*
Or did he leave of his own sense of disgust . . .
Curious to know if you found a humanist more "dangerous" to your board than someone fuckety-fucking enlightenment altogether . . . .
.
Did you ban propellerbeanie?
- Kevin Solway
- Posts: 2766
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 8:43 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
- David Quinn
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
.
You could have taught instead of fought.
Once you got that little "Oprah-speak" jingle in your ears, you might not have been able to hear anything else. I know how those things can go.
I disagree entirely with the theme cropping up here of the hopeless herd and the waste-of-time, but then, this is something I am forced (employed) to deal with anyway. I have seen whole lives pivot suddenly over a single thought -- thinking (rather non-thinking) lives -- thick and obtuse -- suddenly penetrated by some perfect combination of timing, placement, and words, and then whole cavities of space opened up to consciousness. Indeed it is an exceptional experience -- in mine, by qualitative terms, perhaps 1 in 100. However, if I did not witness that 1 in 100 -- if I did not believe it can happen -- I'd be quitting the vocation in a newyorkminute. I look always for the exceptional, which includes engendering the possible circumstances for its appearance.
Which brings me to ask another QRS-type question: The purpose of this site. I'm familiar with your Welcome & Introduction, but I am not understanding its implementation in individual cases. This is a non-confrontational question. Perhaps a fresh declaration might be useful (at least for me).
Is it boddhisattva in nature; or is it to collect about and reaffirm what one already knows, chat about it amongst you, you long-time friends and knowers-amongst? How do you judge toute suite that a person you have been talking to has absolutely no chance to drop any veils? [the one good thing about Plato: remembering what it is like in the dark; speaking to the light from there.] Or are you not interested in helping them? Is it entirely a matter of your tastes? - you know, what amuses you; what does not; what you find of value. This last would best explain the (apparent mis-)impression I seem to have had of this site, admittedly accrued through big gaps in attendance & attention. I'd appreciate the help in clearing my misunderstanding.
On the one hand, I see you in arch demand of (potential?) substance, each sentence on an enlightenment course; on the other, rivers of intellectual small talk and social pabulum stream by. On the one hand, serene patience; on the other, sudden impatience, writing-off. I'm trying to get a gauge on your proported "seriousness," or simply an acceptance of these things as directed by your individual tastes. It's a thoughtful enough site; I don't mind. But I've suspended recommendations of it to serious students/to anyone-seeking until I think I can characterize it more accurately. If you think it just your basic philosophy forum (and all that comes with that), that's fine. I think that now, too, as opposed to a prior estimation of some degree of exceptionality (howevermuch I may see some degree of exceptionality in a number of your posters).
propellerbeanie, in my estimation, had (has) something urgent in him thinking -- however misguided you may have found it, its presence was of far more substance - in my estimation - than the pabulum I've been reading through of late. I don't mind the pabulum being here; it doesn't bother me. It is a number of your judgments I don't understand, and for seemingly exclusive reasons. We, apparently, have a very different idea of what constitutes "spamming," too. I want to add as well that those 1 in 100 people prior to their sudden opening to thought, to thinking, were always, at that moment, the most rigidly distant from it.
How serious are you? And are you here to teach? or preach to the choir? I guess those are the main questions. Anyway, I sure wouldn't want your position, having to decide what is of value and what is not on an internet forum. It has to be tough, all that value-sorting and reactivity in a public venue.
.
You could have taught instead of fought.
Once you got that little "Oprah-speak" jingle in your ears, you might not have been able to hear anything else. I know how those things can go.
I disagree entirely with the theme cropping up here of the hopeless herd and the waste-of-time, but then, this is something I am forced (employed) to deal with anyway. I have seen whole lives pivot suddenly over a single thought -- thinking (rather non-thinking) lives -- thick and obtuse -- suddenly penetrated by some perfect combination of timing, placement, and words, and then whole cavities of space opened up to consciousness. Indeed it is an exceptional experience -- in mine, by qualitative terms, perhaps 1 in 100. However, if I did not witness that 1 in 100 -- if I did not believe it can happen -- I'd be quitting the vocation in a newyorkminute. I look always for the exceptional, which includes engendering the possible circumstances for its appearance.
Which brings me to ask another QRS-type question: The purpose of this site. I'm familiar with your Welcome & Introduction, but I am not understanding its implementation in individual cases. This is a non-confrontational question. Perhaps a fresh declaration might be useful (at least for me).
Is it boddhisattva in nature; or is it to collect about and reaffirm what one already knows, chat about it amongst you, you long-time friends and knowers-amongst? How do you judge toute suite that a person you have been talking to has absolutely no chance to drop any veils? [the one good thing about Plato: remembering what it is like in the dark; speaking to the light from there.] Or are you not interested in helping them? Is it entirely a matter of your tastes? - you know, what amuses you; what does not; what you find of value. This last would best explain the (apparent mis-)impression I seem to have had of this site, admittedly accrued through big gaps in attendance & attention. I'd appreciate the help in clearing my misunderstanding.
