Where this world is going to?

[w1k0]

I found a nice thread in an old Longue: Gadgets are no longer just for geeks... Alexander Turcic added a poll to his thread so I started my own because I would like add some poll as well.

Nowadays the situation seems even worse than nine years ago. Modern devices and modern software – they are designed to be “user friendly” for each dummy. As a result they become “user unfriendly” for geeks. In the case of e-readers it is possible to jailbreak the device and turn it into something useable. Unfortunately it is not possible to hack everything or it would be very time-consuming.

What do you think about that?

[w1k0]

● The world deteriorates and is headed for a collapse (according to Plato the world recedes from its idea which was its model).

● The world develops and pursues an excellence (according to Aristotle the world approaches its form which is its goal).

● The world develops and deteriorates at the same time (according to Heraclitus the opposites coexist in each entity and in the whole world).

● The world does not exist (according to Parmenides only timeless, uniform, necessary, and unchanging unity exists).

● “I know that I know nothing” (according to Socrates there is no an absolute certainty but only a partial confidence).

[Victoria]

I picked 'I know that I know nothing', because there is still a debate on whether this universe will continue to expand - or end in a Big Crunch. I think the edge is with expansion but both are pretty bleak, in terms maintaining life!

However, You Tube has a great 1969 rendition of Peggy Lee singing "Is that all there is?"

[Rizla]

On one hand, we will fade as a race. Look up at the stars. There are no radio stations. The 'competitive' instinct of intelligence is ultimately self-destructive.

Ont the other hand, this world is an illusion. All that is real in it are the living creatures and their attachment to addictions and repulsions.

Work on your soul and have a nice day

[doubleshuffle]

Camping.

[w1k0]

Originally Posted by doubleshuffle

Camping.

Ha! ha!

***

Some ancient philosophers mentioned in my post #2 were homosexuals or bisexuals indeed – maybe all of them. I never traced that and I never will. In my opinion it is not relevant at all.

***

The post quoted above – as I interpret that – was caused by my post from Colin Dunstan’s thread. I criticized there the “Unutterably Silly” threads from the modern Lounge. Meanwhile the author of the quoted post is unutterably active in those “Unutterably Silly” threads.

I am the great advocate of the utter freedom of speech. Everyone can think, say, and write everything. “Everything” means everything so it includes also rudeness, insults, hate-speech, etc. From my point of view there are two kinds of thoughts and speech: wise and foolish. I prefer wise people but fool people have the equal right to live here and express themselves. And I have the right to destroy with my words any fool when he or she comes to me with their foolishness.

***

I do not like to clog up my own threads with some unnecessary posts. I decided to post this here and now because 24 hours after the quoted post appeared it seems to me that its author discouraged the other people from posting here. The quoted post may be offensive for some of you.

People, do not be offended and do not be offensive. Be calm and polite. Do not be discouraged as well. Be encouraged.

We have enough tools to defend ourselves against any unutterable attack. I am that tool.

***

The author of the quoted post may now try to argue that he used that particular word in some neutral sense. I doubt that there is possible any reasonable argumentation which might convince me to that. I know that kind of the people very well. For them everything which is a bit sophisticated is simply “gayness” though they use some other wording in that context. God with them!

[doubleshuffle]

OK. Seems my silly ittle joke was a bit too cryptic. I came here from this thread about the demise of Harold Camping, who had mistakenly predicted specific days on which he thought the world would end. Just couldn't resist when I saw this thread right afterwards.

But having learned that you, dear w1k0, are not a friend of the unutterable silliness that I cherish, I will keep said silliness out of your threads in the future.

EDIT: And in case I wasn't clear enough: My post was not intended to contain any reference to homosexuality whatsoever, and I seriously don't get how it could be interpreted that way.

