Beware of Greeks

Status
Not open for further replies.
Little punk,

I debated with myself whether to present the comprehensive post that I original intended. I must however say that considering your obvious lack of knowledge about Eastern philosphy or world philosphy in general, it would be wasted effort as what usually drives me to long posts is simply not there-- this is not fun or educational. I will however give you this:

WANDERER, you must first distinguish between philopsohy and religion. You make such an efort to distinguish Christianity and Western philosphy so why can't you make the same concerted effort when it comes to Eastern thought? You call eastern philosphy passive and agressive, and hence bad? Surely you cannot imply all the connotations that beg to be implied. Passivity in itself is not bad. Nevertheless, you must not confuse a state of peace and a search for wisdom for passivity. Also agression for the sake of agression is not a good quality. Agression should only be exercise when needed. These are all fundamnetal to eastern philosphy. Also, if you would check your history, you would realize that what you credit the ancient greeks had its beginning elsewhere-- Egypt and Babylon. Either way, I credit the greeks with formalizing and developing the concepts. I think this is enough, if you want more, specify, and if in the right mood, I will tickle your bone.
 
Spoken like a true dolt

WANDERER, you must first distinguish between philopsohy and religion. You make such an efort to distinguish Christianity and Western philosphy so why can't you make the same concerted effort when it comes to Eastern thought?
You assume so much. Let time prove or disporve you.
Words are cheap, actions demand a price.
But I prefer being underestimated than overestimated.

I debated with myself whether to present the comprehensive post that I original intended. I must however say that considering your obvious lack of knowledge about Eastern philosphy or world philosphy in general, it would be wasted effort as what usually drives me to long posts is simply not there-- this is not fun or educational. I will however give you this:
Ah yes, insinuating greatness without proving it. The usual practice of the weak.
Shall I tell you about how I can beat Mike Tyson but wouldn't bother going through the effort because I don't have the time for guys like you?
Nah, why bother?

You call eastern philosphy passive and agressive, and hence bad? Surely you cannot imply all the connotations that beg to be implied. Passivity in itself is not bad. Nevertheless, you must not confuse a state of peace and a search for wisdom for passivity.
I never said passivity was bad.
I said passivity is hypocritical when it is used to be aggressive. It reveals an inability to face reality head-on and it uses the weasel strategy of cowards and men-girls.
If one is beaten passivity can be a good survival strategy, even if not very noble.

Also agression for the sake of agression is not a good quality. Agression should only be exercise when needed.
Agreed. Where have I said differently?

Also, if you would check your history, you would realize that what you credit the ancient greeks had its beginning elsewhere-- Egypt and Babylon.
Everything is influenced from what has come before.
Your point is?
Egypt and Babylon were themselves influenced by earlier thought. Besides who said Egypt or Babylon were eastern?
By your understanding we should consider Egypt a southern civilization.
You have a broad interpretation of what eastern means which is guided by geography.
I’m refering to it as oriental.

Hellenism was nevertheless a pinnacle and a new way of looking at the same things.
It was a spirit of being. An uncompromising, noble spirit to be emulated.

Either way, I credit the greeks with formalizing and developing the concepts. I think this is enough, if you want more, specify, and if in the right mood, I will tickle your bone.
Ah the promise of future ecstasy. The flirtation of a woman promising so much and delivering so little.
I wonder how much of the Greeks you really understand.
From your earlier post you apear to have little understanding.

Your move.
 
What is 'passive aggressivity'?

"If Indian philosophy is studied in British Universities, it is rarely the philosophy department that offers it. (There are honourable exceptions!) A particularly unfortunate consequence of this is that the study of Ancient Philosophy generally focuses exclusively on the history of Greek Philosophy and leaves aside the more ancient history of Indian and the equally ancient history of Chinese philosophy, let alone the more controverted issues surrounding the existence of philosophical thought in ancient Egypt."

More here http://www.philo.demon.co.uk/preGreek.htm
 
Last edited:
Your ignorance knows no limits methinks

Little punk

You assume so much. Let time prove or disporve you.
Words are cheap, actions demand a price.
But I prefer being underestimated than overestimated.
Where is the assumption?
Did you not say this: I'm going to wait for your take on eastern philosophy before I respond to the rest.
I beleive all of eastern history is full of passive agressiveness.
Hinduism and Gandhi, the sleeping giant China, Buddhism is general.
??

