Okay, let’s note a set of circumstances in which you expand on this. For me, I couldn’t care less about who is posting, sock-puppet or not. I’m only interested in the extent to which, in regard to moral and political values, anyone posting in whatever configuration brings their philosophical knowledge to bear on the components of human interactions that seem most important to me: identity, conflicting goods, political economy.
Let the sock-puppet assume an identity here “for purposes of deception.” He or she either addresses the points I raise or they don’t. It’s not deceptive personalities I care about but figuring out a way to yank myself up out of the hole that my own “fractured and fragmented” self has dug for me. If deception helps, that’s fine with me.
And, over and again, all posters will refer back to that particular set of circumstances in order to illustrate and to bolster any accusations that they make.
I’ll start the thread if you’d like. In the philosophy forum of course.
…only as long as you don’t use the phrase “…interactions that revolve around conflicting goods in which we connect the dots between morality here and now and immortality there and then”, or any variation or derivative there-of… otherwise, sure.
Nope, no can do. My entire moral and political philosophy revolves around attempts to explain to others what “I” mean by that…given our interaction with others on this side of the grave as that is relevant to what we believe our fate to be on the other side of it.
So, if you are still interested, I will start a new thread in the philosophy forum in which we discuss bad faith given the issues that most concern you and most concern me. Or, sure, start it yourself.