On the one hand, I see you in arch demand of (potential?) substance, each sentence on an enlightenment course; on the other, rivers of intellectual small talk and social pabulum stream by. On the one hand, serene patience; on the other, sudden impatience, writing-off. I'm trying to get a gauge on your proported "seriousness," or simply an acceptance of these things as directed by your individual tastes. It's a thoughtful enough site; I don't mind. But I've suspended recommendations of it to serious students/to anyone-seeking until I think I can characterize it more accurately. If you think it just your basic philosophy forum (and all that comes with that), that's fine. I think that now, too, as opposed to a prior estimation of some degree of exceptionality (howevermuch I may see some degree of exceptionality in a number of your posters).
propellerbeanie, in my estimation, had (has) something urgent in him thinking -- however misguided you may have found it, its presence was of far more substance - in my estimation - than the pabulum I've been reading through of late. I don't mind the pabulum being here; it doesn't bother me. It is a number of your judgments I don't understand, and for seemingly exclusive reasons. We, apparently, have a very different idea of what constitutes "spamming," too. I want to add as well that those 1 in 100 people prior to their sudden opening to thought, to thinking, were always, at that moment, the most rigidly distant from it.
How serious are you? And are you here to teach? or preach to the choir? I guess those are the main questions. Anyway, I sure wouldn't want your position, having to decide what is of value and what is not on an internet forum. It has to be tough, all that value-sorting and reactivity in a public venue.
.
- David Quinn
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Pye,
If "propellerbeanie" goes away and reflects on exactly why he was banned from a thinker's forum, it may do him some good.
I understand your point. In any decision, it's always a matter of weighing up the pros and cons. If propellerbeanie had stayed, he may well have experienced that pivotal thought and had his life changed thereby. The possibility is certainly there, but very unlikely, in my opinion.
Let's face it, he was a middle-aged man firmly immeshed in a relationship with his wife and children, which he extolled to the heavens, and harboured a lot of psychological resistence towards any kind of questioning of this state of affairs. Is it worth having the forum inundated with all of his lovey-dovey stuff for the sake of the slim possibility of him having a life-changing thought? Is it worth banging one's head against the walls of fundamentalist Christians in the faint hope that something may come of it?
It primarily exists to spark insight and a love of wisdom in the occasional, rare, exceptional young person. It's not really designed for hammering away at calcified middle-aged fuddy duddies.
I have the belief that it is better in the long run to focus on helping one or two young people to stand up and become torch-bearing flourishing boddhisattvas in their own right, than, say, trying to help thousands of lesser individuals make a faltering step or two in the right direction. A small concentration of real quality is better than an ocean of barely nothing.
I'm sure they could make up their own minds, if you let them.
If you want to describe it to them, tell them that Genius Forum is essentially Zennish in nature - unconventional, pure, full of paradox and insight, stimulating and helpful to all who are "serious" about becoming wise. If that doesn't excite them, nothing will.
But middle-aged people are different. When they dive into a rigid system of thought, it tends to be done out of weakness, desperation and fear, and once in, they are unlikely to be persuaded to leave again.
Ach, it's nothing. It's just a bit of tinkering every now and then, to help point the chaos in the right direction. I hardly give it a thought.
-
I consider what I did to be a form of teaching. Sometimes, teaching by way of words doesn't do the trick. If a child sticks fingers in his ears and constantly chants "La, la, la, la" whenever you try to talk with him, what do you do? You can't just keep throwing words at him. You have to send him to his room and tell him to get his act together!You could have taught instead of fought.
If "propellerbeanie" goes away and reflects on exactly why he was banned from a thinker's forum, it may do him some good.
I disagree entirely with the theme cropping up here of the hopeless herd and the waste-of-time, but then, this is something I am forced (employed) to deal with anyway. I have seen whole lives pivot suddenly over a single thought -- thinking (rather non-thinking) lives -- thick and obtuse -- suddenly penetrated by some perfect combination of timing, placement, and words, and then whole cavities of space opened up to consciousness.
I understand your point. In any decision, it's always a matter of weighing up the pros and cons. If propellerbeanie had stayed, he may well have experienced that pivotal thought and had his life changed thereby. The possibility is certainly there, but very unlikely, in my opinion.
Let's face it, he was a middle-aged man firmly immeshed in a relationship with his wife and children, which he extolled to the heavens, and harboured a lot of psychological resistence towards any kind of questioning of this state of affairs. Is it worth having the forum inundated with all of his lovey-dovey stuff for the sake of the slim possibility of him having a life-changing thought? Is it worth banging one's head against the walls of fundamentalist Christians in the faint hope that something may come of it?
Which brings me to ask another QRS-type question: The purpose of this site. I'm familiar with your Welcome & Introduction, but I am not understanding its implementation in individual cases. This is a non-confrontational question. Perhaps a fresh declaration might be useful (at least for me).
