectual position, behind the facade, veers from one anxiety to another"
This is not an intellectual position. It is statement about feelings. Some amount of anxiety, and uncertainty is universal to the human condition. Don't feel like the lone ranger.

Finally. This isn't about making the ego feel good about itself (as though that were a bad thing). Ultimately it's about Happiness. A solid spiritual foundation is essential for true Happiness. (I'm not saying that it's anything like easy. It ain't.) But it's worthwhile.

JWM

4/12/2007 09:37:00 AM  
Blogger juliec said...

"The raccoon position, which is that they are superior to the masses of lesser developed souls, feeds the ego quite nicely.

Huh. Guess I missed that dose of superiority when they were passing out the 'coonskin caps.

Do I consider myself vertically a little higher up than some people? sure. Take my spouse, for instance. He is a good man, and a 'coon at heart (he'd have to be, to put up with me), but he is not a spiritual seeker. So yes, in that sense I'm more vertical than him. Am I superior? I don't think so; as humans, we seem to balance each other out quite nicely.

Speaking personally, I never assume that I am "better" than someone based on what they or I believe. I do sometimes think I'm better than people whose actions demonstrate that they are in a pit and still digging. (See Bill Whittle's latest. Yes, I do think I'm better than conspiracy theorists. Vastly.) However, I am often humbled by those same folk when I see that they are actually finding a way up and out; incidentally, that's not a humility born of envy but rather awe - the successes of others are inspiring to me, and they gladden my heart.

"Behind all atheists and raccoons alike the intellect is anxious, vexed, unsure, fearful."

Certainly that is true of many if not most people at varying points. But if that is all there is to you, then I feel sorry for you, since you seem to be living in a private hell. Again, speaking personally, I'm a happy, optimistic pragmatist. I certainly feel insecure or fearful at times, but I find the best way to confront those feelings is to take appropriate action. When I do, they tend to go away.

My "ego" is fed by the loves in my life - God, husband and family. That I can share some of the sense and wonder of it all here with a group of like-minded individuals is icing on the cake, but if these coonversational opportunities all dried up today or tomorrow my "ego" would still be nourished by the most important things.

4/12/2007 09:49:00 AM  
Blogger juliec said...

OBFT, You remind me of someone who posted here a few months ago, believing that marriage was just a series of power struggles between two people. There is so much more to life than power struggles. There is more than ego inflation to allay unhappiness. It is my most fervent wish that something happens to make you see it.

4/12/2007 09:56:00 AM  
Anonymous dilys said...

It's easy to see how it could look that way to the HugeT. I am reminded of a very good old friend with whom I had a loud&wonderful time. We were accused of being "exclusive." In fact, anyone was welcome, they just had to be as interested in fun and probing questions and sideways angles of truth as we were. Those who wanted "in" it but were not "about" it complained piteously and with rancor before they went away.

Actually, this is related to the next point: "God talk" is just so much worthless and annoying pneumababble at best

One of the promises the Orthodox make, and none of us keep well enough, is to avoid betraying to His enemies whatever we know of the Mysteries. It is the loss of that catechumenal hermetic allegiance early on, supplanted by the idea of jawboning morality and even holiness (an early "push" rather than "pull" strategy) that is a part of modernity, that leads to the oversaturation of God-talk that is now in the culture. Bob is only in the vanguard of struggling with how to engage it without the saturation intrinsic both in the verbiage and in the mind-sets of listeners, that vitiates its value.

4/12/2007 10:22:00 AM  
Anonymous dilys said...

And of course playing Coon involves some degree of striking a pose, being neither all that striped-furry, nor dead like Jackie Gleason past re-runs. An ironic or romanticized profile is part of the fun, like Re-enactors, or marching lefty demonstrators.

Any kind of self-image is contrary to the highest teachings; but while we've all got one, it's Par-Tay.

wv. "d[ilys]cann"

4/12/2007 10:25:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

BFT said "I add my two cents that most positions are ego-inflating/supporting postions, not strictly intellectual ones."

I think that's what's left when your thinking is non heirarchical - what Gagdad mentioned yesterday with the hole pomo deal, that without principled, reality based thought, you are left with only competing power plays.

Now obviously that doesn't mean us run of the mill folk won't still have our ego's to contend with, but without heirarchical thought, there is no way open to setting the ego aside and intellectually examing other thoughts - your stuck in it and only have recourse to elbowing other ego's out of the way - proper reasoning being discarded.

4/12/2007 10:41:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

BFT said "My intellectual position, behind the facade, veers from one anxiety to another"

By facade, if you mean trying to appear other than you are, then yeah, that's going to produce some anxiety. But if by intellectual position you mean those decisions you consciously make day to day, and larger positions that you carry forward - I think a certain level of uncertainty is the price of free will, and it should taken advantage of as a way to continually check your position against changing contexts and deepened understandings of your premises.

Interesting to note however, as you get towards deeper positions (in that odd Vertical sense of the higher level being the root foundation for your 'lesser' thoughts), towards the 'obviously true', the self-evident truths, that uncertainty quiets and all but(?) dissappears.