[w1k0]

I have no access to the thread you came from:

w1k0, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

1. Your user account may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
2. If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

I suppose I do not have the access to that thread because I am not a member of the “Hardened Debaters” group. I am hardened debater myself so I do not need the membership in such a group. I am able to hardening the debate without touching the political or religious topics.

***

Thank you once again for the promise to keeping silliness out of my threads in the future.

[pynch]

Would you care to elaborate why you think that “camping” could be condescending to gays? I have never come across the term in that context.

BTW, “the author of the quoted post” has a name which you can easily find above his avatar—so you might as well use it.

[xg4bx]

Both develop and deteriorate. We have cool ''stuff'' and material things but the foundation is rotting.

[w1k0]

This is not the right thread to discuss the art of war so I hope that this off-topic topic will disappear as soon as possible. So I am asking doubleshuffle, pynch, and the other debaters to stay on topic.

***

Originally Posted by pynch

Would you care to elaborate why you think that “camping” could be condescending to gays? I have never come across the term in that context.

Collins Dictionary:

2 camp (kæmp) (informal)

adjective

• effeminate; affected in mannerisms, dress, etc
• homosexual
• consciously artificial, exaggerated, vulgar, or mannered; self-parodying, esp when in dubious taste

verb

• (transitive) to perform or invest with a camp quality
• See camp it up

noun

• a camp quality, style, etc

The keywords: “exaggerated”, “effeminate”, and “homosexual” appear in different dictionaries in the context of the definition of “camp”. I assumed that “camping” is an action involving a homosexual activity or behavior.

doubleshuffle could post two words:

Harold Camping

but he decided to post just one:

Camping.

I assume that it was an intentional action. He guarded the rear with the help of Harold Camping and posted a vague comment.

Our “Posting Guidelines” say:

Do attempt to state your point of view in a way that avoids misunderstanding. Remember that we are an international community and not all members are posting in their first language.

doubleshuffle violated that rule.

***

Originally Posted by pynch

BTW, “the author of the quoted post” has a name which you can easily find above his avatar—so you might as well use it.

I am aware that the “the author of the quoted post” has a name – doubleshuffle.

I used circumlocution (also called “circumduction”, “circumvolution”, “periphrasis”, or “ambage”) intentionally. I had a few reasons. One of them follows our “Posting Guidelines”:

Name calling is not permitted, even in the form of a question, e.g. “X’s posts make me wonder how much he believes what he’s saying, or if he’s just a troll.”

So I did not name doubleshuffle in my entire post #6 except for the quotation. As I see you were able to infer my other motive. I am satisfied.

***

doubleshuffle, pynch, and me: we used our skills in martial art to harden this debate a bit. I hope that this post ends the off-topic discussion here.

[pynch]

None of this makes sense, so I am out of here.

[doubleshuffle]

Good God.

Posting "Harold Camping" wouldn't have made any sense. The joke was: "Where is the world going to? Camping." I still think it's funny, but I'll sure stay away from any of our freethinker's threads from now on.

And please, if anyone really finds anything offensive about that post, feel free to contact the moderators and have it deleted.

[Laridae]

Where this world is going to?

If we get the right answer do we win a prize?

[w1k0]

I am going to go to sleep so I can not wait until someone posts fifteenth post enabling me to post the summary of the first page at the top of the second one. So my summary is here.

***

Originally Posted by Laridae

Where this world is going to?

If we get the right answer do we win a prize?

The problem is the following: we have just one question but as many answers as the respondents. Moreover each respondent thinks that his or her answer is the right one. So everyone is right though everyone has some other rightness than everyone else. Assuming that everyone is right – everyone wins the prize. What is that prize? The prize is your satisfaction because you are right (in your opinion) and you had an opportunity to tell your point to the other people.

***

After the first page of the thread and 13 voters the podium is the following:

1. Heraclitus and Socrates (tie)
2. Parmenides, Plato, and Aristotle (tie)
3. empty

So there is a crowd on our podium. Maybe the second page and the next voters will clear that situation a bit.