Atheism

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Fresco does beg for it...doesn't he

Indeed he does, Frank. He worked long (quite long) and hard (extremely hard) to cultivate me as an "enemy" in another thread. His M.O. was to avoid saying a single word of substance and instead make repeated attempts to mock, ridicule and demean me (while, of course, "demonstrating" his vast superiority) in another thread.

Because I ignored his juvenile crap for so long, he became more and more emboldened and abusive. He thought he had found a "feeb" who was incapable of retaliating, so he just poured it on, as all bullies do. I finally got fed up with his chickenshit ways.

But I don't use his lame tactics. I mainly just point out the substantive problems with his assertions, while noting the delusions of grandeur which are so manifest when he spews his crap.

1 Reply

@layman,

speaking of eschewing obscurantism--William Zinsser just died.

1 Reply

@fresco,

Okay so... you skimmed through half a dozen pages of Heidegger, you took a 2-pence online course... and yet you think you can speak authoritatively about the Nazi professor. Nice faking.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

speaking of eschewing obscurantism--William Zinsser just died.

Who dat is, Farmer?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Thank you for reminding me why I put you on ignore in the first place.

That Wittgenstein assessment was worthy of the inanity of layman's opinion of Einstein. You two have a great future together !

2 Replies

@fresco,

Quote:

"The fight against bewitchment by language".

Fighting against words, huh? Now that's a suitable fight for a young rich, and bored individual like Witt.

I remember a time when philosophers were fighting against political oppression, madness, religion and obscurantism. Fighting for freedom, welfare, love and knowledge. A time when philosophy was meant to help us live through our lives, not just help us fill our free time...

0 Replies

@fresco,

Puh-LEASE... Einstein was a real, hard thinker, not a privileged word-wanker like Wittgenstein.

1 Reply

@fresco,

Quote:

That Wittgenstein assessment was worthy of the inanity of layman's opinion of Einstein

As if Fresky would even know my "opinion of Einstein," eh? I have often expressed the utmost respect for Al (especially in his later years). He had a brilliant mind, great insight, virtually impeccable intellectual integrity, and could communicate his thoughts in a very down to earth way. Unfortunately, his devotion to Mach (and positivism) as a very young man (a devotion which he later abandoned and instead validly criticized Mach and positivism) led him to the assert the dubious postulates of "special relativity."

0 Replies

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

... but I remember a class in Phenomenology that was entirely a study of Being and Time.

Phenomenology - this is a wonderful starting point and my favuorite theme. Why don't you tell us what are the standard word/phrase associations with Phenomenology: military criminals; institute of psychotronics and mind control; absolute retards, greedy for money and power ... and how will you comment all that?

1 Reply

@layman,

http://www.brynmawr.edu/math/people/anmyers/ESem/on-writing-well.pdf

He was the author of a writing style book that was a real page turner . We had all kinds of BS style manuals for tech writing so that wed all sound pompous. Zinsser was a master writing teacher . I have a first ed autogrphed of his "writing Well"

He was like the Elmore LEonard of techy writing.
Theres no law that says your writing should only be understood by the priests"

2 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

He was the author of a writing style book that was a real page turner . We had all kinds of BS style manuals for tech writing so that wed all sound pompous.

Thanks for the info, Farmer. I'll try to remember this guy, who I wholeheartedly agree with when he says things (under the rubric "Science and Technology") like:

Quote:

Writing is thinking on paper. Anyone who thinks clearly can write clearly, about anything at all. Science, demystified, is just another nonfiction subject. Writing, demystified, is just another way for scientists to transmit what they know.

I was confused by your post at first (especially when taken in conjunction with your initial post), because I thought you were saying he promoted obscure expression when you said:

Quote:

We had all kinds of BS style manuals for tech writing so that wed all sound pompous.

I see now that you were simply making a contrast between the prevailing mode of scientific expression and his recommendations.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

I remember reading a paper on Obscurantism, hmm, I might still have it stashed.

Ah, I do, but it's not by Zinsser -
Principles and Methods of Obscurantism
Alexander Kohn, Ph.D
circa the seventies

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.3322/canjclin.20.6.360/asset/360_ftp.pdf;jsessionid=61D8F94EB96A04C3E4A263F37D98CC7D.f02t02?v=1&t=i9n6cg18&s=fc43d3d927faad08703e216f0f1ad88a958f3bd7

No, I don't want to read it again..

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

Zinsser was NOT an obscurantist. He was a fan of digging as deep as it took to be able to allow one to splain something as simply as one would when explaining it to our mothers.
As I said, he was the techy equivalent of ELmore LEonard's writing ("Get Shorty"-"Justified")

1 Reply

@layman,

Quote:

I see now that you were simply making a contrast between the prevailing mode of scientific expression and his recommendations

.
And he was so good at that. He was also the one reportedly responsible for the term "creative Nonfiction"

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

not a privileged word-wanker

A wanker of words, thats not good writing is it?

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Did I say he was?
I didn't take Kohn as one either, but that was about 40 years ago I read it.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

By 'word-wanker', i meant someone who writes or speaks for the sake of looking profound, rather than to say something of importance. The tractatus is full of maxims such as this one:

Quote:

if there is nothing to distinguish a thing, I cannot distinguish it, since otherwise it would be distinguished after all.

Oh so deeeep....

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Oh so deeeep....

Heh, Ollie. Maybe you just don't get the profundity of it all, eh? Ever think of that? Here, try this insight I just now thought up. I bet I get an honorary degree in philosophy from Harvard for it, ya know?

Red is Red, Mofo!

Scientifically speaking, I guess you could leave out the "mofo" part. But, of course, that's not the profound part, so no matter there.

0 Replies

Word wankers take note. . .
In every argument, there comes a time
when its never to late to obfuscate.

0 Replies

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

FBM wrote:
... but I remember a class in Phenomenology that was entirely a study of Being and Time.
Phenomenology - this is a wonderful starting point and my favuorite theme. Why don't you tell us what are the standard word/phrase associations with Phenomenology: military criminals; institute of psychotronics and mind control; absolute retards, greedy for money and power ... and how will you comment all that?

If it were comprehensible, I might. As it stands, all I see is a word salad with jibberish dressing.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know