(BTW BFT questioning doesn't equal Trolling - you've got to add some rude condescention for that)

4/12/2007 11:08:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Superior? Why the heck would you want to wast time trying to be? The raccoon sense, IMH(?!)O, is more of a settled, assured sense of self - not infallible - but confident that you'll be able to, and interested in, learning something new, a certain eagerness to discover your errors, not to hold on to and prop them up (egads! Why on earth or heaven would anyone want to hold onto an idea they suspected of being in error?!).

And of course to tweak those who pose as untweakable. That, and finding the scampering about in the yard at night and finding the hidden snacks, are pretty much tops.

Beyond that, I'll go with what Juliec said up top.

4/12/2007 11:26:00 AM  
Blogger robinstarfish said...

Scripture
the book of nature
rustling of vellum codex
last evening psalm

4/12/2007 11:29:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

"Whenever anyone -- even an atheist -- says anything, he is presupposing a universe in which a thing called "truth" may be encoded and passed from mind to mind through a medium called language. These are huge presuppositions, and only serve to re-emphasize the crudity of the atheist mind. "

Which is why if there was such a thing as an honest cynic, he'd have to say nothing, curl up and wait for death. The use of a single word concedes the entire argument to absolute truth - that existense exists, that you know it, and are able to identify it - even in questioning it, you reinforce your belief in it, the belief that your words refer to some-thing.

"a reason why the equations that describe the deep structure of the physical world are beautiful -- and in fact, could never be ugly, or "less than beautiful.""

And a clue as to the integration of the Good, the Beautiful and the True.

4/12/2007 11:38:00 AM  
Anonymous Dr_Qi said...

The litany of ignorance continues;

"an inexhaustible subject-object that must always elude exact description, even though it can definitely be described with exactitude."

As opaque and doublethink as anything Derrida ever wrote.

"That is, objects always "stand for something else," and are therefore language even before they are objects. No, they are objects because they are language, a language that may be read and understood by subjects. Put another way, if objects were merely objects, not only would knowledge of them be impossible, but there could be no subjects in the cosmos."

"Whenever anyone -- even an atheist -- says anything, he is presupposing a universe in which a thing called "truth" may be encoded and passed from mind to mind through a medium called language."

Are you sure you went to college? I have to assume you never took anything resembling linguistics or philosophy of language. Perhaps you should check it out.

"either the mind is truth (among other things, including beauty) or it is nothing."

A false dichotomy.

"Most philosophies are intellectually closed systems, the conclusions of which are truly "foregone," as they are packed into the hidden assumptions with which the philosopher has started his errant quest."

This is the most observant thing I've ever seen on your blog, so, on that level, congratulations. It is , however, kind of spoiled since you don't notice how it applies to you.

Language, despite your antiquated Augustinian notions, is not a medium in which Transcendent Truth is embedded or communicated. Rather language is an evolutionary adaptation which aids our survival. It is, on a much more productive and fundamental level, similar to having an opposable thumb or having the capacity to use a stick to pry insects out of the ground. Language is a tool. It is our greatest tool, one that allows us to create and use many of our other tools, but not something that functions to comprehend what you would call Divinity. Anyone who has had a genuine 'religious' experience knows this.

In addition to studying some actual linguistics, you also might want to look into some current neuroscience[and not that done by someone from an evangelical university]. I would also recommend reading Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations to get a basic idea of how language actually functions.

4/12/2007 11:44:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Thanks for the tips!

4/12/2007 11:47:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Dr_Qi said... "The litany of ignorance continues;"

You shouldn't be so hard on yourself.

4/12/2007 11:47:00 AM  
Blogger Magnus Itland said...

Very good. People underestimate the word (in its broadest sense).

In contrast, the New Testament goes so far as to be at times fuzzy about the difference between God, the Messiah and the Word.

This is the Word as Meaning. I sense that this is different from the Eastern practices of cultivating a few particularly beautiful and powerful words, selected for both form and meaning, and using them as primary transformative tools. Of this I have no revelation, only indirect observation.

On the third hand, certain eastern statements (notably the Dhammapada and Tao te Ching) seem to have revelation effect on me, by meaning rather than original form. As a Christian of sorts, I have found this disturbing at times but undeniable. In part I believe their effect on me is caused by bypassing immunity (saturation?) and calling out to what I already "should" know is right, or rather *good*. This would surely also work the other way around.

4/12/2007 11:54:00 AM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

Qi--

Let us stipulate that either you or Dear Leader have conveyed the truth of the matter. However, in the unlikely event that your clumsy words have conveyed truth, then this proves that the B'ob is right and that you are wrong.

4/12/2007 12:02:00 PM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Magnus--

Not to worry -- as that antiquated Augustinian St. Augustine remarked, "although God alone is thought of as the god of gods, he is also thought of by those who imagine, invoke, and worship other gods, whether in heaven or on earth, in so far as their thinking strives to reach a being than which there is nothing better or more exalted."

