=D> =D> 
Again the contention between those of spiritual/religious faith and humanistic/scientific faith.
Yet, once again, I see the fact that evolution is misrepresented. Evolution, even as asserted by Richard Dawkins, does not attempt to explain singualrity of universal origin.
It simply attempts to explain the variation of life, from most simple, forward to most complex, in structure and detail only. Which regardless of âbelief systemâ is viable. No creature can maintain itself within constantly processural changing environments, in a static form. This is all evolution works to describe.
GCT, let me tell you a secret about the last four hundred years of philosophy. During such time, there was never a concern for what is âobjectively true.â Instead, anyone who called themself a philosopher was engaged in a game of trying to decide if their actions would warrant reward or punishment from a âGod,â and they spent their time trying to to find a way out of Pascalâs wager. You see, there was never a case of someone wanting to know what was true just for the sake of itâŚbut rather whether or not it was going to be their ass if they did something wrong.
âPhilosophyâ is a cover up for this activity. Philosophy is a smart manâs way of trying to out-run and out-talk his fear and responsibility. Philosophy is a mistake. Sartre made philosophy the bitch that it is.
Philosophy is the reaction to the fear of Godâs possibility. Anybody who says they want to know the âtruthâ is full of shit and are only concerned with feeding their âthick, self satisfied faces,â as Frenchy put it.
I do not expect that this planet will ever get it right. The spirit of man is currently engaged in a slow suicide. A handfull of people know this, myself included. Whatâs left to do is watch, drink a few beers, kill a few hipocrits, and play yer guitar.
And Iâll say it again: a philosopher is a failed scientist.
The spirit of man Detrop? Pffff⌠Sometimes you impress me⌠sometimes you disapoint me⌠This would be a case of the latter⌠not that you care⌠but I doâŚ
Once more âphilosophy is a bitch because this philosopher told me soâ
How ironic that detrop idolises the most bourgeois of 20th century hypocritesâŚ
Ludicrous, and you know it is. A philosopher is a gay scientistâŚ
You are a chump, SIATD. That statement is quite possibly the most incorrect thing you have ever said. The fucking guy goes to war as a meteorologist/journalist, gets captured and imprisoned for a year by the Germanâs, gets out and joins the resistence in Algeria, exposes war crimes by writing for a tribunal, almost gets blown up by a bomb planted in his apartment by assassins, turns down the nobel prize, teaches at a university, and lives off of nothing more than tobacco, beer, two pairs of pants, and an office crammed with literature.
Bourgeois?
What a fucking idiot you are.
Never. Apollo will always beat Dionysus. Always. Fritz was just mad because he couldnât be a scientist so decided to write polemics about science for the rest of his miserable existence.
SIATD, I want you to repeat after me:
âI, Someoneisatthedoor, am a useless twit who, thanks to Derrida, can spend the rest of my life playing words games and pretending like I am a philosopher while Iâm doing it.â
âHey sweetheart - the boilerâs broken again - have you got the number of that 24-hour philosopherâŚ?â
Put another way he spent most of his life in academic institutions pedalling work of mediocre quality, burning up far more resources than the average person by usually living out of hotels, met with some opposition, prententiously turned down the Nobel Prize (rather than accepting it and trying to change what it symbolised, like a proper revolutionary) and deluded any number of people into thinking that he was some sort of celebrity.
Are you still pissed off because I kicked your ass when we discussed Sartreâs philosophy?
Is this your best response? It is contemptible. Like you said, your life is full of anger and fearlessness so the KUDOS suggested career is serial killer, not critic of philosophy. Stick to what you are good at, nailing bits of wood to one another and getting angry with your bossâŚ
Tab,
Do we really have to get into another âIâm arguing against argumentâ discussion? If a philosopher is a failed scientist then what does that make the person who hangs around on a philosophy board pointing this out?
Here we give examples of a number of people who graduated in philosophy in the UK and have achieved a great deal in their subsequent careers away from Philosophy. Some are well-known, others less so. We cannot claim that all philosophy graduates could achieve similar success but the examples do show where a philosophy degree can lead.
Right, thatâs why only 50,000 people attended his burial.
That was lame. Youâre starting to panic.
Avoiding such nonsense is far more symbolic.
âI am not an institutionâ- Sartre
Of course not. At the time I found it more productive to clip my toenails than continue with you about Sartre. If you want to call that your victory, thatâs fine. I do love to watch you squirm though.
Thank you, my friend. The truth about how you feel finally appears. Iâm going to carve another notch in my hammer for ILP, and hit the road.
Great. Guys its been great.
Detrop,
Hereâs another handle:
Feel free to fly off it
Er⌠Right�
Eddison: âHey look!!! I make this glass thingymijig - look how it shinesâŚ!â
Spinoza: âBut greater still doth forthward shine the pure intellect of manâŚâ
Eddison: âYeah - but you can read books with my light - even when itâs DarkâŚ!â
Spinoza â[size=200]KEWL !!![/size] Oh⌠er⌠bollocks, I mean, [[size=75]harumph[/size]] itâll never catch on and itâs all inuctive anyway⌠[size=75]Can I have one[/size]âŚ?â
NevermindâŚ
Are your legs alright from that huge jump?
Thing is the thing I donât get. You seem to hold the view that life should be better spent doing something instead of only thinking about it. Correct me if Iâm wrong here but thatâs how itâs coming across. There is nothing wrong with that but letâs look at how you arrived at this conclusion.
You were born â grew up, got a self of self â> read a bunch of literature which gave you an informed view.
Which of these parts was the most important in your identity? I would hope youâre going to say the middle. But for all this literature to come about, for the world to be defined, or undefined as you may see it, you need these guys that were institutionalized, that put out slightly falsified text just to avoid getting killed for anti-religious propaganda. Philosophy isnât a bitch, itâs a burden, in the institutionalized manner itâs a sacrifice a sense of âwellâŚsomeoneâs gotta do itâ.
Philosophy is what directs the world. Plato alludes to the fact that philosophers would make the best rulers because they donât want the job as a joke. The statement is ironic because Plato knew he -was- ruling, you just have to expand the timeline to see it.
Itâs not like you donât know this stuff⌠lately youâve been on some sort of a rookie mistake streak.
*Edited so as to not appear too ridiculous.
I dunno, way I heard it Dionysus threw the best parties, and he had the best groupies.