.
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/what-made-your-life-more-beautiful/83692/34?u=magsj
I split a bunch of posts out of that thread into two new threads: one about crack, and one about a personal dispute – none about what makes life beautiful.
1 Like
Are you saying that the judgment “life is beautiful” can not be made if the existing antecedent conditions involved smokin’ some whack crizzack? Or is this a cause/correlation dispute? Or is it an argument against the subjective nature of aesthetic judgments? I beseech you.
I sense self-deprecating humor. A thing of beauty… or an inability to break character the way your mom always warned you would happen if you kept making that face? (P.s. I’m muting this thread & I don’t care about your answer.)
.
Dirty Laundry? Imaginary dirty laundry more like.. another’s schizophrenic-madness does not reality make.
.
Your divisive treatment of me, belies your biases.
But it does:
Your favorite contributor.
Straight illness.
How do I put someone on ignore on this forum structure?
Hey Bob, you commented on my recent Last Supper revision. In the Art, Music and Entertainment section.
You referenced my previous draft from 2023. That was my thread, too. Did you not check the author before you copied from A.I.? I am revising the material.
You didn’t even bother to notice.
Bob, just another robot A.I. fake poster. Can’t even review the A.I. text before he posts it. Pathetic.
Also, “Bob’s” avatar photo is A.I. That ain’t him. Everything about Bobby is fake.
Put me on ignore Bobby. I don’t want to read your A.I. bullshit any damn way.
And you overlook the fact that there is very little you can do on the internet that doesn’t involve AI. If I were to sit in a library or use the books I have at home and look up anything pertinent to what you said, I would find nothing. As it was, I found that article. The use of Google or any other search engine is standard and not worth mentioning today.
When I use the Internet, I always make micro searches and use a text that I had previously written to show the direction I am searching, with the question, whether it is correct. I rarely just accept what AI says, and often I take out what was missing or replace what was incorrect in my original text.
But, of course, people like you are highly creative and never use AI, and your genius comes only from your grey matter. You rely on nobody, but are perfection in person, and nothing you write is edited or corrected because it is already perfect. You need to think this because you see the world as highly competitive and you need to show your worth.
I, on the other hand, am a pensioner who spends most of his time writing novels, researching for those stories and also reflecting on a long life with a lot of very mixed experiences. I can draw from that intuitively, but am humble enough to check to see whether my impression is correct. I have been engaging here on the forum since 2003 to learn, and have learnt much in the past, but today, I get the impression that people are only here to argue.
2 Likes
Merci, cheri! (15 characters)
1 Like
You are wrong. The photo is a few years old, but it was used on a website of the organisation I worked for as a regional manager. In fact, the picture is still reachable on XING, although it is from my last job as a house manager. Compare it to the one I use on Substack.
Due to my great interest in Leonardo, I also read Leonardo Da Vinci by Walter Isaacson in 2018, and earlier, about ten years ago, I bought the huge book by Daniel Arasse on Leonardo, but in German. I was not prepared to translate out of those books, which are quite exhaustive. I’ll give you an example (p.366-368):
„In seiner Interpretation des Abendmahls verschmelzen die beiden Akte, mit denen Jesus die christliche Religion begründete, zu einem einzigen Augenblick und einem einzigen Ereignis, der dem Lauf der Geschichte eine andere Richtung gab. So ist es nicht erstaunlich, dass er in seiner Komposition das Grundkonzept der Anbetung der Könige in konzentrierte Form wiederaufnahm. […]
Im Abendmahl scheinen die Figuren streng in das Netz der geometrischen Perspektive mit Jesus als Fluchtpunkt in der Bildmitte einzufügen. Der enge Rahmen, den Leonardo für die Gesamtdarstellung wählte, lässt die Figuren >>vor<< den geometrisch durch Kassettendeck und Wandteppiche bestimmte Orte treten
[…]
Die lebendige Symmetrie in der Platzierung der Jünger – sie sind in dramatischen Dreiergruppen zu beiden Seiten Jesu versammelt – steht im Widerspruch zur stabilen Raumarchitektur. Die Köpfe der drei rechts und links außen platzierten Jünger nehmen in der Fläche ungefähr den durch die jeweils ersten beiden Wandteppiche bestimmten Raum ein, aber sie verteilen sich nicht gleichmäßig auf ihnen.“
Both authors commented on the similarity to the Adoration of the Magi with the figures surrounding Jesus with Mary in the middle.
If you imagine me sitting with the book studiously copying out of the books, which are of a considerable size, you might understand that I chose an easier way.
However, after reading this some time ago, I found that your “discovery” repeated some of the things Arasse noted, but also what Jacobsen’s biography revealed when he discussed how Leonardo’s studies and notebooks reveal a continuous blending of empirical observation, scientific exploration, and philosophical reflection, which were not separate from but integral to his artistic achievements.
Write. One can write without A.I.
Think. One can think without A.I.
I do. You do not.
You are making excuses to be lazy.
Exactly. And that’s your approach, memorizing and copying material of others.
That’s why you have no problem using A.I., without even proofreading or double-checking it.
You referenced my own material to critique my own material. And you didn’t even realize it.
You are copying other people’s ideas. I am not.
I am original, a human. You are not.
False.
As demonstrated in my Leonardo’s Last Supper thread, and mentioned above, you referenced my own material in attempt to challenge my material. You are pitiful, Bob. Lazy. Pathetic.
Yes, as illustrated, I am highly creative and keep A.I. use to a minimum. And I always explicitly state when I use A.I. You do not.
Pretty fair statement.
I am single, alone, and produce all this material myself. I have no degree and am affiliated with no university.
The world is highly competitive. People are competing for job positions, resources, mates and social positions.
Look at you, here. And on the Leonardo’s Last Supper thread, trying hard to tear down the material and claim it is copied.
This material is significant. It has worth. You are an A.I. robot. With no ideas.
I am right.
Don’t you have a wife? A family? Why not spend time with her as opposed to generating tedious A.I. articles for strangers? If I had a lady I would cherish her. Not boast about my A.I. knowledge on an obscure philosophy forum.
I’m fairly certain you claimed earlier the image was A.I. enhanced. Is the image A.I. enhanced?
I cannot find that specific comment.
But you don’t do it anyway, the A.I. does.
Interesting. However that has no relation to my work or the material presented.
Besides, you had to read someone else’s book to discern that?
Then cite them explicitly, and provide direct sources.
You are making claims with no evidence.
You did the same in the Leonardo’s Last Supper Decoded thread and I responded. You had no further response.
What are the alleged similarities? Why can’t you identify those?
You are presenting empty claims, Bob.
What is your point here? To argue? Without evidence? And I’m the problem?
Stop spamming the board with your A.I. drivel, Bob. We’re not impressed. Spend time with your wife.