4/12/2007 12:08:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

dr_qinte said " I would also recommend reading Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations"

As with the Posivitists he abhored, you should also go back and give Wittgenstein another read - he's wasn't as dumb as you unthink he is.

(BTW BFT, if for some strange and odd reason you are interested in living up to your nic - this is the kind of rude condescention you've got to get strive for)

4/12/2007 12:20:00 PM  
Anonymous Dr_Qi said...

Van, the logical positivists misunderstood his Tractatus and didn't read Philosophical Investigations. Are you familiar with the vast difference between the two works and the basic assumptions underlying them and their respective methodologies?

I can all but guarantee you I've spent much more time delving into PI than you have spent thinking seriously about anything in your entire life. Perhaps you should take your own advice and re-read it, assuming you ever have in the first place. The Wittgenstein of the Investigations would have disagreed with you and Bob's way of seeing things much more roundly than I do and to suggest otherwise is simple ignorance.

4/12/2007 12:54:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

BFT! You're in luck! dr_qi as consented to giving demonstrations of trollism and non-conceptual thinking, perfect for ego posturing! Let's look at just a couple examples:

"despite your antiquated Augustinian notions"
Here you can imply something is bad just because it isn't part of the pomofo-wackademia clique, just use words such as 'antiquated', and you won't ever having to give a single reason!

"you also might want to look into some current neuroscience"
Here you accomplish much the same goal (avoiding giving reasons), but this time with a dismissive gesture towards a recognized lofty-type field, implying that anyone aspiring to be as superior as you con to be, just knows that sounds impressive - and that's it! They're impressed! And again, with, and for, no Reason!. Just the thing for compulsive ego posturists, and if you do it well (here you'll need to find other role models, dr_qi being so inadequate) you can intimidate anyone caught up in the same flat land world of non-reasoning ego one-dipmanship.

oh, and dr_quibble, "Rather language is an evolutionary adaptation which aids our survival."

No, evolutionary adaptation is more like the 'oowoo-click-wapah hunh'[thump] and 'tweet tweet screech' as the apes and birds have evolved to use non-conceptual sounds to indicate 'things'. Conceptual language, that's an entirely different existentialada - try reading a little further in your linguistics studies.

4/12/2007 01:02:00 PM  
Blogger juliec said...

Gee, DQ - it sounds like you are far more inte-lligent than we puny, close-minded coons can ever hope to understand. Perhaps you should get your own blog, where you can better dazzle the masses with your brilliant insights into everything. You could write long posts about how we're all supposed to think or not think, and maybe if you're lucky some bright star among us might even see your dazzling, well-read intellect for what it is. Clearly, we are too cowed into submission by Bob to fully appreciate you here.

(wv: gagymim - see, he even controls the word verification here!)

4/12/2007 01:02:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

BFT! The gift that keeps on giving!

"I can all but guarantee you I've spent much more time delving into PI than you have spent thinking seriously about anything in your entire life"

See! No thought, no reasons, just simple assertions and intimidations! Assuming you hang out in the same flatland cliques, you can go far with this stuff!

4/12/2007 01:05:00 PM  
Blogger I R A Darth Aggie said...

In contrast, the New Testament goes so far as to be at times fuzzy about the difference between God, the Messiah and the Word.

I dunno, John[1] seems to have gotten it right. Was he a proto-coon or perhaps a paleo-coon?

[1] In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was
God.
- John 1:1

4/12/2007 01:13:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

I remember having a bone-headed prof as an undergraduate. It was very fristrating to deal with someone who was so obviously missing 95% of the big picture (although at 18 I didn't know what the big picture was either, I just knew that Professor Jughead was not going to enlighten me).

I finally did manage to attach myself to a brilliant yet humble Jewish polymath who made philosophy come to life for me.

In the intervening years I had mostly lost interest in philosophy, even as I was steadily moving toward a more spiritual life. Recently I've been revisting my interest to some degree. I read Bob's recommended "Explaining Postmodernism". Much to my surprise, frankly, I really "got" a lot of the concepts which completely eluded me in my atheist/pomo days. I do attribute this to the lasting, reverberating qualities awakened in me by the Coonifesto, and by this blog. I'm not trying to butter up Bob here, I'm really serious. I credit OC (including the other posters of course) with gradually helping me move toward what I believe Bob refers to as an "activated gnosis".

On other fronts I've been on jets for a couple weeks. This week was mostly spent in the arid (if richly appointed) confines of the penthouse office of one of Boston's more prominent law firms. Multi-party negotiations including a new VC, the DHS, our lawyers, and a couple major private jet companies--let me tell you 'Coons, I was never more ready for today's OC installment.

Hanging in there for another round and another 20 or so customers, then I'm headed out the door into AFF. (Or should that be Accelerated Free Ascent?).

Life is funny. Half spent doing 75 hour weeks, half spent in pure Slack.

4/12/2007 01:15:00 PM  
Anonymous walt said...