Why should I bother with a moron who won't even take the time to learn about what he criticizes? Distinguish between religion and philosphy as you did here: But the onslaught of Christianity against Hellenism was not to end here.

Ah yes, insinuating greatness without proving it. The usual practice of the weak.
I already did. You do not know of Eastern philosophy

Shall I tell you about how I can beat Mike Tyson but wouldn't bother going through the effort because I don't have the time for guys like you?
You shouldn't tell me how you can beat Mike Tyson if I were to tell you that Mike Tyson was 9ft tall, 400 pounds, and could punch a hole in steel with his bare hands, for obviously, I I don't know Mike Tyson.

I never said passivity was bad.
I said passivity is hypocritical when it is used to be aggressive. It reveals an inability to face reality head-on and it uses the weasel strategy of cowards and men-girls.
If one is beaten passivity can be a good survival strategy, even if not very noble.
You have not shown how Eastern Philosphy is passive agressive in the sense (psychological) you use it. I told you to be aware of the connotations and abviously you aren't. To teach one to be peaceful unless attacked is not passive agressive in the psycological sense.

Also, when you attach negativity to this perceived "hypocrisy" in Eastern philosphy, it can be inferred therefore that you think 'passive agressiveness' wrong.

Agreed. Where have I said differently?
Moron, you take that out of context. I broke down into in simplistic terms, aspects of Eastern philosophy that can be considered passive and agressive.

Everything is influenced from what has come before.
Your point is?
My point, which I am sure you understand, is that you cliamed Attica as the source. I will spare you the geographical restructuring that creates Asia Minor, etc.

Egypt and Babylon were themselves influenced by earlier thought.
Their philosphies originated their respective locales-- they were the first civilizations.

Besides who said Egypt or Babylon were eastern?
Certainly not me. I presented them because you attributed Greek philosphy to only the greeks. That the rest of the world exacted no influence. What I said: Also, if you would check your history, you would realize that what you credit the ancient greeks had its beginning elsewhere-- Egypt and Babylon .

By your understanding we should consider Egypt a southern civilization.
A non sequitur that follows an invalid premise. You are irrational.

You have a broad interpretation of what eastern means which is guided by geography.
I’m refering to it as oriental.
Again, where did I call Egypt and Babylon eastern?

Hellenism was nevertheless a pinnacle and a new way of looking at the same things.
It was a spirit of being. An uncompromising, noble spirit to be emulated.
It was a way. It was new way of looking at the same thing. And I admire, respect and know that 'way', but you descredit and belittle other ways without knowing them!

Ah the promise of future ecstasy. The flirtation of a woman promising so much and delivering so little.
I wonder how much of the Greeks you really understand.
From your earlier post you apear to have little understanding.
Your ignorance is outstanding. Do you realize the contradiction in what you say above and this: I'm refering to the pre-Socratic Greece, the pre-Democracy

Unless you have absolutely no fucking clue about what the period called hellenism.

Your move.
You never made a move little punk.
 
Still waiting

I guess I could answer you with the usual sprinklings of epithets and then wait for your posturing in reply but why bother?
I have better things to do than waste my time with a little twerp that talks big but acts little.
I’ve made my position clear. I only speak of things I have personal experience with, not things I’ve read in books.
My position stands as my personal assessment and waits for refutation besides the:
“I guess you haven’t heard of the Chinese then”.
Deep analysis I must say. But I forget, I am not worthy of your time and effort.
You're like those Kung-fu guys that lives through reputation and avoids physical contact by reminding the world that he has taken martial arts for a few years and he possesses a black belt now, so that his real fighting talents aren't exposed as a fraud.
But it's different play-fighting in controlled environments or in the movies and it's a whole different thing in the real world, isn't it master?
School smarts and street smarts are different things.

You shouldn't tell me how you can beat Mike Tyson if I were to tell you that Mike Tyson was 9ft tall, 400 pounds, and could punch a hole in steel with his bare hands, for obviously, I I don't know Mike Tyson.
Nice evasion tactic.
I'm sure you've used it before. Is that how you justify your cowardice to yourself?
Again insinuating something without having to display it for all to witness.
I'll presume then that you know much and move on to better things besides baby-sitting.
This will be my last response to you when all you do is pretend knowledge.
If and when you ever get into substance then I'll respond.
If I have the time that is.
Tell me are your eyes squinty and is your penis tiny?
I’m getting a craving for some egg-roles, all of a sudden.

