Search results

Two of the lamest responses I've ever seen. What happens when the pawns try to make up their own talking points before 4 AM.

In a world such as I have described, sanity is measured by ones seriousness in persistent phenomenon. By calling exGOPer a serioso, I'm saying he is insane almost beyond repair. It's this seriousness which makes the land of imagination and faith into a living hell. Never take yourself, nor...

The idea that there is a sane Self, and the appearance of an insane self is the beginning of wisdom on the quest for knowledge. A mind, divided against itself at the core level of identity, is compromized, and while this condition persists, cannot remain sane (a house divided against itself...

I just don't consider anthropology or sociology to be valid starting, or ending points in the quest for knowledge, which is what "the love of wisdom" means to me. If you can think of a better word for understanding, and then achieving some mastery over the difference between knowledge and...

So I will continue to offer rhetorical ammunition to the side that opposes you, while you continue to function as a serioso. A serioso is a word I just coined to describe anyone who takes his supremacy seriously, right up to the line where you pull out your knife, your gun, or your exploding vest.

So you are a hypocrite who projects your problems on others, as if your shirt don't stink.

No relation to Jack Hershey as only an extremely bigoted supremacist would conflate our rhetoric. That you do believe in your own supremacy is quite obvious, and you challenge Trump as if he were knowledge itself, able to destroy you just by remaining itself.

Regardless your opinion about the various dilemmas that face creatures of faith, knowledge will destroy YOU, depending what you identify with. Currently, as you identify, you enjoy zero bigotal supremacy over Trump.

I would categorize Trump as a creature of faith, but you no less. On the field of faith, which is always a battlefield, I'll back the least bigoted, and go against the biggest bully (you and your comrades). Caring about your faith and caring about your self-interest are the same thing. When...

As a rule of thumb, people don't care about knowledge, only their faith. People being the product of faith, as opposed to the product of knowledge. The only people who care are those who are weary from carrying the weight of faith on their shoulders for millenia. You are not yet weary.

I could show you two, of whom I learned a lot. But I don't mention books or names.

No these are things I've been saying for a long time without deviating in consistency (all sub-statements in harmony, free of cognitive dissonance). I've said, all study of physical/material world phenomenon is a study of the effects of faith upon a compromised mind. A compromised mind is the...

Pretty sure Socrates tore apart those who relied on avoidance of argument via ad hominem attacks like this. You don't even have the vocabulary to cross-examine anything I've said, English being second language to you.

Subsets are like trees. A philosopher stands back and sees the forest, through eyes of knowledge, a forest that grows from the soil of faith, which is the essence of the domain of imagination (the total opposite of knowledge's domain of reality). As a narrow minded bigot, you are always liked a...

Philosophy is the study of knowledge itself, as you say. Knowledge encompasses anything that can be named as a subset. So it is THE superset.

The origins of man are first psychological, then "physical". Anthropology and sociology are subsets of philosophy. You are a bigoted bully, the lowest denomination on the social scale.

No you are confusing everything with your own bigotry. Prejudice-U is not a proper school, and if I were in charge of vetting, I'd reject you as a candidate for US American culture. The origins of man are first psychological, then "physical".

It appears you don't know what philosophy is, and how sociology is a subset of the study of the origins of mankind.

My advancement in philosophy qualifies me for some sociologic commentary. There is no doubt there are a variety of expressions of supremacism. As a philosopher I could also tell you why. I have identified three areas of supremacism that you fit into as a profiled subject. It's hard to tell...

Meaning you are a supremacist in at least three categories: ideological political, bigotal religio, and race based. I guess your race is Pakistani brown, mixed with Islamic bigotal religio, backed by pernicious British ideology, which is mainly about a dual standard of law in application.