You could have “subtracted” those words.
I am schizophrenic philosopher anti-philosopher who plays both sides of the field.
That was already apparent.
My intention is not to tell anyone anything, but to put out there things that are brought alive by those who see them. I am not the intellect behind any kind of sense that is made from what I write. The person reading it is the one who gives it life and makes it meaningful. I sprinkle fairy dust and then watch what happens.
Yeah well, intellectual insecurity is a common weakness today and it plays well against those of intellectual bullheadedness. Unfortunately it leads to nothing.
The reason why I cannot claim any rights to being a philosopher is because anything I ever write, I could, just as well, refute it.
My problem is that I am too capable of doing philosophy, so much so that if I were ever forced to write one thing I thought was most true, I couldn’t do it. I couldn’t do it because I can make anything true, and therefore anything I write is not determined by what I think is true, but by the reader.
The reader does all the work. I stir the mind up, as it were, with the purpose of provoking creativity and imagination in the reader. In this way I am not a philosopher as much as a kind of midwife or experimenter, you might say.
I need to tread lightly here because I don’t want to get mixed up with things I don’t believe are creative; I feel like you are trying to persuade me to move in a certain direction. I can’t move in only one direction. I am a non-linear, multi dimensional thinker and I must avoid any restrictions when I find them. So, I’d rather not pass comment on your above words, though I do appreciate the undeserved praise you’ve tried to give me. Or rather, I appreciate the fact that you thought I was deserving of such praise.
All of that was the exact reason that I made my suggestion. An “ontological engineer” or oncologist, is one who can see any perspective and understand exactly what it is that makes that perspective true or not. He can argue any side of just about anything. But unlike many, he understands within what ontological frame each argument is true or not. Understanding ontological construction gives the true thinker a foundation from which he gains even more freedom with which he can surmise counter arguments and make them stick, if he chooses. He becomes a “master of the angels” from which he gains a very solid foundation and might eventually choose to do something worth while.