Smoov said -

"I do attribute this to the lasting, reverberating qualities awakened in me by the Coonifesto, and by this blog. I credit OC (including the other posters of course) with gradually helping me move toward what I believe Bob refers to as an "activated gnosis".

My wife and I were musing along those very lines this morning, in nearly the same words.

Dr_Qi, on the other hand (who carries a different quality of Qi than the sort that concerns me daily), rather takes me back...back in time, to my father's farm, when as a kit of a boy I would move some old board and find a stinkbug.

So simple, to compare the two examples I cited, and choose the better.

4/12/2007 01:51:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

dr_qiYah! said "I can all but guarantee you I've spent much more time delving into PI than you have spent thinking seriously about anything in your entire life."

Oh, I've no doubt about that whatsoever. I do give Wittgenstein more credit and respect than most moderns, because I think he was honestly seeking after truth - but he didn't find it, and though he had many interesting insights, I think he missed the the main highway by several miles. Perhaps you recognize many of the same landmarks on the road to nowhere?

Surely worth some study, but bending your life around the T or the PI(BFT - Isn't that cool? Use contextually abrupt acronyms, don't explain them - Man-o-man will that help intimidate sheeple!)? Nope.

(BFT - this is another gem "to suggest otherwise is simple ignorance", just throw it around everywhere, works great in Rio Linda!)

IMHO He gave far more weight to words as static things and rules in themselves, rather than as a dynamic set of contextual references required by the heirarchical nature of our conceptual minds. But that's another posting.

wv:ngjriu - Nagarjuna! Even wordverif recognizes you!

4/12/2007 01:53:00 PM  
Anonymous walt said...

Magnus, in your post you said,

"...certain eastern statements (notably the Dhammapada and Tao te Ching) seem to have revelation effect on me... In part I believe their effect on me is caused by bypassing immunity (saturation?)..."

You are not alone in this.

4/12/2007 02:11:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Smoov said "... the lasting, reverberating qualities awakened in me by the Coonifesto, and by this blog..."

Yep, I hear ya and concur.

"Life is funny. Half spent doing 75 hour weeks, half spent in pure Slack."

Remember what Walt said about the board when you're around them lawyers (no offense Joseph).

4/12/2007 02:14:00 PM  
Anonymous Dr_Qi said...

Van, you are right, I am not going to provide you with an explanation of why the facts I assert are true.

A simple example will illustrate why ; Lets say that you or Bob asserted in their posting that Rust is the remnant of Iron after it lost its Phlogiston[a view believed by many in the 17th and 18th century].

I would simply post a response informing you that you are incorrect, tell you that rust is instead the result of Iron undergoing an Oxidation reaction, and perhaps where you could start to learn why. How could I, in a short few paragraphs, both convince you that you are in error and explain/demonstrate the contemporary understanding of Chemical Theory.

As to me using 'PI' instead of 'Philosophical Investigations', I suppose it is difficult to put that together, but it is very common usage and most anyone in Philosophy or the Humanities would get the reference.

4/12/2007 03:05:00 PM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

Just noticed the first comment by Big Fat Troll:

"The raccoon position, which is that they are superior to the masses of lesser developed souls, feeds the ego quite nicely."

How can one even say "Raccoon position" with a straight face? Yes, we are superior to the masses of lesser develped souls, just like Ralph, Ed, Toots, and Herman before us.

4/12/2007 03:10:00 PM  
Blogger juliec said...

Thanks, Cuz, you just opened my eyes at the most inopportune moment. I hadn't really thought about "Raccoon position" until you noted that, and for once I was actually eating something. My keyboard narrowly missed being doused by masticated peach. I guess I've finally been baptized as a coon :)

4/12/2007 03:15:00 PM  
Blogger Lisa said...

Am I the only one here who has no freaking idea what Dr. Qi is talking about nor do I really care. All I read from the doc is blah, blah, pretentious blah....Plus, how can you trust a guy that can't even spell his own name right? Everyone knows there should be a U in there between the Q and I but maybe that's his problem! ;)

4/12/2007 03:30:00 PM  
Blogger Magnus Itland said...

Oh, I certainly did not mean to imply that the "fuzziness" of the New Testament when it comes to the God-Word axis was a deficiency, or unintentional. That little library can be painfully sharp when it wants to. I've cut myself often enough trying to grasp it.

4/12/2007 03:32:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

dr_qible said "I would simply post a response informing you that you are incorrect, tell you that rust is instead the result of Iron undergoing an Oxidation reaction, and perhaps where you could start to learn why."

Wow... that seemed vaguely rational. You see, that's the type of response most of us would make. If the people in that blog showed no interest in taking such a response seriously, we'd all pretty much move on.

A good plan, but then it gets a tad spoiled by your actual behavior:
"The litany of ignorance continues;" & "Are you sure you went to college?" & " It is , however, kind of spoiled since you don't notice how it applies to you." & "and not that done by someone from an evangelical university"... well, you (meaning other people, not you of course - as if) get the picture. Notice any difference in tone & content there?

