- orangesampson
- Nov 22, 2012
-
by Ion Helmet
|
Garden snails own though, they are lazy loving crawling things with a saeshell on it's back, I can't be mad at them.
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 01:58
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2024 17:06
|
|
- Cardiovorax
- Jun 5, 2011
-
I mean, if you're a successful actress and you go out of the house in a skirt and without underwear, knowing that paparazzi are just waiting for opportunities like this and that it has happened many times before, then there's really nobody you can blame for it but yourself.
|
They love beer. There can't possibly be anything wrong with an animal that loves beer.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 01:59
|
|
- nomadologique
- Mar 9, 2011
-
DUNK A DILL PICKLE REALDO
|
don't they eat your poo poo and then you get really comically mad and throw down your trowel in a grand but frustrated gesture like zeus before the unpredictable whims of his playthings?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 02:00
|
|
- orangesampson
- Nov 22, 2012
-
by Ion Helmet
|
don't they eat your poo poo and then you get really comically mad and throw down your trowel in a grand but frustrated gesture like zeus before the unpredictable whims of his playthings?
till the lady bugs show up and eat um, yes this is accurate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 02:02
|
|
- nomadologique
- Mar 9, 2011
-
DUNK A DILL PICKLE REALDO
|
gently caress those snails and their uppity sense of self importance, like they're the only game in town!!
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 02:04
|
|
- Minimum Syntaxing
- Oct 29, 2008
-
He looks white, but he's the son of a black man!
|
I was in a philosophy class once,
All I remember from it was the sort of apathetic way the professor would say "hmm" and "good point" in regards to the occasional debate between the only 3 passionate students in the class.
Idunno if it's just me being modest, but I don't get why people argue over such subjective stuff like philosophy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 02:23
|
|
- les fleurs du mall
- Jun 30, 2014
-
by LadyAmbien
|
I was in a philosophy class once,
All I remember from it was the sort of apathetic way the professor would say "hmm" and "good point" in regards to the occasional debate between the only 3 passionate students in the class.
Idunno if it's just me being modest, but I don't get why people argue over such subjective stuff like philosophy.
sounds like my entire degree yeah
also had one lecturer who would always respond to real lovely questions and comments by saying "mmmmmm that's an interesting question" in this fake-sincere way because he was way too polite to be like "ehh"
People argue over all philosophy because it helps develop the ideas. It's like a jam session.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 03:06
|
|
- nomadologique
- Mar 9, 2011
-
DUNK A DILL PICKLE REALDO
|
People argue over all philosophy because it helps develop the ideas. It's like a jam session.
o god no don't induct me into your loving drum circle w/o my consent
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 03:14
|
|
- les fleurs du mall
- Jun 30, 2014
-
by LadyAmbien
|
o god no don't induct me into your loving drum circle w/o my consent
instead of dreadlocks we have opinions about white ravens
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 03:32
|
|
- Suicide Sam E.
- Jun 30, 2013
-
by XyloJW
|
This topic is personally important to me and i hate seeing it treated so trivially with buffoonish posts i guess. You can't troll me dude, i'll keep responding till its not fun for you anymore if you don't mean what you say.
Someone is only ever trolled because they allow themselves to be trolled.
As for looking like an idiot, some people work at it with diligence and to others it comes naturally.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 08:50
|
|
- the worst thing is
- Oct 3, 2013
-
by FactsAreUseless
|
Someone is only ever trolled because they allow themselves to be trolled.
As for looking like an idiot, some people work at it with diligence and to others it comes naturally.
Thanks for this, useful stuff man
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 13:27
|
|
- nomadologique
- Mar 9, 2011
-
DUNK A DILL PICKLE REALDO
|
this is one of the most memorable moments of herzog or really any film i've seen... that penguin... his magnetic poo poo probably got broken.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 16:17
|
|
- the worst thing is
- Oct 3, 2013
-
by FactsAreUseless
|
Here's a good link about Wittgenstein related to the gay bullshit discussion from earlier. Figured I might actually add some kinda content to this thread
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/03/was-wittgenstein-right/
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:02
|
|
- nomadologique
- Mar 9, 2011
-
DUNK A DILL PICKLE REALDO
|
i like that wittgenstein would run records at the "wrong" speed and then decide which speed was best and tell everybody "no you're listening to it wrong"
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:03
|
|
- Suicide Sam E.
