Iambiguous revealed

Iambiguous favorite opposing goods argument is abortion.

To this, I replied:

If there is a universal savior born to humans, this person by definition would be impossible to abort.
So, the only next consideration is everyone else, and we can at least draw a line in the sand, that if everyone is miserable, the child will be and grow up to be miserable as well. This is a logical grounds for abortion, just like euthanasia is logical in late stage patients. One key issue being that the mother only feels safe being a hands on Mother for her own offspring and calculates that she cannot do this, and by nature, doesn’t trust adoption services.

Iambiguous states freedom is an illusion. I offered my disproof of omniscience to make the point that this is false: if a being know every reason why it knew what it knew, all of those reasons would be external, with zero internal, and because of such, there would be no I in which to determine.

If all of those reasons are internal, there would be no other to act upon or gleen knowledge from, no identity.

This means that freedom is necesssrity compatabalistic… a very common philosophic stance that iambiguous cannot compute with his autism.

Every time iambiguous puts his I in quotes, he’s telling everyone that he doesn’t exist.

How can a person who doesn’t exist make thousands of posts?!?!?!

Morality is objective. The problem is that females of the species look for contradiction in order to consent to a mate, if a male cannibalizes his own rationality and is not immediately struck by a bolt of lightning on the spot, women consider him a God.

Iambiguous is treating us men as women in the hopes of getting more women … he’s intentionally practicing bullshit on us, to gain retroactively, female consent that he never deserved, and to this day, doesn’t deserve.

And about his God sentences, this is the oldest trick in the book for abusive males.

Just like men watch football, even if they can’t play it, to have female sexual attention, iambiguous is with god to get laid. Oldest trick in the book, the god douchbags, I wouldn’t be surprised if iambiguous went to church every Sunday …

Iambiguous is not an enigma, he’s a vagina chasing coward.

What else does iambiguous try to pull on everyone, ahh yes, the compassionate iambiguous “I could have been born as anyone, so I feel for you all” guess what, you aren’t, you were born as iambiguous, so, for a moment of your life, own that and take responsibility for it, like brave people do, instead of jettisoning off their responsibilities for the people they could have hypothetically be born as and being a burden to society at large.

I’m not going to try to solve this problem because they are already solved. This is what Iambiguous has proven, and that the problem to solve is a far more far reaching one.

But I wonder what would happen if you said killing an unborn child rather than abortion? All morality aside.

This is asking a favor then.

What is this proof? Maybe you can translate iambiguous in your own words, and the implication.


Then your response was a non response.

I stand by my post.

Seems to me like you’re not passionate about iambiguous, but drank the kool-aid, and that you’re afraid of me looking at the bare “proof” and “implications”

Note to others:

If perchance you do come across a point you feel does successfully challenge the manner in which I intertwine the components of my own philosophy in addressing the question, “how ought one to live?”, please bring it to my attention.

I read his stuff from time to time but it all appears to be “a personal problem” to me. The guy is out to thump me for some reason.

Ask him why.

I already answered that question.

Hallucinate your entire reality from eternal forms. That’s the supreme solution.

To get there, go through the 4 stages of how to raise a sex dimorphic species.

I always get frustrated when a person’s entire philosophy is “dick headed” abuse that attracts women to men.

I admit I hadn’t read the whole opening post. Upon having done so, I found this: “if a male cannibalizes his own rationality and is not immediately struck by a bolt of lightning on the spot, women consider him a God.”

Which is goddamn genious. My sister confirmed it is true. I guess women don’t need reason as much as they need men who own themselves. Reason is objective and so owns who obeys it.

But is reason the only effective flow in the universe of humans? Are some less easy and more requiring of drivers than passengers?

Women have higher intelligence anyway, what they want is higher strength.

Thanks. But, truth be told, I can’t tell the two of you apart. :wink:

The two of who?

Tell him, Ecmandu. :wink:

Ecmandu, if he told you what two he means, please tell me.

Now for an apparent dissenting opinion:

I am not too unlike too much different from anyone else here, must retain the right to digress of necessary when finer points are called for as a means of clarification.

The non existence issue , which has been so overly thumbed over ad nauseum , still retains its very formidable proof of the infallibility of the individual, even as god.

My thinking has progressed to the degree , where the proof is in the pudding for so bold an assertion:

Individual existence is a myth, and with that I am not about to argue. It was no less an ontologist then Sri Auribindo, Khrishnamurti’s teacher, who rightfully held to the view that even common sense can lead is to this belief.

If any are familiar here , then they should be compelled to admit that the only thing keeping them from enlightenment , is their overall aversion to anything that is other wordly, a very widely accepted normative view proposed by ultra materialists, nowadays.

The very basic of basic ground is inquiry what darkness and light are, but arbitrary successions between which the difference melts into a steady grey, but more composed of a hue of lightness then a saturation of nothingness.

Identity and non identity go the same way, the physical-temporal dissolve into an eternity of twilight. The twilight of the gods is nothing but the individuality giving rise to their dawn, the dawn of the tragedy of appearances. This becomes the form of existence, and the becoming is an eternal manifestation of infinitely recurring states (of consciousness) that can not come to be or pass away.

That is how one (not ME, or even me), because ME is the source and the manifestation of IT.

If this was not so, NOTHING would become existential apprehension, since IT IS, darkness has no ground, to exist upon. (Formally)

Light does, simply because it can be apprehended in all of its modes of being.

All the intervening and variable thoughts such as those developed in conjunction : such as the fate galaxies, the infinite instability of material manifestation, of quantum and all the other chilling and disturbing postmodern signs trying to alleviate the terrible angst resulting from such overbearing instability , dark matter, the horrible calculus of difference between universal wholeness and particular-ness, are but mere myths, that exist simply to avoid the horror of facing the idea of what man is made of. The spatial temporal infinities are so compellingly
entropic and anthropomorphic, that they effect other states with an immutable magnetism. The black hole within , is consumate proof that nothing survives, except that., which is indefinitely and eternally a BEING In-It’self.

PS Ecmandu condoned this a while ago, as arguing pro forms. Its been written by him quite a while back, so it’s s labor of looking for a needle in a haystack

You and Ecmandu of course. Two people with literary skills in the same thread, it is mind boggling to the man who prides himself on the number of copy-pastes he performs in a day.

The arrival of Orbie makes it 1000x times more complicated even.


I don’t know. There are more interesting things he could have meant. I’ll leave it to him to tell us, no way to know for sure until he does.

Your styles would appear similar to someone who reads strictly to dismiss.

I was just going to recommend you compile a novella, by the way. The way you write and talk about rehab, a bit Bukowski meets Salinger. It would sell and live on.