"...it is very common usage and most anyone in Philosophy or the Humanities would get the reference." Yeah. Thanks. Got it. Do you, however, notice that most the folks here hang out is somewhat different areas? Photography? Music? Hi-Tech? Navy? Home? Personally, I wouldn't be so rude as to put that burden of assumption on the denizens of a blog - I'd just write it out... then again, I'm not 'dr_qi'.

Does your vast intellectual depth and philosophical grasp tell you anything about the behavior and personality of a person who is so rude? Who does hang out and comment just for the purpose of trying to denigrate people who don't know them and didn't invite them? Who tries their best to impress, putdown & insult the ideas and beliefs of people who obviously neither hold the same beliefs as them nor seek to?

Hmm?

You are pathetic.

4/12/2007 03:38:00 PM  
Anonymous Petey said...

GAZE. Q-ball is one of those nutty linguistic philosophers who sits all day polishing his glasses but never puts them on to look at the world. The Wittgenstein fetish is so 1950s.

4/12/2007 03:39:00 PM  
Anonymous ximeze said...

I'M on the List! I'M on the List! I'M on the List! (repeat)

You guys just go right ahead with your LOFTY denials, if you like!

I! will tell the Truth: it IS all about MY ego!!!!!

Mwaaaahaaaahaaaha

4/12/2007 03:53:00 PM  
Anonymous dr_qi said...

Van, you are right, I am not going to provide you with an explanation of why the facts I assert are true.
Of course I am incapable of articulating said explaination but allow me to obfuscate with this obscure reference insinuating that you are too shallow to understand the explaination that I am inacapable of giving. Here goes.

A simple example will illustrate why ; Lets say that you or Bob asserted in their posting that Rust is the remnant of Iron after it lost its Phlogiston[a view believed by many in the 17th and 18th century].

I would simply post a response informing you that you are incorrect, tell you that rust is instead the result of Iron undergoing an Oxidation reaction, and perhaps where you could start to learn why. How could I, in a short few paragraphs, both convince you that you are in error and explain/demonstrate the contemporary understanding of Chemical Theory.

Now with that outdated example, I have conned you into believing that I not only have a firm grasp on 17th entury chemical history/theory, I have also intimated that I am currently 2 to 300 years ahead of my time intellectually.

As to me using 'PI' instead of 'Philosophical Investigations', I suppose it is difficult to put that together, but it is very common usage and most anyone in Philosophy or the Humanities would get the reference.

Of course, if you're not in Philosophy or the Humanities, I can again try and force you to feel as if you are below me and thus a waste of my time by using the obscure acronym which then releives me of the need to explain anything, which of course I am incapable.
See? Easy.
Hey, works with the 18 year old undergrads.
Now, time for a nappy.
MMMmmmmm, I just love myself.

4/12/2007 03:53:00 PM  
Anonymous still small voice said...

ximeze,

We already knew that.

4/12/2007 03:55:00 PM  
Blogger juliec said...

Lisa,
"All I read from the doc is blah, blah, pretentious blah....

yep, ad nauseum

4/12/2007 04:11:00 PM  
Anonymous ximeze said...

smallvoice:
Thank you, a smallthing & not as much as I! deserve. As WE know.

4/12/2007 04:12:00 PM  
Anonymous still small voice said...

Did you hear that Bob? Time for a new cabinet position. ;^)

4/12/2007 04:28:00 PM  
Anonymous ximeze said...

Julie:
Welcome to the world of ISS - thought I! better use an acronym too, so I! can be sure others know how smart I! am.

Beware hot beverages. Just a thought, now you have The Condition.

4/12/2007 04:29:00 PM  
Blogger Joan of Argghh! said...

"What we have here is a failure to communicate." -from Coon Hand Luke

Not that it matters much, but as a bit of 'Coon trivia that just goes to prove how ego-centric and superior a 'Coon I am: Strother Martin, the Man what uttered that phrase, was my mom's cousin.

Bring me a troll to bash! I come by it honestly!

4/12/2007 04:50:00 PM  
Anonymous debass said...

C'mon yous guys. Dr_Qi is an analgram for daiquiri, as in "Is that a hickory daiquari, Doc?"
I come here to get away from these guys, but just like MY asshole, they seem to follow me wherever I go.
iQ_tarD, I don't speak this language as well as music, so when you can sing me the first chorus to Moments Notice, I might listen to you, but you probably can't swing anyway. I like Tits Stoolman and Herman Woody too, and Ralph and Ed and Trixie and Alice. Bang-Zoom!

4/12/2007 04:54:00 PM  
Anonymous ximeze said...

Gecko:
Thanks for the jimfedor link.
Beaky sends kissie noises to Merlin.

Magnus:
Finding revelation in Eastern Text just shows the presence of O everywhere, thoughout time. Very cool.