Their philosphies originated their respective locales-- they were the first civilizations.
And you know this for a fact, do you?
It’s interesting that the bookish types like you, that achieve understanding through reading, place such confidence on history and the words of others.
Was Hitler also a maniac then? That'swhat the books say, don't they? Then it must be so.
But when personal ability is absent I guess one must rely on the ability of others to construct self-esteem.
I’m sure you’ve read many books and you can quote many sources but have you an understanding of what you speak or only knowledge of it?
You sound like a sophist to me.

Certainly not me. I presented them because you attributed Greek philosphy to only the greeks. That the rest of the world exacted no influence.
Now here you are really talking out of your ass.
Where have I said that?
Where have I said that the Greeks were influenced by nobody?
My posts are available. Quote them and show me or shut the fuck up.
I focused my attentions on a specific culture and presented it from my perspective.
If someone else thinks a different culture deserves equal attention then let him/her have the courage to make a case for it. If not let them yammer and spew, as I scratch my crotch and smirk.

A non sequitur that follows an invalid premise. You are irrational.
Thanks, that's the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me.

It was a way. It was new way of looking at the same thing. And I admire, respect and know that 'way', but you descredit and belittle other ways without knowing them!
No I belittle idiots like you that insinuate other ways and then make excuses for not presenting them.
Show the quality of your mind genius, by exposing its workings for all to see or just sit there on the sidelines on your coaches couch, pretending your an athlete when you don't even have the nuts to step into the field and place your honor and ego on the line.
I’ve posted numerous essays about this or that subject and I have exposed myself to ridicule and belittlement by inferiors, like you, that feel threatened by my views orby the way I express them but can do no more than attack me perosnally without ever presenting contradicitng opinions on the subject itself.

You probably only make quick little gorilla attacks because you fear you might get your ass kicked in a real battle.
Shall I search this Forum for one of your posts or should I jack-off instead and do something more constructive?
Jacking-off it is, then.
The above was meant as a set-up for your next insult.
Thought I’d make it easy for you.
Besides I would like to test my ability to manipulate your responses, just to see what you’re really made of.


Your ignorance is outstanding. Do you realize the contradiction in what you say above and this: I'm refering to the pre-Socratic Greece, the pre-Democracy

Unless you have absolutely no fucking clue about what the period called hellenism.
CONTRADICTION?!!!
Where the hell is the contradiction?
Let’s assume I have no clue, enlighten me and show the world your true value.
But I’m sure you have a ready excuse and smartass quip to avoid any risk.
You’re like those guys watching a fight and screaming directions to the fighters from outside the rink; those guys that throw insulting epithets followed by what they would have done or could have done, yet they don’t have the balls to enter any rink and would probably wet their pants if they were ever face to face with one of those “morons” in the rink.

Like I said this will be my last response to you. Post a real opinion of your own, except for empty criticism, and I might lower myself enough to comment.
Otherwise keep on yapping from the sidelines, you entertain me.
 
HA.
You sure know how to scream and dodge every significant assertion I make.

Like I said, unless you show an indication of the minutest of knowledge about Eastern philosophy, I won't indulge in your ignorance.


BTW, just as an exercise, read this timeline of Greek History. You might learn something:
http://www.filetron.com/grkmanual/detailgreekchrono.html
 
thefountainhed said:
HA.
You sure know how to scream and dodge every significant assertion I make.

Like I said, unless you show an indication of the minutest of knowledge about Eastern philosophy, I won't indulge in your ignorance.


BTW, just as an exercise, read this timeline of Greek History. You might learn something:

Barbarians should not mingle with the noble.
Now go off and read something.
 
So SodaFountain, why do you think african tribes invented lasers?
 
fountainboy thinks?!

Persol:
So SodaFountain, why do you think african tribes invented lasers?

How else can one justify the concept "racism is the sole reason for black failings in academe, even though there are only one or two known great African civilizations"?
 
Where are the great African empires,. the great black philosophers?
How long can one blame others for their own failings?
 
"black" bashing week at the old farm?

--Where are the great African empires,. the great black philosophers?

Do your research. Or is the question rhetorical?

--How long can one blame others for their own failings?

Someone is?

--fountainboy thinks?!
Yep


How else can one justify the concept "racism is the sole reason for black failings in academe, even though there are only one or two known great African civilizations"?

Perhaps you should answer that question. It is your own concept.
 
