That one means that the guy is a schizo with grandiose delusions who is also desperate to be loved by a woman and is totally into you. And he feels entitled to be seen as the superstar of this forum, he deserves it. And is now whining that he keeps getting banned unjustly.
Of course in reality he isn’t banned unjustly, banning him is the minimum, this just doesn’t dawn on him.
It was never called that. What caught my notice back in 2009 was that the major theories in my Ethics course textbook (as a student) could be reduced to three: character (I shoved virtue theory into this one, including Aristotle, and existentialism, because my textbook called it “the virtue of authenticity”), conduct (I shoved Kant’s deontology into this one), consequences (I shoved teleology into that one along with utilitarianism, and Ayn Rand’s objectivism). Never put any of it in a Venn diagram at that time as far as I recall. Somewhere along the way when I was explaining things to my kids (no later than 2011), I was able to reduce that to be, do, and end (fits better with teleology). I don’t remember why exactly I decided to do that. Just one of those things that was bouncing around in my brain, maybe. But I realized you didn’t just need one of them. You needed all of them.
Life happened along the way and then I decided to go back and get my B.A. I was taking Philosophy of Art with Dr. Winfree. Pretty sure 2021. I realized that Kant had be do end (my profile picture is from when I wrote the Venn diagram on his chalkboard to ask him a question about it after class). And it’s been with me ever since.
I’ve gone back-and-forth since then, trying to think about it with the Trinity… because the ground of being… the Logos… the unmoved mover… stuff like that. But it was really Copilot introducing me to Aquinas on the whole thing that got me to understand it. I’m pretty sure everything I learned about unity-in-distinction (as opposed to monism and dualism), I learned from Copilot.
But one thing I really wanna get articulated is the Is-Ought-Value distinction and how it basically rewrites the way we introduce logic, or resets it back to where it used to be. I don’t have enough education in logic to feel confident in being the one that does that though. But I can definitely get it started:
In a nutshell: yes, having good natural intuition, on the emotional, visceral level, is necessary. Being sensitive to people’s hidden intentions, seeing their good and bad sides at the same time, etc.
But one also should learn a lot of psychology on top of that. There is far more to learn there, a lot of it very surprising. Improve the cognitive empathy etc. There are many many different types.
I don’t know why you would think it’s a woman. He oozes classic male entitlement in every post. I don’t think any woman could do that, let alone sustain it for such a long period of time. That kind of obsessive behaviour is far more common in males as well. I don’t know any of the background story. I’d just assumed you must have been in an actual relationship with him at some point.
And there’s something that simply no woman can imitate, especially not for years: the male mind is built for one strong singular focus. It’s quite different from the female mind. And that’s always there in Lavender’s posts.