Posts by hiddenhound3

What incredibly somber news to receive, especially considering that just five days ago, Ghost released a spectacular cover that I am certain she would have truly appreciated:



Rest in Peace Tina 😢

Dana Robinson4 said:By the way, I recall the folks in Texas went through a massive drilling project last year, but there hasn't been a single word about finding anything useful...

The Appalachian Mountains are absolutely saturated with natural gas; you can find drill sites and gas metering stations practically every few hundred yards. About twenty years ago, gas flares were burning steadily in places like a small town in rural America, the Holy Trinity, and another small town in rural America, but then they mysteriously just went out.

Word is, drilling in the Appalachian Mountains isn't even recommended because the geological area is too unstable.

wiredseal7 said:So, they're missing medicine, medical supplies, hygiene products, diapers, and even some basic food items.

A total tragicomedy—if you can even call this a success.

This is precisely why they feel compelled to plunder the humanitarian convoys being dispatched to Ukraine.

Joseph Bailey41 said:Flo.

Goodness, 😍 hey there, sister! 😒

I tend to envision all philosophers in much the same way, particularly my dear Uncle Siggy. 😁

Sandra Murphy33 said:Yeah... you hit the nail on the head there.
Personally, I tend to associate that specific concept mostly with children. When dealing with adults, we might "promise" to look into something, investigate it, or get it sorted out, but it doesn't carry the same weight. A child actually lives within that promise; they exist in a state of constant anticipation, fueled by their imagination as they wait for it to come true. With an adult, a promise often functions as the exact opposite—it’s a signal that you can finally stop worrying about it and move on, assuming you actually trust the person making the claim.*

*this is a relatively new American expression 😎

It is true; promises should be distributed with moderation and wisdom to serve as motivation, yet one must remain cautious. An unfulfilled promise results in disappointment for the recipient and creates a heavy psychological burden for the one who gave it.

As for adhering to rigid principles, I abandoned them long ago because I found them to be both restrictive and destructive. A principle is essentially a box that you trap yourself inside. Why would any rational person choose to do that to themselves?

Sandra Murphy33 said:Because they carry weight—at least for people with a shred of integrity—and because they create anticipation —especially when you're talking about children—promises shouldn't be made unless a person is absolutely certain they can follow through.
But then again, can anyone ever truly be 100% certain about anything?

To me, a promise is more an expression of good intentions than a guarantee of results; its value lies in the sentiment rather than the eventual execution. We have no way of knowing what unforeseen circumstances might derail us. No one can actually guarantee the future, not even prophets.

What I find most ironic is that the Bible itself advises against making oaths or swearing by anything at all (Mt 5:34). Yet, despite that, American culture is saturated with various forms of commitments and vows; in fact, much of our social structure is built upon them.😁

By making promises, we essentially attempt to colonize the other person.

Eric Newman75 said:

says:
Basically, you could have tactical wisdom, criminal cunning, sports intelligence, whatever you feel like calling it.

That’s just being crafty, not wise. It's about being shrewd or being a smooth operator.

So, is Felix the Cat actually wise, or is he simply clever?

Quincy:

claims that: Socrates possessed immense intellect, whereas his wife was quite ordinary. Essentially, we are observing two distinct types of individuals who operate through entirely different social frameworks, much like how an elephant and a giraffe exhibit vastly different sociological behaviors. For her, the primary concern is the transactional nature of the relationship—whether he provides utility, such as chopping wood while she manages the hearth—but for a highly intellectual individual, such trivialities simply aren't even on the radar. A man like Socrates, whose mind is perpetually occupied with the profound contemplations he has bequeathed to the entire world, cannot be bothered by such grounded interpersonal dynamics, even if they constitute her entire reality; this fundamental disconnect is precisely where resentment and conflict originate.

He likely had his own reasoning for choosing her, perhaps needing someone who would allow him to refine his own virtues.🙄

My thanks to you, Xanthippe, for the insight regarding Socrates.😍

Melissa Stewart6 said:I personally lean toward the idea that drawing sharp lines between art, religion, and philosophy is a mistake. Just as astrophysicists search for a "theory of everything," I believe these expressions of the absolute spirit should be harmonized rather than pitted against each other. In the end, they aren't actually opposites; they only seem that way when we lack the tools to interpret them correctly.

I am inclined to agree completely!

Eric Newman75 said:And honestly, that’s fine. Language is one of those things that sets us apart from the animal kingdom, isn't it? But if you're blind to the divine, how on earth are you supposed to describe the indescribable? What kind of terminology would you even reach for—metaphorical or literal? Both end up being imprecise in their own way. And let's be real: words often just fall short. I am who I am. But what does that actually mean? Take Hebrew, for example. It doesn't bother with complex verb tenses like we do; it just uses perfective and imperfective aspects. Usually, people use the perfective for the past and the imperfective for the future. "Usually," I should add, because context is everything. In the original text, you see the first-person imperfect twice and the third-person once. "Who I am" and "who He is." It captures everything: who was, who is, and who will be. How can you even begin to express the Absolute in English?

Since our language ultimately fails us, we are left with this:

Noah Sullivan, I am certainly not advocating for a permanent ban on Parsifal; in fact, my position is quite the opposite. I believe we should be flagging any post that fails to meet our standards of decency, regardless of who authored it. This would naturally include flagging posts by Adisov as well, until he accumulates enough infractions to trigger an automatic ban.