- Jun 30, 2013
-
by XyloJW
|
i like that wittgenstein would run records at the "wrong" speed and then decide which speed was best and tell everybody "no you're listening to it wrong"
How would you know if you never tried?
Almost all of the beat in earlier Nine Inch Nails tracks is just slowed down polka. But if you never listened to them at higher speed you wouldn't gain this insight to industrial music of the late 90s.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:05
|
|
- nomadologique
- Mar 9, 2011
-
DUNK A DILL PICKLE REALDO
|
i said i like it that he did that
i didn't say it was wrong to do that
i said i like it
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:06
|
|
- Suicide Sam E.
- Jun 30, 2013
-
by XyloJW
|
i said i like it that he did that
i didn't say it was wrong to do that
i said i like it
All I am suggesting is you should do it yourself and then report back if you find anything out.
Bonus points if afterwards you can tell everyone they have been doing it wrong.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:10
|
|
- TheEldar
- Oct 24, 2010
-
|
The world is a beautiful place, so many magical things happen every day. Cherish every moment, since you only get one shot at life. Sitting there thinking about how pointless everything is is a big waste of life.
/seriouspost
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:26
|
|
- nomadologique
- Mar 9, 2011
-
DUNK A DILL PICKLE REALDO
|
quote:66. Consider for example the proceedings that we call "games". I mean board-games, card-games, ball-games, Olympic games, and so on. What is common to them all?—Don't say: "There must be something common, or they would not be called 'games' "—but look and see whether there is anything common to all.—For if you look at them you will not see something that is common to all, but similarities, relationships, and a whole series of them at that. To repeat: don't think, but look!—Look for example at board-games, with their multifarious relationships. Now pass to card-games; here you find many correspondences with the first group, but many common features drop out, and others appear. When we pass next to ballgames, much that is common is retained, but much is lost.—Are they all 'amusing'? Compare chess with noughts and crosses. Or is there always winning and losing, or competition between players? Think of patience. In ball games there is winning and losing; but when a child throws his ball at the wall and catches it again, this feature has disappeared. Look at the parts played by skill and luck; and at the difference between skill in chess and skill in tennis. Think now of games like ring-a-ring-a-roses; here is the element of amusement, but how many other characteristic features have disappeared! And we can go through the many, many other groups of games in the same way; can see how similarities crop up and disappear.
And the result of this examination is: we see a complicated network of similarities overlapping and criss-crossing: sometimes overall similarities, sometimes similarities of detail.
67. I can think of no better expression to characterize these similarities than "family resemblances"; for the various resemblances between members of a family: build, features, colour of eyes, gait, temperament, etc. etc. overlap and criss-cross in the same way.— And I shall say: 'games' form a family.
And for instance the kinds of number form a family in the same way. Why do we call something a "number"? Well, perhaps because it has a—direct—relationship with several things that have hitherto been called number; and this can be said to give it an indirect relationship to other things we call the same name. And we extend our concept of number as in spinning a thread we twist fibre on fibre. And the strength of the thread does not reside in the fact that some one fibre runs through its whole length, but in the overlapping of many fibres.
But if someone wished to say: "There is something common to all these constructions—namely the disjunction of all their common properties"—I should reply: Now you are only playing with words. One might as well say: "Something runs through the whole thread—namely the continuous overlapping of those fibres".
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:28
|
|
- nomadologique
- Mar 9, 2011
-
DUNK A DILL PICKLE REALDO
|
quote:217. "How am I able to obey a rule?"—if this is not a question about causes, then it is about the justification for my following the rule in the way I do.
If I have exhausted the justifications I have reached bedrock, and my spade is turned. Then I am inclined to say: "This is simply what I do."