All this philonamedropping compels ME! to say Something Completely Different:


Bruces Philosophers song

Immanual Kant was a real pissant
Who was very rarely stable

Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar
Who could think you under the table

David Hume could out consume
Schopenhauer and Hegel

And Wittgenstein was a beery swine
Who was just as schloshed as Schlegel

There's nothing Nietzche couldn't teach ya
Bout the raising of the wrist
Socrates, himself, was permanently pissed


John Stuart Mill, of his own free will
On half a pint of shandy was particularly ill

Plato they say, could stick it away
Half a crate of whiskey every day

Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle
Hobbes was fond of his dram

And Rene' Descartes was a drunken fart
"I drink, therefore I am"

Yes, Socrates, himself, is particularly missed
A lovely little thinker
But a bugger when he's pissed

4/12/2007 05:10:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

jwm said...
Maybe QI is IQ inverted. He may well be the ultimate froll. Methinks we've been had. I'm starting to chuckle.
wv: jxkxfz (jokers, kings, foolz?)

JWM

4/12/2007 05:18:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Hmm, perhaps.

The problem is, without Truth, all men are either conned or con men. And there's no way to tell who is who!

Is up down, or down up? Both... and neither!

PoMo's think that our wordplay is the same as theirs, just a way to pump up ego and mask ignorance, but I've found, that like good music, what seems to the cynic like just accidents are intentional to a greater degree than one might suppose.

Besides, Senor H. Ghost writes the script. He's got my back!

Now, if I'd just stop moving around so much...

4/12/2007 05:28:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

btw, regarding 42? Check it...

Revelation 11:2

But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

humm.

4/12/2007 05:34:00 PM  
Blogger MizzE said...

Debass,
Woodrow Charles Thomas Herman taught me that you don't have to always use words when discoursing on the heart of things. Big early hits were "Blue Flame," "Dupree Blues", "Blues Upstairs and Downstairs" and "Blues in the Night". The link takes you to a 1933 LP recording of "Blues Downstairs". No jive.

4/12/2007 05:49:00 PM  
Anonymous debass said...

MissE,

Thanks for the link. There is some great video on YouTube. I especially like to watch someone I have heard but never have seen. I always have a mental picture of what they look like but it is never as they actually are. Dinah Washington and Billie Holliday are two examples. Of course, I don't know what people look like by their posts. So I get a mental picture. It's probably not accurate either.

4/12/2007 06:09:00 PM  
Anonymous debass said...

Oops,

should be MizzE.

4/12/2007 06:11:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Ximeze,
Cool song! (except of course Socrates could drink a barrel and still not get drunk. Doubly cursed)

And hey - Nice Sally Fields impression!

Joan of Argghh! I thought it before you wrote it! though I suppose having Strother (what a character actor!) as kin trumps my thinkn'.

4/12/2007 06:12:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Van, as to rudeness, I think that a blog which asserts day in and day out, and which receives the ruckus applause of an uncritical mob, that all those who are on the political Left are a priori demonic, Luciferean, subhuman and a number of other horribly myopic and polemical things has not earned the right to courtesy. The fact that you would all rather be able to continue your silly little thoughts alone and undisturbed in no way entails that I ought respect that wish.

Simple anger at the Left[which is due to the awareness that it is not only correct but that it is slowly and inevitably winning in the struggle between progress and reverting to the middle ages of culture] is one thing, but when you all pretend to know what you are talking about when it comes to areas that I know thoroughly to assist your tantrums then I step in to remind you of your ignorance. I realize you don't care since being informed about those things is not your interest.

4/12/2007 06:13:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

River Cocytus said..."btw, regarding 42? ..."

Yeah, but that still doesn't answer what the question was.

4/12/2007 06:15:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

aninnyInteQi said "The fact that you would all rather be able to continue your silly little thoughts alone and undisturbed in no way entails that I ought respect that wish."

Wow. And you'd rather do that than anything else? Sad.

Don't worry though. We know it's just the leftist obsession with controling other peoples lives and thoughts - the idea that someone, somewhere is thinking how terrifying for you....

It's ok. Have some warm milk. Dwell on those nice warming Luciferian thoughts of yours. Relax.

It's ok. We don't mind laughing at you.

4/12/2007 06:25:00 PM  
Blogger MizzE said...

Debass,

I'm in a blues downstairs sort of mood tonight and I grooved on the Woodrow LP on YouTube going around and around and around.

Hey there's a picture of me on my blog - Girl Wearing
a Mask and La Boina - does it fit your picture?

MissE works; all my students called me MiZZZZZ E!

4/12/2007 06:29:00 PM  
Blogger MizzE said...

A haiku for Anon

somewhere between now
and now must find time to care
I saw it for sale

4/12/2007 06:33:00 PM  
Blogger juliec said...

Ximeze, that philosophers' song pops into my head every time someone mentions a name from that list. I seem to recall singing it loudly in college with several noisy friends.

By the way, Hooray for You!!

wv: pzrlemhi - please relieve me?

4/12/2007 06:47:00 PM  
Blogger juliec said...

I heard a song today that seems to have come straight from DQs head:

You've got me so I'm running round and round in circles.
You've got me so I can't see my own face.
You've got me so I feel like I've been like this forever.
You've got me so I'm crazy with disgrace.

