Kevin's Video on Ownage.

[Carmel]

Diebert van Rhijn:
Joking around is always the easy part which easily bores so I'll look forward to some substance as I'm sure you're capable of it. As for "sides of the fence", to me there are no sides but those temporary created by proper argumentation or fencing.

Carmel:
I'm never bored when I'm laughing, Diebert, which is often. I actually feel sorry for people who take life too seriously. I used to be like that when I was younger. It's like being in a man made prison of sorts.

[Dan Rowden]

Frivolity is merely a response to boredom. Boredom is a response to not being able to find something that promotes the ego. Talk about your prisons.

[Carmel]

Dan Rowden:
Frivolity is merely a response to boredom.

Carmel:
I don't equate laughter with frivolity. It's an expression of contentedness, peace. It requires a certain amount of detachment and perspective to be able to laugh. It's also the ability to see the absurdity in most situations...and there's lots of it, take a look around! I mean why let it bother you?

Dan Rowden:
Boredom is a response to not being able to find something that promotes the ego.

Carmel:
I'm not quite sure what you mean? Myself, I'm almost never bored.

Dan Rowden:
Talk about your prisons.

Carmel:
No, It's freedom, sweet freedom.:)

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Oh, by the "interest toward the infinite" you meant the topic of such? Why don't you just say that instead of mincing words?

Well, I was quoting Quinn's article ad verbatim. But it clearly needs improvement, I mean "interest" is such a weak word, it almost escaped your unimpressive attention!

[Diebert van Rhijn]

I don't equate laughter with frivolity. It's an expression of contentedness, peace. It requires a certain amount of detachment and perspective to be able to laugh. It's also the ability to see the absurdity in most situations..

This was about you who is almost never bored being "bored senseless" with a certain topic ("women") and you chuckling at what we know now were mostly dejavu's reading errors. And perhaps some of your own since what I wrote is not unusual at all at this forum: having lots of good and extensive experiences with women while still understanding the genders in a deeper sense. There is no conflict at all as you might find out if you'd explore this further. The laughter, contentedness, detachment and perspective is mostly mine in this case, I'm afraid :-)

[Dan Rowden]

Dan Rowden:
Frivolity is merely a response to boredom.

Carmel:
I don't equate laughter with frivolity. It's an expression of contentedness, peace.

Er, not it isn't. Laughter is absolutely nothing like such things. Quite the opposite, in fact.

It requires a certain amount of detachment and perspective to be able to laugh.

Er, not it doesn't. Quite the opposite, in fact.

It's also the ability to see the absurdity in most situations...and there's lots of it, take a look around! I mean why let it bother you?

There's a huge difference between a sense of the ironic and/or absurd and garden variety laughter and humour.

Dan Rowden:
Boredom is a response to not being able to find something that promotes the ego.

Carmel:
I'm not quite sure what you mean? Myself, I'm almost never bored.

That was hilarious. Colour me frivolous! Can you not see why your response was so funny?

Dan Rowden:
Talk about your prisons.

Carmel:
No, It's freedom, sweet freedom.:)

Er, no, constant need for relief from boredom is a prison.

[Carmel]

Diebert van Rhijn:
This was about you who is almost never bored being "bored senseless" with a certain topic ("women") and you chuckling at what we know now were mostly dejavu's reading errors.

Carmel:
lol! yes, and I used the modifier "rarely" preceding the words "ever bored" to allow for exclusions, hence making my statement still accurate.

Actually, to be clear, I was chuckling at your last sentence that started with: some women and those who support them... but upon second reflection, I think it may mean something other than my original interpretation, but I think I'd rather let that one slide for now...

Diebert:
And perhaps some of your own since what I wrote is not unusual at all at this forum: having lots of good and extensive experiences with women while still understanding the genders in a deeper sense. There is no conflict at all as you might find out if you'd explore this further.

