Mo, is this going to happen or not 
This is not a matter by which monooq might take up his pen, it seems.
Monooq! That was Mo back in the good old days. =D>
Yup, back when Mo was a berkeleyean idealist. We’ve come a long way since then, haven’t we son.
I have a lasting fondness for Bishop Berkeley.
Anyways, iambusher, I am a bit busy these days.
And I have promises to keep.
And miles to go before I sleep.
And miles to go before I sleep.
A bit cryptic. Or is that the point?
And how many miles exactly? You know, if we’re talking about the same thing.
Anyway, to contend or not to contend is still the question on this thread.
K: having just discovered this later bit, I am going on the record to state, yes,
I have a great deal of respect for IAM… and in fact, I will also state that I think
he is the only “true” philosopher on this site… he has his questions, his problems
to solve and he is diligent in attempting to work out his philosophical problems…
there are many, many here who don’t have a clue that there is even such a thing
as a philosophical problem and that problem requires some sort of solution…
what is the question that drives you? what are you seeking to answer?
do you even have enough sense to at least ask questions about
what does existence mean to you? or do you just float along with life
like 99.9% of all people…those people never ask themselves the vital
questions of existence… “what am I do to?” “what values should I hold?”
“what should I hope for?” and what has turned into my question,
“what is the point of existence?” the why of being… we exists,
but why? “does life have meaning?” which is another way of saying,
“do I have meaning?” …
is my life meaning found in that old Kantian answer?
God, freedom and immortality…
I reject god and immortality, so all is left that’s left for me is freedom…
In the end all I have, all I have is questions… what is the point of existence,
mine, yours, ours…
Kropotkin
A person who has no need to ask those questions may be wiser than any philosopher.
I agree. He is a “true” philosopher.
Interestingly, I have seen Iamb also not understand what putting something in quotes means. Or perhaps there’s more performance art in PK than I realize. Either way he put extra effort in to carefully not write that Iambiguous is a true philosopher.
Fact: Everyone is a “true” philosopher in his own way. Philosophy is indefinable.
"I think therefore I philosophe. "
One of those loaded nuanced ideas.
K: ok, I think IAM is the only TRUE PHILOSOPHER on this website… there does that
help you…
Kropotkin
But he didn’t seem to understand them. Not at all.
And since his defense of Iamb was based on the content of his posts and not his behavior, he like Iamb was not responding to posts made or the issues. Like Iamb he assumes that it is not possible to consider someone’s behavior unless you disagree with their beliefs.
He seems not to have noticed that given that he is an objectivist, Iamb considers him to be part of the problem in the world. The great bulk of Iamb’s posts are about objectivism and trying to get people to demonstrate the rationality of their morality/value positions. The greatest difference is obviously that unlike Iamb, PK is not a nihilist and is an objectivist.
Further since PK does not think he himself is a “true” philosopher, there is not real reason to think he would recognize one.
I pointed out in my original response to PK other problems with saying that he and Iamb merely have different language for the same beliefs. IN fact some of his ideas that he is writing as if they are the same as Iambs are clearly not. See the Golden Age thread for that.
And as I pointed out to Iamb, PK and Iamb share political values and in general Iamb’s behavior, what I have a problem with, are less likely to happen in the political threads but much more likely to happen in the philosophy and religion threads. So, he is partly blessed, but also partly inclined to ignore the negative behavior of members of his own team. Members of the other team often do the same thing. Iamb tends to use kid gloves when dealing with objectivists he shares values with.
As Iamb surely must have noticed, despite my advice, people showed no interest in ignoring him. Oh, well. One must sometimes point out a good solution even if one thinks it is unlikely to be taken up.
So, it’s back to pointing out his disruption of threads and faux responses.
Poor PK, he doesn’t notice that he is giving answers, including objectivist answers around moral issues, with great regularity.
K: I disagree with this statement, “a person who has no need to ask those questions
may be wiser than any philosophy”
a person who lacks the wisdom to ask questions means they aren’t curious at all…
and one of the traits of every great human beings has been curiosity…
show me someone who isn’t curious and that person is dumber then a rock…
intelligence is tied up in how curious a person is…
someone who has absolutely no curiosity is IQ45… and he is dumber then a rock…
Kropotkin
Help me. I didn’t need any help on that one. I am not sure why we should think you could recognize a TRUE PHILOSOPHER since you seem not to consider yourself one.
And I notice how you focus on what was merely a jab and not, for example, on the substantive portions of the post. Whatever.
What does curiosity have to do with it?
Those questions show a disconnection between the person asking and life, the universe and everything.
If you are connected, then the questions don’t even arise.
You wouldn’t look for ‘meaning’ if you had it already.
He understood them enough to sustain the respect I have for his intelligence. Unless, of course, that’s not good enough for you.
Note to Mo:
We won’t let all this Stooge stuff distract us, okay? 
Mo, don’t “disappear” again please. The very future of ILP revolves around bringing minds of your caliber back again.
Don’t let the Kids prevail
You know, just in case.
I’ll never let that happen. My goal has always been to reduce ILP to mediocre thinkers through the influence of my incessant obnoxious behavior, boundless philosophical sophistry, and over-use/abuse of social media to present seemingly random and arbitrary content of myself that has nothing to do with anything.
It’s called absurdism by the deed, dude.
But what if you all become brilliant as a result of my influence, instead?
Crap I hadn’t thought about that.