(Chorus)
I know what's on your mind
But its not what you think it is.
I know what's on your mind
But its not what you think it is.

I'm running on a treadmill after you
I'm running on a treadmill now.
I'm running on a treadmill after you
I'm running on a treadmill now.

(By Oingo Boingo)

4/12/2007 06:53:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

If by winning you mean declaring there is no such thing as defeat?

Of course, by all means, do! But keep me out of it, please. I have enough troubles today for me, not to have yours coercively inserted into my days.

I stay away from leftist blogs because I'm not interested. I read enough in the past, and I'm finished.

I read enough to understand I was being conned into a kind of 'intellectual materialism' - that is, reducing the divine intellect to a form of material reasoning.

For instance, the notion that language is somehow merely an aid to our survival.

Right! Everything, no matter how exalted just serves the material.

Or rather, completely wrong, a priori wrong, 180 degrees from right.

Just because some 'godbag' wronged you in the past, doesn't make God himself responsible.

If you want to talk to him about it you can, just say something and be prepared to hear the answer you don't want to hear.

That's usually where it starts.

Geesh. Leftists really are nothing more than fools caught up in a machine with no more master. That might make them less, um, intentionally evil, but 'actions count' as some interlocutor was saying, and clearly the results of one's actions as just as important as the intents.

You could go on literally eternally about this - it is a subject with out end - about where leftists are wrong. Why? Because as Evan Sayet pointed out, when you are PURPOSELY wrong, you're wrong all the time.

So for the number of right things (they are infinite) there are just as many wrong things.

Thus, the infinite topic of bashing the left.

Just because you haven't bought the whole 'Secret' doesn't mean it hasn't bought you.

Ta ta!

wv: lambdt ...!

4/12/2007 06:58:00 PM  
Blogger Lisa said...

Reminds me of my favorite Billy Preston song...

I've got a song I ain't got no melody
How'm I gonna sing it with my friends
I've got a song I ain't got no melody
How'm I gonna sing it with my friends

Will it go round in circles
Will it fly high like a bird up in the sky
Will it go round in circles
Will it fly high like a bird up in the sky

4/12/2007 07:07:00 PM  
Anonymous tsebring said...

Lisa,
dont forget the rest of that song:

"I got a story aint got no moral
with the bad guy winning once in a while
I got a story aint got no moral
with the bad guy winning once in a while"...

Sounds kind of like a lefty, pomo, nihilist wet-dream fantasy to me. Thanks to Congress, academia and the education establishment, we may be on our way there.

4/12/2007 07:50:00 PM  
Anonymous tsebring said...

Dr. Qi,
the completely horizontal, flat, arid landscape of your philosophy reminds me of Australia's Nullarbor Plain...or, even more, of those pics of Mars from the Viking landers. What a lonely, desolate, lifeless place that must be.

4/12/2007 07:58:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

aninnyInteQi,

Sorry for the delay, had to break for celebration dinner (18yr olds volleyball team stomped and crushed all the self esteem out of the competition).

I just wanted to hand it to you, this:

"...which is due to the awareness that it is not only Politically correct but that it is slowly and inevitably winning in the struggle between progress and reverting to the middle ages of culture..."

That is some Prime Grade A-1 Stupid!. We know how hard you've got to work to make sure you've completely broken with reality, in order to be able to churn out that kind of Stupidity; and, well, I just wanted to make sure you knew that such efforts don't go unappreciated.

Outstanding job! Dumb and Dumber've got nothing on you guys! Really, well done.

Hey, lookee here! wv:gbfvt - Gagdad Bob Favorite! See!?

4/12/2007 08:00:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

The Post-Modern has thrown away his anchor

He is drawn towards the Zenith

He feels the pull of the intersection

The Post-Modern laughs at those he sees anchored

In the west, the east, the north, the south

But stares stubbornly at his navel

"I've found God!" he says;

But just found his navel

"I've found truth!" he claims;

But the nadir only reflects the sun;

Lunatics all, again

Who would stare at the moon

And call it God?

(PP- the irony of the 'post modern free verse' being used as to deliver a litany of sorts against PoMoism is not lost on me.)

4/12/2007 08:25:00 PM  
Anonymous debass said...

MizzE,

I went to your blog a few weeks ago and can't remember what preconceived mental picture I had. I usually go to people's blogs that are listed so I can see who they are since my preconceptions are so far off. I missed seeing so many jazz greats growing up, that I go out of my way to see videos of them whenever I can. I did get to see Duke and I got to play with Dizzy once but I missed Coltrane and Bill Evans. I have some books with very good pictures of many jazz greats. It just seems to make me more connected to the music.