Do your research. Or is the question rhetorical?
If I need to do research to discover a thinker that made a difference then what real difference did he make?
If men have external differences based on race or gender or genes then how is it that they have no internal ones?
If men have physical inequalities then why do we assume they have no mental ones?
But I forget we live in the age of excuses and rampant equalitarianism. Where inequality can’t be hidden the measuring stick is lowered to accommodate all, even the inferior.
We must all appear to be the same as to ensure peaceful coexistence on an overpopulated planet.
Ideas that are deemed dangerous or subversive are labelled using the popular, sexist, racist, fascist terminology and all debate ends at that.
What about the bell curve?
 
thefountainhed said:
dumb response.

NEXT!
Case in point.
Thanks for accentuating my arguments with your proof.
It always astonishes me how my positions, when they are unable to be refuted, are bolstered by the very people that try to contradict them.
Thanks for proving me right, my brother.
 
fountainboy:
"black" bashing week at the old farm?

I shall slip on my Doc Martins.

Do your research. Or is the question rhetorical?

The ancient Egyptians have been claimed as the "great Black civilization" but they were hardly "black". A few Ivory Coast kingdoms were "black" but they were hardly great civilizations but instead great kingdoms.
Black philosophers? Whom?

How else can one justify the concept "racism is the sole reason for black failings in academe, even though there are only one or two known great African civilizations"?

Perhaps you should answer that question. It is your own concept.

Wish it was.
 
You are either a nitwit, or a deeply conceited moron. I suppose both positions are fundamentally equal. Let me show why your post was stupid:

--If I need to do research to discover a thinker that made a difference then what real difference did he make?
1st stupid statement. To assert that fame (and from your perspective to boot!) distinguishes the importance-- in terms of difference made, is so utterly moronic as to not demand a thought out response.

---If men have external differences based on race or gender or genes then how is it that they have no internal ones?

2nd moronic statement! What is internal? Aren't the external features distinguished by what is not seen, or internal? Why must intelligence be this so called difference? Does nose shape, hair type, or skin tone affect the biological makeup of the brain? Distinguish these so called races. Do you know how much the peoples of West Africa alone differ genetically?

---If men have physical inequalities then why do we assume they have no mental ones?

Who is saying that men do not differ mentally? At issue is whether you can categorize the physical differences and then assign mental capability to the groups. You cannot, becase the two are not related!

--But I forget we live in the age of excuses and rampant equalitarianism.
You live in such an age? What then of the racism, and ethnic, religious warfare that plague the earth like never before? You speak without knowledge.

---Where inequality can’t be hidden the measuring stick is lowered to accommodate all, even the inferior.
Show where

---We must all appear to be the same as to ensure peaceful coexistence on an overpopulated planet.

Really? If you concur, then why do you complain?

--Ideas that are deemed dangerous or subversive are labelled using the popular, sexist, racist, fascist terminology and all debate ends at that.

really?

--What about the bell curve?
What about the fucking bell curve? Are your references that outdated?


I have been to your website, old man. I have read your essays andI have seen you regurgitate the same crap on this forum and others. You over generalize, make non sequiturs, and show a tremendous lack of knowledge. Do not annoy me.
 
Xev, you are not my intellectual equal and you know it. I will not engage two morons at once. Until I reach you, shut up.
 
What are you going to do if he annoys you, use harsh language?
Impotent fool.

Name one great black civilization
 
1st stupid statement. To assert that fame (and from your perspective to boot!) distinguishes the importance-- in terms of difference made, is so utterly moronic as to not demand a thought out response.
Who said anything about fame moron?
Still waiting for that great black philosopher that rocked the world.

2nd moronic statement! What is internal? Aren't the external features distinguished by what is not seen, or internal? Why must intelligence be this so called difference? Does nose shape, hair type, or skin tone affect the biological makeup of the brain? Distinguish these so called races. Do you know how much the peoples of West Africa alone differ genetically?
Who said anything about nose affecting brain?
Are you making things up to escape?
I merely stated that if there are physical differences then we can safely assume that there are metal ones as well.

Who is saying that men do not differ mentally? At issue is whether you can categorize the physical differences and then assign mental capability to the groups. You cannot, because the two are not related!
What I can do is assume that there were developmental differences that cause physical ones and may have also contributed to mental ones.
Empiricism old man!!!

I have been to your website, old man. I have read your essays andI have seen you regurgitate the same crap on this forum and others. You over generalize, make non sequiturs, and show a tremendous lack of knowledge. Do not annoy me.
Or what?!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top