Carmel:
You're preaching to the choir. I've no doubt that you understand this, but not everyone here does. Some of the gender discussions I've seen thus far, never go beyond a rudimentary understanding. Only on rare occasions do they transcend to higher realms.
And even when the more transcendent insights do occur, they're often cut short or ignored.

Diebert:
The laughter, contentedness, detachment and perspective is mostly mine in this case, I'm afraid :-)

Carmel:
lol! good then! It's nice to see you laugh, whatever the supposed cause... ;)

---
p.s.
Dan,

lol! oh, there's plenty of irony and absurdity here to keep me laughing!

[Gurrb]

you are here on forums discussing; why? i would assume because of boredom. deny it. but if one was not bored, they would lying on their couch doing shit all. boredom, or avoidance of, is what motivates us to do-- to be. call it a prison, but then life is a prison... a meaningless prison. ah, the pursuit of pleasure.

There are two kinds of people in this world: those who are in denial, and those who are in denial that they are in denial.

[Dan Rowden]

Dan,

lol! oh, there's plenty of irony and absurdity here to keep me laughing!

I know; you're currently supplying about 80% of it.

[Carmel]

Dan:

I know; you're currently supplying about 80% of it.

Carmel:

Ad hominen, meh. I noticed you did that to the woman from youtube, too. Don't practice what you preach, eh?

[Dan Rowden]

Excuse me? What woman from Youtube? And it wasn't an ad hominem. Try and learn at least a modicum of logic, Carmel. And more importantly, don't play the gender card at me. I will not stand for that sort of stupidity.

[Carmel]

Dan Rowden:

I know; you're currently supplying about 80% of it.

Carmel:

Dan, this what I was calling an ad hominen. I could just as easily claim that someone's posts were 80% absurd. If I did so, it would be an ad hominen, too.

[Robert]

Dan Rowden:

I know; you're currently supplying about 80% of it.

Carmel:

Dan, this what I was calling an ad hominen. I could just as easily claim that someone's posts were 80% absurd. If I did so, it would be an ad hominen, too.

No it wouldn't, it would just be you claiming that the contents of their posts are 80% absurd. There's a difference between offering a critique of an argument and criticizing the individual who's making it.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

There was no error in my reading of what you wrote.

You wrote: by the "interest toward the infinite" you meant the topic of such?. If you don't understand the difference between actively having an interest or passively being part of something larger then I start feeling like the philosophical equivalent of a pedophile....

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Some of the gender discussions I've seen thus far, never go beyond a rudimentary understanding. Only on rare occasions do they transcend to higher realms. And even when the more transcendent insights do occur, they're often cut short or ignored.

Feel free to present your higher understandings to the unwashed. But I'm getting worried reading this discussion and the one with Nick that you might have no substantial experience discussing and examining something more than skin deep. That was not my first impression of you so I'd like to be proven wrong.

[Dan Rowden]

Dan Rowden:

I know; you're currently supplying about 80% of it.

Carmel:

Dan, this what I was calling an ad hominen. I could just as easily claim that someone's posts were 80% absurd. If I did so, it would be an ad hominen, too.

As Robert pointed out, your understanding of the fallacy of ad hom is false. Don't worry, the fallacy of ad hominem is one of the most falsely asserted logical fallacies around (though, yes, there are informal versions that are hard to detect). It's what people do when they want to look like they know something about logic.

As an example of the irony in your posts, just go back to my statement about boredom and ego and look at your reply. It was brimming, just brimming.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Diebert, you wrote: "since according to that article women are not capable of developing real interest toward the infinite, it's also natural that it's not of particular concern to them if they'd really be somehow "excluded" from it."
So you're saying that by "it" you mean an 'interest' in the infinite.

It referred indeed to a "real interest toward the infinite". Why does it make me a liar while you were turning it into something what was not written? And yes I do agree with it, I even flatly stated the womanly approach, if any, is "wearing" the interest as garment only. Not sure what your specific objection is apart from a possible critique on the complex sentence structure I used, which I admit could be simplified to remove any possible ambiguity. Then again, I do assume common sense.