(Remember that we sometimes demand definitions for the sake not of their content, but of their form. Our requirement is an architectural one; the definition a kind of ornamental coping that supports nothing.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:29
|
|
- nomadologique
- Mar 9, 2011
-
DUNK A DILL PICKLE REALDO
|
quote:107. The more narrowly we examine actual language, the sharper becomes the conflict between it and our requirement. (For the crystalline purity of logic was, of course, not a result of investigation: it was a requirement.) The conflict becomes intolerable; the requirement is now in danger of becoming empty.—We have got on to slippery ice where there is no friction and so in a certain sense the conditions are ideal, but also, just because of that, we are unable to walk. We want to walk: so we need friction. Back to the rough ground!
oh man that bit about "logic was not a result but a requirement"
lol owned
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:33
|
|
- the worst thing is
- Oct 3, 2013
-
by FactsAreUseless
|
culture and value is my favorite
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:38
|
|
- nomadologique
- Mar 9, 2011
-
DUNK A DILL PICKLE REALDO
|
PI is the only thing i've read but is basically a home run
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:40
|
|
- nomadologique
- Mar 9, 2011
-
DUNK A DILL PICKLE REALDO
|
o i meant to post these ones but forgot BU TNOW i remembered!~
quote:71. One might say that the concept 'game' is a concept with blurred edges.—"But is a blurred concept a concept at all?"—Is an indistinct photograph a picture of a person at all? Is it even always an advantage to replace an indistinct picture by a sharp one? Isn't the indistinct one often exactly what we need?
Frege compares a concept to an area and says that an area with vague boundaries cannot be called an area at all. This presumably means that we cannot do anything with it.—But is it senseless to say: "Stand roughly there"? Suppose that I were standing with someone in a city square and said that. As I say it I do not draw any kind of boundary, but perhaps point with my hand—as if I were indicating a particular spot. And this is just how one might explain to someone what a game is. One gives examples and intends them to be taken in a particular way.—I do not, however, mean by this that he is supposed to see in those examples that common thing which I—for some reason—was unable to express; but that he is now to employ those examples in a particular way. Here giving examples is not an indirect means of explaining—in default of a better. For any general definition can be misunderstood too. The point is that this is how we play the game. (I mean the language-game with the word "game".)
quote:88. If I tell someone "Stand roughly here"—may not this explanation work perfectly? And cannot every other one fail too? But isn't it an inexact explanation?—Yes; why shouldn't we call it "inexact"? Only let us understand what "inexact" means. For it does not mean "unusable". And let us consider what we call an "exact" explanation in contrast with this one. Perhaps something like drawing a chalk line round an area? Here it strikes us at once that the line has breadth. So a colour-edge would be more exact. But has this exactness still got a function here: isn't the engine idling? And remember too that we have not yet defined what is to count as overstepping this exact boundary; how, with what instruments, it is to be established. And so on.
We understand what it means to set a pocket watch to the exact time or to regulate it to be exact. But what if it were asked: is this exactness ideal exactness, or how nearly does it approach the ideal?—Of course, we can speak of measurements of time in which there is a different, and as we should say a greater, exactness than in the measurement of time by a pocket-watch; in which the words "to set the clock to the exact time" have a different, though related meaning, and 'to tell the time' is a different process and so on.—Now, if I tell someone: "You should come to dinner more punctually; you know it begins at one o'clock exactly"—is there really no question of exactness here? because it is possible to say: "Think of the determination of time in the laboratory or the observatory; there you see what 'exactness' means"?