Is it boddhisattva in nature; or is it to collect about and reaffirm what one already knows, chat about it amongst you, you long-time friends and knowers-amongst?
It primarily exists to spark insight and a love of wisdom in the occasional, rare, exceptional young person. It's not really designed for hammering away at calcified middle-aged fuddy duddies.
I have the belief that it is better in the long run to focus on helping one or two young people to stand up and become torch-bearing flourishing boddhisattvas in their own right, than, say, trying to help thousands of lesser individuals make a faltering step or two in the right direction. A small concentration of real quality is better than an ocean of barely nothing.
On the one hand, I see you in arch demand of (potential?) substance, each sentence on an enlightenment course; on the other, rivers of intellectual small talk and social pabulum stream by. On the one hand, serene patience; on the other, sudden impatience, writing-off. I'm trying to get a gauge on your proported "seriousness," or simply an acceptance of these things as directed by your individual tastes. It's a thoughtful enough site; I don't mind. But I've suspended recommendations of it to serious students/to anyone-seeking until I think I can characterize it more accurately.
I'm sure they could make up their own minds, if you let them.
If you want to describe it to them, tell them that Genius Forum is essentially Zennish in nature - unconventional, pure, full of paradox and insight, stimulating and helpful to all who are "serious" about becoming wise. If that doesn't excite them, nothing will.
Well, if there is another philosophy forum which is even remotely like this one, I want to see it.If you think it just your basic philosophy forum (and all that comes with that), that's fine. I think that now, too, as opposed to a prior estimation of some degree of exceptionality (howevermuch I may see some degree of exceptionality in a number of your posters).
True, but his urgency was one of fundamentalism, akin to the urgency displayed by born-again Christians. He was basically a born-again worshipper of family/love, and thus he had the passion of one who had previously lived a life of sin and now has "seen the light". He has found redemption in his wife and children, and the whole point of his being here on the forum, it seemed to me, was to give voice to this.propellerbeanie, in my estimation, had (has) something urgent in him thinking -- however misguided you may have found it, its presence was of far more substance - in my estimation - than the pabulum I've been reading through of late.
In my experience, that's really only true for young people, who are still growing and developing, whose minds are still unformed and explorative. A young person can dive fully into a rigid, deluded system of thought - for example, Christian fundamentalism - and pour everything he has into it and still be able to escape unscathed when he realizes, further down the track, that it is deluded. That's not a problem for him because he is still young, vibrant, and fearless. He doesn't really depend on external attachments to prop his psychology up. Thus, he still has the potential to hear the truth, to be changed by it, and become enlightened.I don't mind the pabulum being here; it doesn't bother me. It is a number of your judgments I don't understand, and for seemingly exclusive reasons. We, apparently, have a very different idea of what constitutes "spamming," too. I want to add as well that those 1 in 100 people prior to their sudden opening to thought, to thinking, were always, at that moment, the most rigidly distant from it.
But middle-aged people are different. When they dive into a rigid system of thought, it tends to be done out of weakness, desperation and fear, and once in, they are unlikely to be persuaded to leave again.
Anyway, I sure wouldn't want your position, having to decide what is of value and what is not on an internet forum. It has to be tough, all that value-sorting and reactivity in a public venue.
Ach, it's nothing. It's just a bit of tinkering every now and then, to help point the chaos in the right direction. I hardly give it a thought.
-
.
Ta for the generous explanation. You are right - students can judge for themselves, but when they ask, specifically . . . I would like to be fair to both them and the Forum's intent.
I understand your thinking on "middle-age" people, but here we will just have to agree to disagree. Once again, I have only my own experiences to make this assessment, and those would be teaching in the adults-returning program on my weekend gig at the other uni. I have witnessed myself enough resulting divorces and career dumpings and revaluations of life and living, I'd be amiss in my position to ignore them. In the current class, there is a 50 year old man - the sound of whose lifelong Catholicism recently falling still reverberating through his every word and movement since. It's a start. I personally think it is never too late, prosaic as that sounds. Nevertheless, I can understand your position on your Forum here. It's what I asked for and I appreciate the delivery.
.
Ta for the generous explanation. You are right - students can judge for themselves, but when they ask, specifically . . . I would like to be fair to both them and the Forum's intent.
I understand your thinking on "middle-age" people, but here we will just have to agree to disagree. Once again, I have only my own experiences to make this assessment, and those would be teaching in the adults-returning program on my weekend gig at the other uni. I have witnessed myself enough resulting divorces and career dumpings and revaluations of life and living, I'd be amiss in my position to ignore them. In the current class, there is a 50 year old man - the sound of whose lifelong Catholicism recently falling still reverberating through his every word and movement since. It's a start. I personally think it is never too late, prosaic as that sounds. Nevertheless, I can understand your position on your Forum here. It's what I asked for and I appreciate the delivery.
.
