Who are your favorite CURRENT ilp posters?

Social Forums Non-Philosophical Chat
41

Aletheia, James S Saint, Attano, Pezer and without music are, from where I stand, ‘on the level’.

Tab and Faust are the most eminent members of the old guard.

Monooq is bright in a way I can not so well perceive. So was
John Jones. And Weary Locomotive. Perhaps they are very smart, perhaps they have very good lives.

Trajicomic is insane, always on his way to genius and occasionally attaining it in a spectacularly unpredictable way.

Abstract writes the most interesting poetry.

Sauwelios is the poster most reliable to have done his homework and know what, precisely, he is talking about.

Parodites has surprised me most. I thought he was an eloquent melancholic, he turned out to be a bone rattling philosopher. The one to really stir things up.

42

I don’t understand Wittgenstein. John Jones gave me the feeling there was something to be understood. This was one of the strangest fleeting sensations.

43

To be honest though I agree with what I think Pezer means, that Aletheia and I are the only ones here who think meta all existing philosophies, comprehensively, pushing the borders of the realm. Philosophy is to change what it means, or can mean, to think. The decision of man to follow through the possibility of reflection to its end is made only in complete theoretical defiance of self-interest, and finally arrives at the contradiction of this endeavor in a new way so as to root man deeper into his self-interest. Philosophy always tries to reconcile man with beast. We have however come very close to identifying the seed of self-interest, the logos of exception, the philosophers stone.

Traji - I deeply dreaded having involved myself in this thread - as fortunate as I am to be honored by you and Pezer and denounced by volchok, I feel utterly pathetic expressing these judgments, but less so as I approach honesty. I see three layers of activity on ILP:
The philosophers
The rebellion
The establishment / society

The philosopher attains to power, long term vision. The rebellion clears the ground for new values inspired by the philosophers, and the establishment / society talks about the status quo, makes minor repairs and adjustments, indirectly based on activity of the rebellion, but is, as a structure, alien to the activities of the philosophers.

Within the society, there are all sorts of people. Within the rebellion, there are only people with excess of energy. Philosophers are strange types, full of contradictions and, in the face of the establishment, always “fools”, who exaggerate their case. This is due to the fatalism of a society over its peak, attaining its values passively over the course of a long slide towards decadence. The rebellion is what is not decadent, separating itself from this slide, drawn as if by its own bootstraps out of the swamp, using the leverage of the philosopher.

The communication of philosophers with the rebellion would require different interface than a forum.

44

It would require a boot camp… But what rebel would agree to that?

45

I’m not a post Nietzschean… I take after a philosophical root of Cynicism that radically predates Nietzsche… I just like to point out the Nietzscheans and ‘Post-Nietzscheans’ backwardness, because after Jung Nietzsche was the second modern philosopher I studied and met Cezar and Sauwelios- and largely rejected them in time for differing reasons- but it wasn’t just to do so to be different- I see Nietzsche had many cynic elements in him. Pezer is much, much more deserving of the title of post Nietzschean as he’s obsessed with becoming one.

You could half shove Walker under the Cynic wagon too, he’s half way into it. Cynicism is one philosophy one can join without ever hearing about it or trying, it just happens. It’s a natural outgrowth of life. Labeling me as a Nietzschean is like labeling Richard Dawkings as a Baptist because he’s always chatting with them.

46

Nah, never mind. I had a pessimistic moment, so sue me.

47

My list would be too long. There’s some great people here. I even had a dream last night about two of them - Faust and Arc were telling me the best place to buy a miniature guitar. Faust knew his guitars. Arc was… sweet. :-k

Contra-Nietzsche is pretty hilarious at times. I was just browsing this thread and reminded of that. I wish I had more time lately to get to know people better. I miss a lot of people too. But time moves on…

48

My favorite posters are Moreno, FilmSnob, Contra, Trajic, Duality, EyesInTheDark, Pav, James S Saint, Satyr, and Stoic because he is fun arguing with.

49

JohnJohns:

[i][b]Philosophy can tell us how big the universe is.

A line is as long as the number of events on it. All journeys are the same length if they have the same number of events.

We make constructions or events in the act of looking, because we draw geometries and events on what we see. So the more we look, the more we think something has got bigger. But things haven’t got bigger. They haven’t.

So the universe started when it was no size at all. Now, it is the same size as when it started, but because there are more events we say that it has “got bigger”. It hasn’t got bigger. Measuring the size of the universe is a task of science. In this case, science serves our preoccupation not with size, but with the number of events.

One day, in the far-off future, when the universe has ballooned out and all material events have vanished, the universe will be the same “size” as it was when it started because the number of events in it will be the same. That’s the truth. Thank God we have philosophy to help us think things like that out.[/i][/b]

Yeah, the guy was a fucking philosophical genuis. :wink: :banana-dance: :banana-dance: :wink:

50

duplicate post: but almost worth repeating.

51

I’d need to see context to really get a sense of those quotes. But even if these are ‘failures’, he thought out of the box and could also think in the box. He’s interesting. And he was intentionally provocative. And better a lot of ‘mistakes’ with even just one or two unique persectives and points tossed in - and I think he does much better than that - than the usual rehashing of common sense or watered down worshipping of this or that philosophical figure or scientific empiricism (as be all and end alls) and so on.

To state he is a genius is close to claiming to be a genius oneself but he’s a creative one off.

52

JohnJones:

[b]Isn’t a total an idea verging on an absolute mystery? at least with a so-called subjective whole we have a vision of what is under consideration.[/b]

There are dozens of similar JJ “insights” here at ILP. What does it mean? Well, what do you want it to mean?

Hell, even Bianco Luno is able to make an occasional reference to the real world. :wink:

53

Well, I ‘met’ him on other forums, so I can’t speak to his posts here. But elsewhere he absolutely could be clear. We ‘bonded’ for a while in anti-psychiatric rants. He’s a purist, though, man.

I can follow him here -
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=174576&start=25
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=174186
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=174529&p=2205928#p2205928

and he seems to immediately raise a lot of anger, along with less upset questioning.

If he was anything like how he was in other forums, he may have made enemies and this explains the reactions. But it seems to me if you post something that questions ‘philosophical common sense’ and do this in statements and are content with your position, you meet rage.

I am quite sure a number of philosophers who are canonical, if they posted here, would meet similar reactions. How dare they keep using words in those odd ways. How terrible they are not clear. How can he not back down when presented with logical rebuttals. And so on.

This does not mean I think he was right, but I like the balls he starts rolling. It seems like the reactions are very much intended to stop that roll, rather than see where it is going, and or mocking him for doing it, and then outrage he does not back down. Along with other more nuanced responses to what he is saying.

Most of the stuff he presents around logic, I have trouble following. But a lot of his other stuff, I just enjoy. I like a new angle, even if it turns out I don’t think it is ‘correct.’

54

Other forums? Anyways, ambigui is just trolling here. A long quote, responded to with a smiley face and sarcasm… What else are you supposed to call that?

55

John jones was cool. I echo Mo_ 's sentiments. That guy created OC.

56

alt.philosophy, someplacesomehere, alt.psychology and related alts., sciforums (I think), philosophy forums, and more. He goes somewhere and eventually gets banned or fed up perhaps.

57

I never liked John Jones, he has intellect, but no soul.

58

Faust
FilmSnob
Flannel Jesus
James L Walker
kuze420
Moreno
Mutcer
SIATD v2
turtle
V-OutOfTheWilderness

59

He was actually really funny. He had more soul than most IMO.

60

And he could hurl a spicey insult also.