There shouldn't be any untouchable figures here, yet Parsifal seems to be treated like our little golden child.

I am uncertain what logic led you to such a conclusion, though it appears you may not be following the situation closely enough.

Christian Myers said:And what exactly are these criteria?

We should just pick a moderator among ourselves and call it a day.

The boss arrived some time ago and presented a rather lackluster initiative to set things right, yet he vanished before any actual progress could be made. There has been plenty of discussion regarding this matter; if you search for "Anderson" in a search engine and follow his red thread through his philosophy, you will see exactly what I mean. I am not going to go looking for it myself right now, as I simply don't have the time—motherly duties call.

bluemason3 said:That’s an impossible demand. What’s the alternative? 😁

I also want to call for people to stop hassling Adis Sabovic. The guy is incredibly sharp and funny; he asks the right questions and brings a unique energy to this thread. If he starts overdoing it, then just moderate the inappropriate posts and leave it at that.

Sabovic's clones get banned by default, since he's already got a permanent ban.

hiddenpuma75 has been playing like a child lately, and frankly, he needs to be presented with a real challenge if he wants to stay relevant. This is how things work in the modern era; we saw the trend start a few years ago with the whole cold plunge craze. I have actually developed a specific challenge for Pars, designed with meticulous detail, and should he express even a shred of interest, I would be more than happy to lay out the specifics for him.

It appears that any clones of Sabovic are being systematically banned by default, simply because his permanent ban remains in effect.

As far as he is concerned, I believe there are moments when one ought to extend forgiveness. To be perfectly honest, I was away from the community for quite some time a few years back, so I am actually unaware of the circumstances surrounding his permanent ban. Consequently, I don't really know the full story of what transpired.

It seems to me that the boss is experiencing some significant discomfort down there.

Melissa Stewart6 said:Wouldn't it be easier just to appoint a moderator?

The current state of affairs has reached a point where, in my estimation, a moderator would no longer be able to remedy the damage. We have been pleading for a moderator for months now. One has to wonder why we were permitted to let things deteriorate to this extent. As far as we are aware, there were several forum members eager to step up as moderators, yet they failed to meet the necessary criteria :jebote:

The number of high-quality contributors is dwindling, and even those remaining are beginning to show signs of frustration.

Perhaps the philosophy here requires an inquisitor, given that silence has completely taken hold.

And let us be perfectly clear: I place the blame solely on the administration for failing to act in a timely manner.

You know, I honestly believe the best course of action regarding all this philosophy would be to simply put it on ice entirely.

Melissa Stewart6 said:I don't recall him ever writing anything particularly smart or witty.

I certainly do.

hiddeneagle98 said:hiddenpuma75 acts like he’s trying to be some sort of court jester for philosophy and honestly, he seems to be doing alright with it—you can tell he’s actually having a blast.

I’m backing you up, Pars, and I really don't want to see you get banned, but I’ve gotta ask you to dial back the spamming just a little bit. It’s not even because I disagree with what you’re saying—because, frankly, there are times when I totally do—it’s just that you’re coming on way too strong. You’re posting so much stuff all at once that it feels frantic, like you're just dumping everything onto the board in one go. Try to rein it in or maybe condense your thoughts. And try to take the personal jabs down a notch; you don't need to go around throwing names around and whatnot.

In any case, it would be a good idea if we all tried to stick to the actual topics at hand, even if we just take baby steps toward doing that. If something doesn't have its own dedicated thread, it’s not that hard to just start one.

Also, look, if you see some other forum members preaching their specific ideology in a thread, just let it slide. Let them be. If you absolutely feel the need to weigh in, just head over to the chat; I promise everyone will see it there, and don't worry, it's not like people are typing a novel in there constantly. Or, better yet, why not just start "Parsifal's Daily Digest" and write your thoughts there? I’ll definitely show up to read it. Just try to leave some space for threads to exist without your fingerprints all over them—though, I suppose it shouldn't be hard to recognize which topics are practically begging for a break from you.

I support this sentiment.

Pars, my advice to you is to refine your style, shed that wounded ego, and cease targeting other members, and everything will settle down perfectly.

Philosophy would surely miss 🙂

Furthermore, I appeal to everyone to stop badgering Adis Sabovic; he is incredibly lucid and witty, posing legitimate questions and contributing uniquely to the dynamic of this forum. If he begins to overstep, then inappropriate posts should simply be sanctioned, and that should be the end of it.

A great deal goes unnoticed here in our philosophical discussions. Neither Pars nor Adis are the primary issue, nor are they the only ones involved.

And please, let us find more moderators so this entire ordeal can finally reach its conclusion.

I never, under any circumstances, engage in that behavior; I attribute it entirely to a lack of focus, because if I sense my mind starting to wander, I simply turn off the movie and wait until the next day.

... if you were to cross paths with your own self, would you actually like the person looking back at you?

It is understood that this inquiry remains purely hypothetical. Let us attempt to envision a scenario where you encounter your true self in its purest form. What would be the very first thing you noticed about your own being, and what kind of impression would you leave upon yourself? Ultimately, would you find yourself to be someone you truly admire?