"Inexact" is really a reproach, and "exact" is praise. And that is to say that what is inexact attains its goal less perfectly than what is more exact. Thus the point here is what we call "the goal". Am I inexact when I do not give our distance from the sun to the nearest foot, or tell a joiner the width of a table to the nearest thousandth of an inch? No single ideal of exactness has been laid down; we do not know what we should be supposed to imagine under this head—unless you yourself lay down what is to be so called. But you will find it difficult to hit upon such a convention; at least any that satisfies you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:57
|
|
- nomadologique
- Mar 9, 2011
-
DUNK A DILL PICKLE REALDO
|
quote:If I tell someone "Stand roughly here"—may not this explanation work perfectly? quote:If I tell someone "Stand roughly here"—may not this explanation work perfectly? quote:If I tell someone "Stand roughly here"—may not this explanation work perfectly? quote:If I tell someone "Stand roughly here"—may not this explanation work perfectly? quote:If I tell someone "Stand roughly here"—may not this explanation work perfectly?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:58
|
|
- the worst thing is
- Oct 3, 2013
-
by FactsAreUseless
|
quote:
464. My aim is: to teach you to pass from a piece of disguised nonsense to something that is patent nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 19:19
|
|
- the worst thing is
- Oct 3, 2013
-
by FactsAreUseless
|
My snippets from culture and value some of which I used for a paper:
quote:
Sketch for a Foreword†4
This book is written for those†e who are in sympathy with the spirit in which it is written.†f This spirit is, I believe, different from that of the†g prevailing European and American civilization. The spirit of this civilization the expression of which is the industry, architecture, music, of present day†h fascism & socialism, is a spirit that is alien & uncongenial†i to the author. This is not a value judgement. It is not as though I did not know that†j what today represents itself as architecture is not architecture & not†k as though he did not approach what is called modern music with the greatest mistrust (without understanding its language), but the disappearance of the arts does not justify a disparaging judgement on a whole segment of humanity. For in these times genuine & strong characters simply turn away from the field of the arts & towards other things & somehow the value of the individual finds expression. Not, to be sure, in the way it would at a time of Great Culture. Culture is like a great organization which assigns to each of its members his place, at which he can work in the spirit of the whole, and his strength can with a certain justice be measured by his success as understood within that whole. In a time without culture, however, forces are fragmented and the strength of the individual is wasted through the overcoming of opposing forces & frictional resistances; it is not manifest in the distance travelled but rather perhaps in the heat generated through the overcoming of frictional resistances. But energy is still energy & even if the spectacle afforded by this age is not the coming into being of a great work of culture in which the best contribute to the same great end, so much as the unimposing spectacle of a crowd whose best members pursue purely private ends, still we must not forget that the spectacle is not what matters. Even if it is clear to me then that the disappearance of a culture does not signify the disappearance of human value but simply of certain means of expressing this value, still the fact remains that I contemplate the current of European civilization without sympathy, without understanding its aims if any. So I am really writing for friends who are scattered throughout the corners of the globe.
Page 9
It is all one to me whether the typical western scientist understands or appreciates my work since in any case he does not understand the spirit in which I write.
Page 9
Our civilization is characterized by the word progress. Progress is its form, it is not one of its properties that it makes progress. Typically it constructs. Its activity is to construct a more and more complicated structure. And even clarity is only a means to this end & not an end in itself. For me on the contrary clarity, transparency, is an end in itself. I am not interested in erecting a building but in having the foundations of possible buildings transparently before me. So I am aiming at something different than are the scientists & my thoughts move differently than do theirs.
Page 9
Each sentence that I write is trying to say the whole thing, that is, the same thing over and over
again & it is as though they were†a views of one object seen from different angles.
I might say: if the place I want to reach could only be climbed up to by a ladder, I would give up trying to get there. For the place to which I really have to go is one that I must actually be at already. Anything that can be reached with a ladder does not interest me.
Page 11
If I do not quite know how to begin a book that is because something is still unclear. For I should like to begin with the original data of philosophy, written & spoken sentences, with books as it were. And here we encounter the difficulty of "Everything is in flux". And perhaps that is the very point at which to begin.
In this world (mine) there is no tragedy & with that all the endlessness that gives rise to tragedy (as its result†c) is lacking. It is as though everything were soluble in the ether;†d there are no harnesses. This means that hardness & conflict do not become something splendid†e but a defect.
Page 12
Conflict is dissipated in much the same way as is the tension of a spring in a mechanism that you melt (or dissolve in nitric acid). In this†f solution tensions no longer exist.
Page 41
One cannot speak the truth;--if one has not yet conquered oneself. One cannot speak it--but not, because one is still not clever enough.
Page 41
The truth can be spoken only by someone who is already at home in it; not by someone who still lives in untruthfulness, & does no more than reach out towards it from within untruthfulness.
Page 50
Thoughts at peace. That is the goal someone who philosophizes longs for.
Page 64
Don't for heaven's sake, be afraid of talking nonsense! Only don't fail to pay attention to your nonsense.
Page 73
Someone who knows too much finds it hard not to lie.
Page 76
Human beings can regard all the evil within them as blindness.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 19:20
|
|
- the worst thing is
- Oct 3, 2013
-
by FactsAreUseless
|
And from the Blue and Brown books:
quote:
Philosophy, as we use the word, is a fight against the fascination which forms of expression exert upon us.