4/12/2007 08:58:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Van, as to rudeness, I think that a troll which ass-serts day in and day out, and who receives the rauckus applause of an uncritical, self drempt peanut gallery (the good Dr, line judge, unknown friend, anon, etc.), that all Classical Liberals are a priori demonic, Luciferean, subhuman and a number of other horribly myopic and polemical things has not earned the right to courtesy. The fact that "we" are not be capable of continuing our juvenile thoughts alone and undisturbed entails that "we" come here to snipe at you with our silly little adolescent tantrums.
Simple anger at America [which is due to the awareness that it is not only correct but that it is slowly and inevitably winning in the struggle with progressives or reverting to the middle ages of culture(Islam)] is one thing, but when you all know what you are talking about when it comes to areas where I know nothing, to assist my tantrum I then step in to remind you of my ignorance.
I realize you don't care since being informed about those things is not in your interest.


Bob,







HELP?

4/12/2007 10:22:00 PM  
Anonymous pussywillow said...

The commentary on this blog has a nasty combative and truculent demeanor; is this what we want here?

I blame Bob--he sets the tone by constantly attacking atheists and leftists, and so naturally what he's going to get back has an angry tone.

Who needs all this grumbling and shit? Somebody actually stooped so low as to pirate Dr. Qi's handle and then counterfeit a comment, a very sordid act of electronic hitting below the belt. Likely he won't be back, and the best troll in months is burned out in a day.

Do we want a classy joint or a dive bar where mob violence rules? Bob, I appeal to you to change the tone of your posts so as to lift the general atmosphere of your blog and its clientele.

4/13/2007 12:10:00 AM  
Anonymous enquiring minds said...

Now it's pussy willow huh? Can't you do better?

4/13/2007 12:20:00 AM  
Anonymous Vinny the gat said...

Big Pussywillow-
Da Mob doesn't hang out in dives.
One more remark like dat, and you'll be swimmin' wit' da fishes!

4/13/2007 03:48:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Pussywillow,

The wise and wonderful Scott Ott at Scrappleface.com has a solution I think you're going to like.
Genteel Blogs Offer 'Civility Offsets' to Vitriolic Bloggers, "A draft proposal circulating in the so-called blogosphere would allow family-friendly blogs to sell “civility offsets” to vitriolic bloggers who prefer to pay for “nastiness indulgences” rather than to tame their bitter tirades...", I think that's worth looking into, don't you?

4/13/2007 05:31:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

For the rest of us, you've reall got to look at the blogger code Ott's tweaking (linked from his 'column'). Anything that can use 'celebrate', 'embraces', 'frank', in the first sentence is well worth a few credits.

4/13/2007 05:35:00 AM  
Blogger Magnus Itland said...

Pussywillow...
wouldn't it be wonderful if this blog was like a temple courtyard, a quiet and serene harbor from the strife and shouting of the world, a place for quiet contemplation, a place where everyone was welcome and felt encouraged to strive for their highest potential?

Luckily this place already exists on the Internet. Go to the left until you come to the Wilber escalator, then take it to the Teal level, and follow the trail of "seeds" till you find the place that transcends and includes blogging.

No seriously. I'm talking about a real, big website and their self-image. But what they don't have is raccoons with flaming swords that turn every which way. Now that is a sight not to be missed.

4/13/2007 05:39:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Notice they have to spell out every conceivable do and don't - asking for good manners would be completely lost on them. Plus it wouldn't provide as many loop holes as a detailed list does.

If you want to sound lofty while leaving the door open to continue being sneaky and underhanded and able to squash the right...er, wrong view, gotta keep clear of principles and go with lists everytime.

aninnyInteQiWillow - just follow the bird seed....

4/13/2007 06:21:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Turns out Van der Leun at American Digest picked up on it too,
Genteel Blogs Offer 'Civility Offsets' to Vitriolic Bloggers, "A draft proposal circulating in the so-called blogosphere would allow family-friendly blogs to sell “civility offsets” to vitriolic bloggers who prefer to pay for “nastiness indulgences” rather than to tame their bitter tirades...", I think that's worth looking into.

I so much prefer his approach:

"COMMENTS THAT EXCEED THE OBSCENITY OR STUPIDITY LIMITS WILL BE EITHER EDITED OR EXPUNGED."


oh I am sooo late.

4/13/2007 06:28:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Woops, right link, wrong caption
No Stinking Badges

4/13/2007 06:29:00 AM  
Blogger Lisa said...

I vote for dive bar as long as we get to throw the peanut shells on the ground...Give me a dive bar anyday over a clASSy joint....Plus if you are impressed by the nonsense of a troll like Dr. Qi then you are definitely in the wrong neighborhood. Now who's the ego-inflated snob? (passes the Grey Poupon across the limos)

Tsebring-I always get too enthralled with the music to really pay attention to the lyrics after the first chorus anyhow! ;) But unfortunately, sometimes the bad guys do win a battle once in a while, the important thing is that the good guys win the war!

4/13/2007 07:51:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Van, I love Teri's comment at the end... kind of putting everything that has been said down the memory hole...?

'Maybe she wasn't used to death threats?' (who is, aside from the Israelis?)

'Perhaps its time to reconsider how porn degrades women' (What world is she from?)

4/13/2007 07:52:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

The irony of the song is that music and stories have a different purpose than reality.

'Your song/story is so real!' -- but it does nothing for me...

4/13/2007 07:56:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home