Iambiguous can’t accept that the plain truth that what people like yourself tell him directly about how he is offending them is actually the case, because it would deflate his narcissistic self-image. Ironically, his psychological defense against this, is the fantasy that people cannot handle the profound truths that he tells.
To the best of my ability – openly, honestly, introspectively – I have attempted to explain to you my reaction to our exchange. After all, I cannot not think and feel about it other than as I do. Now, I’m not arguing that the way I reacted to it is the way that you should. Or that you are wrong to react to it as you do. That’s not how “I” works here for me. We take out of things like this what we first put into them: ourselves. Based on the life that we have lived and the experiences we have had.
There is no Right Way to assess it, to interpret it, to judge it.
Also, if you insist on accusing me of accusing you of this or that on this thread, doesn’t it just draw more attention to it? Isn’t that what you least want?
What makes the most sense here to me doesn’t make the most sense to you. But: that’s perfectly normal to me given the nature of the exchange itself.
I have invested a lot of time and commitment here in exploring relationships I had never really thought about before. It all fascinates me now. As I explained above. If the thread is locked and I have to start again on a new thread, well, that is beyond my control. But I can’t just not be intrigued by it all in the manner in which “I” have unfolded here so far.
He was just embarrassed and try to bury it under a bunch of meaningless links and quotes.
Unbelievable.
The plain truth? So, what are you suggesting…that anyone who does not react as you do here to me is now “one of them”. Is no longer “one of us”, those who grasp the objective truth about iambiguous?
A Stooge and an objectivist?
And what’s ironic here is that one of the things that drew me to Maia is the assumption that she was not an objectivist herself. Yes, she believed in an “ism” that was completely alien to me. But she made it clear that her beliefs were not embedded in any “my way or the highway” mentality. She noted how within the Pagan community there was no attempt to judge others as being right or wrong in their beliefs. Why? Because those beliefs were not based on a philosophy or an ideology. Instead, they were based on the behaviors that they shared…behaviors rooted profoundly in nature itself. Communing with nature in a way that our modern world has virtually eliminated altogether.
Now, anytime you want to take your own accusations against me and explore them substantively, contextually as felix dakat, you start the thread.
Note to others:
Meet Curly-Joe. Along with Shemp, another of my burgeoning collection of Stooges.
Or, hmm, maybe he’s Shemp.
As I have told you before, there’s no point entering a substantive dialogue with you because you dismiss other people’s ideas as contraptions without providing arguments for how you arrived at that conclusion. And that’s just the first of many hostile practices in your style of discourse. These have been pointed out to you ad nauseam by many members here on ILP. You have deflected all that feedback and haven’t changed a bit. So, while you do post some interesting subject matter which I appreciate, I continue to think that dialogue with you would be a waste of time. Your discussion with Maia was interesting for a while until violated her boundaries. Not cool, bro.
And as I have told you just above: unbelievable.
Yet again, you merely iterate much the same accusations regarding me…as though repeating them really makes them true objectively.
Oh, and just out of curiosity, please pin down the point in my exchange with Maia above where I violated her boundaries. Assuming for example that I have the capacity to be her and understand beyond all doubt what those boundaries were.
Also, out of curiosity, do you have anything to contribute in regard to the points I raise pertaining to the existential relationship between sense deprivation [congenital or otherwise], dasein and human identity.
Only this time as felix dakat.
If not then might I suggest that you stick to your “general description spiritual contraptions” on other threads.
Note to critical thinkers(which excludes Bigster) 
Now that’s comedy provided by an idiot, Biggie(ironic idiot extraordinaire) shooing Felix(another accurate objectivist)out of a thread Biggie isn’t welcome in. =D>
Iambiguous --anyone but an abject narcissist would know that at the point where Maya was asking you not to post on this thread any longer you had violated her boundaries. Furthermore she told you exactly how you did it. And yet you act in your responses as if you don’t comprehend that. You have yourself admitted that your consciousness is fragmented. Perhaps empathy is lost somewhere in a misplaced fragment of you.
Why on earth is this thread now suddenly attracting all the flies?
Do any of you have anything at all to contribute to an exploration into the complex, often convoluted relationship between sense deprivation, dasein and human identity? Anything at all?
Of, for example, a philosophical nature.
As for Wendy, over and again I have given her ample opportunity to take her own “Coalition of Truth” objectivism out into the world of actual conflicting goods. Nothing. So I conclude then that here she is a chickenshit. But, sure, that can only be but another of my own subjunctive assessments rooted existentially in dasein.
Look, if they can’t even be honest with themselves as to why my posts so disturb them, then noting the OP here…
ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop … 5&t=185296
…is not likely to change much.
But, again, that really isn’t what this thread is meant to explore.
So, I dare them to start a new thread on the philosophy board in which we can explore their own accusations against me. Given a context of their own choosing. And I can assure them I will conduct my end of the exchange with the utmost civility. Providing they do the same.
And above I noted repeatedly why I objected to her request. And what you act like is that only her own assessment of the exchange counts here.
And, yes, my own fractured and fragmented sense of self is embedded precisely in the countless ambiguities that pervade exchanges of this sort. That’s my point by the way. And anytime you wish to explore the nature of empathy given your own [I suspect] considerably less fractured and fragmented understanding of yourself out in the world, let’s go there.
But you won’t. Why? Because all the accusations you already level at me make the attempt futile. Then around and around you go.
“Look, if they can’t even be honest with themselves as to why my posts so disturb them, then noting the OP here…”
There it is iambiguous’s standard accusation that he uses every time after he rejects the reasons people give for not wanting to talk to him. Notice the elevated self-esteem that pathological psychological defense is meant to give to him. It is his superior piercing and probing questions that people just can’t handle because they can’t handle the profound truths that this intellectual genius brings to the discussion. I predicted that this is what he would say only a few posts ago and now here it is. How could I predict it? It’s a persistent recurring pattern with this guy. In psychiatric parlance they call that a personality disorder.
Again, all I can do here is to extrapolate from my past experiences with those that “I” construe to be objectivists. The irony here being that I do not believe that Maia is herself an objectivist. I have far more respect for her own understanding of the life that she lives than for all of the “Coalition of Truth” dittoheads that now pervade ILP.
And to the extent that you honestly believe that my own at times brutally grim assessment of an essentially meaningless and purposeless existence reflects the height of narcissism and self-esteem, well, that merely exposes just how little you grasp the “for all practical purposes” reality of moral nihilism. Of a fractured and fragmented “I” embodied in this:
Though, yeah, given my past experiences with those of your ilk I am still inclined to believe it is that which they are ever intent on distancing themselves from.
If only becasue I have to deal with the brutal consequences [on both sides of the grave] of still thinking like I do myself.
Biggie, himself, has “a condition?” Irony cannot get anymore iron.
Like I said, flies.
Why “Joe”?
Well, that’s the last of them. From now on I have to make up the names myself.
More irony with a tinge of serendipity, that’s my middle name without the “e” so kindly leave that off during your rounds of ongoing insults.
That’s the iambiguous mantra of meaninglessness. You keep mumbling that to yourself over and over as you take yet another excursion around whatever circle of your personal hell you’re on.
Hey man, don’t hate me cause I spit the truth.
You fake Vietnam going scum collector.
I still have that $1000 for you.
And leave the girl alone you fat fucking creepy nerd.
*Cue tantrum.