[Kunga]

what kind of woman IS interested in the infinite ?
ALL MY LIFE I'VE BEEN SEARCHING/WONDERING/PHILOSOPHISING/DEEPLY COMMITTED/PASSIONATE FOR TRUTH/ART/POETRY/LEARNING....
My downfall is that i took it for granted. My highest asperation is towards yogis. To me that is the highest accomplishment.
Maybe the percentage of women interested in these things is small...but so is it with men !!!!!!

[Robert]

what kind of woman IS interested in the infinite ?
ALL MY LIFE I'VE BEEN SEARCHING/WONDERING/PHILOSOPHISING/DEEPLY COMMITTED/PASSIONATE FOR TRUTH/ART/POETRY/LEARNING....
My downfall is that i took it for granted. My highest asperation is towards yogis. To me that is the highest accomplishment.
Maybe the percentage of women interested in these things is small...but so is it with men !!!!!!

'I must attain perfection in this life, yea, in three days I must find God; nay, with a single utterance of His name I will draw Him to me.' With such a violent love the Lord is attracted soon. The lukewarm lovers take ages to go to Him, if at all. - Ramakrishna.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

what kind of woman IS interested in the infinite ?

What kind of man is not interested in the infinite. Lets call him woman. Hey, if you want to discuss the topic start a thread on it and for example list specific objections to Quinn's article with some arguments. Still waiting for Carmel.

[Kunga]

what kind of woman IS interested in the infinite ?

What kind of man is not interested in the infinite. Lets call him woman. Hey, if you want to discuss the topic start a thread on it and for example list specific objections to Quinn's article with some arguments. Still waiting for Carmel.

i just started reading Quinns paper on Women (Exposition) ...so far so good...if it deviates from the sages view of women there will be hell to pay and i will start a thread..lol

[Gurrb]

history is written by men,

[Carmel]

Diebert van Rhijn:

What kind of man is not interested in the infinite. Lets call him woman.

lol! The answer to that would be: most men. Most men are really ordinary and have a proclivity for really ordinary things, such as, video games and porn.
Some men like to collect things, shiny new cars, women, power, status or even knowledge or wisdom...the last two are admirable to a point. If a man is using his so called "wisdom" in a chronic effort to feel superior to others, then he really isn't wise, at all. If he wants to graciously share it in a way that benefits others, he may have some attained some level of enlightment. If he thinks he doesn't have more to learn...he's fucked. Move on back two squares.

Diebert:
Hey, if you want to discuss the topic start a thread on it and for example list specific objections to Quinn's article with some arguments. Still waiting for Carmel.

Carmel:
Relax, Diebert. It is The holiday season after all and I do have some worldly matters to attend to.

While we're on the subject of Quinn's article on "Woman", my opinion of it is probably not what you might think it to be. Maybe we could discuss it after the holidays are over. Also, it's been awhile since I read it. I'd like to read and contemplate it again, so as to give it a fair assessment.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

What kind of man is not interested in the infinite. Lets call him woman.

lol! The answer to that would be: most men. Most men are really ordinary and have a proclivity for really ordinary things, such as, video games and porn.

Quite so, the illusions of joystick power. It would shift the topic to: what is the most extra-ordinary to strive for and who would bother?

Relax, Diebert. It is The holiday season after all and I do have some worldly matters to attend to.

While we're on the subject of Quinn's article on "Woman", my opinion of it is probably not what you might think it to be. Maybe we could discuss it after the holidays are over. Also, it's been awhile since I read it. I'd like to read and contemplate it again, so as to give it a fair assessment.

Sure, I didn't literally mean waiting, it's a discussion forum, not a chat board. I've no idea what your current thoughts are on the topic but my interest for now is if you can debate it using proper argumentation. That in itself would be a rarity around here.

New thread.