Page 142
To get this clearer, think of this example: Someone says "Napoleon was crowned in 1804". I ask him "Did you mean the man who won the battle of Austerlitz?" He says "Yes, I meant him".--Does this mean that when he 'meant him', he in some way thought of Napoleon's winning the battle of Austerlitz?
What I give is the morphology of the use of an expression. I show that it has kinds of uses of which you had not dreamed. In philosophy one feels forced to look at a concept in a certain way. What I do is suggest, or even invent, other ways of looking at it. I suggest possibilities of which you had not previously thought. You thought that there was one possibility, or only two at most. But I made you think of others. Furthermore, I made you see that it was absurd to expect the concept to conform to those narrow possibilities. Thus your mental cramp is relieved, and you are free to look around the field of use of the expression and to describe the different kinds of uses of it.
Lectures of 1946 - 1947, as quoted in Ludwig Wittgenstein : A Memoir (1966) by Norman Malcolm, p. 43
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 19:21
|
|
- the worst thing is
- Oct 3, 2013
-
by FactsAreUseless
|
and yes when he's talking about games and the different types it's really good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 19:23
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2024 17:06
|
|
- nomadologique
- Mar 9, 2011
-
DUNK A DILL PICKLE REALDO
|
quote:THE thoughts which I publish in what follows are the precipitate of philosophical investigations which have occupied me for the last sixteen years. They concern many subjects: the concepts of meaning, of understanding, of a proposition, of logic, the foundations of mathematics, states of consciousness, and other things. I have written down all these thoughts as remarks, short paragraphs, of which there is sometimes a fairly long chain about the same subject, while I sometimes make a sudden change, jumping from one topic to another.—It was my intention at first to bring all this together in a book whose form I pictured differently at different times. But the essential thing was that the thoughts should proceed from one subject to another in a natural order and without breaks.
After several unsuccessful attempts to weld my results together into such a whole, I realized that I should never succeed. The best that I could write would never be more than philosophical remarks; my thoughts were soon crippled if I tried to force them on in any single direction against their natural inclination.——And this was, of course, connected with the very nature of the investigation. For this compels us to travel over a wide field of thought criss-cross in every direction.— The philosophical remarks in this book are, as it were, a number of sketches of landscapes which were made in the course of these long and involved journeyings.
The same or almost the same points were always being approached afresh from different directions, and new sketches made. Very many of these were badly drawn or uncharacteristic, marked by all the defects of a weak draughtsman. And when they were rejected a number of tolerable ones were left, which now had to be arranged and sometimes cut down, so that if you looked at them you could get a picture of the landscape. Thus this book is really only an album.
Up to a short time ago I had really given up the idea of publishing my work in my lifetime. It used, indeed, to be revived from time to time: mainly because I was obliged to learn that my results (which I had communicated in lectures, typescripts and discussions), variously misunderstood, more or less mangled or watered down, were in circulation. This stung my vanity and I had difficulty in quieting it.
Four years ago I had occasion to re-read my first book (the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus} and to explain its ideas to someone. It suddenly seemed to me that I should publish those old thoughts and the new ones together: that the latter could be seen in the right light only by contrast with and against the background of my old way of thinking.
For since beginning to occupy myself with philosophy again, sixteen years ago, I have been forced to recognize grave mistakes in what I wrote in that first book. I was helped to realize these mistakes—to a degree which I myself am hardly able to estimate—by the criticism which my ideas encountered from Frank Ramsey, with whom I discussed them in innumerable conversations during the last two years of his life. Even more than to this—always certain and forcible— criticism I am indebted to that which a teacher of this university, Mr. P. Sraffa, for many years unceasingly practised on my thoughts. I am indebted to this stimulus for the most consequential ideas of this book.
For more than one reason what I publish here will have points of contact with what other people are writing to-day.—If my remarks do not bear a stamp which marks them as mine,—I do not wish to lay any further claim to them as my property.
I make them public with doubtful feelings. It is not impossible that it should fall to the lot of this work, in its poverty and in the darkness of this time, to bring light into one brain or another—but, of course, it is not likely.
I should not like my writing to spare other people the trouble of thinking. But, if possible, to stimulate someone to thoughts of his own. I should have liked to produce a good book. This has not come about, but the time is past in which I could improve it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 19:24
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 01:58
