Montreal Escorts

What do you hate the most?

Fat Happy Buddha

Mired in the red dust.
Apr 27, 2005
368
0
0
Montreal
The argument on IQ in socio-economic stratification and its relation to racial issues has important ramifications for our immediate intellectual environment. Generally, it is obvious that when one group is concentrated at a lower socio-economic stratum, a sub-culture evolves based on what are perceived as the strengths of the segregated group. This is one of the causes leading to a distinct black culture in the US that most recently manifests itself in the form of rap music and hip-hop culture. If John Cage is correct in saying that socio-economic status is determined by genetic factors--primarily innate intelligence--then we have to assume that rap music and hip-hop culture are simply the cultural manifestation of a less intelligent segment of the population. However, if he is wrong, then rap music and hip-hop culture can in some ways be interpreted as an expression of rebellion and an attempt to regain socioeconomic ground. As I said, however, this issue is more a part of our global intellectual environment than our immediate one. In our immediate environment, we should be deeply concerned by how the argument over innate intelligence versus environment relates to interboard relations. I feel that if we assess the issue incorrectly, great injustice will be done.

As in the case of race in the US, we find ourselves facing a stratification of hobbyists into two groups. Whether or not this is the result of genetic factors is a key question. I await John Cage's assessment of the issue, but I personally am not ready to accept that the primary factor determining board affiliation is genes or innate intelligence.

The subculture that we see forming has many parallels to black subculture. First, there is the presence of an exaggerated masculinity that cannot be fully explained as an attempt to compensate for "diversity of an intergalactic nature." This exaggerated masculinity leads members of the subculture not only to report sexual encounters of a business nature, but also private sexual encounters. In other cases, the compensatory factor causes individuals to claim unrealistic powers of sexual prowess, including six, seven or even eight male orgasms in one sexual encounter.

The imagery of the subculture also leads us to question whether the principal sentiment of the group is one of passive acceptance or rebellion. Some members choose cartoon figures of small naked boys as their personal icon. Others choose physically stunted males with green skin. In both cases however, the limited physical stature of the icon character is counteracted by an implied willingless to "get into mischief"--hence, rebel. The recent inclusion in a certain thread of male buttocks extended in preparation for penetration leads us to suspect however that the passive/active natures of members of the subculture are not fixed. My feeling is that the passive characteristic arises in conjunction with the feeling of being dominated, as is the case in chimpanzees and indeed other mammels. This would make such actions the result of social conditioning. John Cage, I suspect, will say that such passive invitations to copulation are the result of genetic charactertics and are therefore fixed.

The formation of a subculture within the hobbyist community is probably unavoidable based on the diversity of its members. However, if the subculture forms as the result of uneven social resources or exclusionary practices, then I feel that it is a dangerous phenomenon because it will inevitably lead to rebellion on the part of the group forming the subculture. For this reason, I feel that the role of genetics, if any, in determining board affiliation merits closer examination.
 
Last edited:

eastender

New Member
Jun 6, 2005
1,911
0
0
Definitely

John_Cage said:
That being said, however I do understand where Eastender is coming from. He's saying that we have to be VERY cautious and not over-zealous when it comes to "achieving the greater good" --- especially since we must make sacrifices on the way.

But Eastender, let me propose something else then:

IF we can SURELY eliminate crime (for good, it will NEVER resurface) at the cost of the jobs of policemen, lawyers, judges, various alarm system companies... etc... Would you be for it? Considering that the people who lost their job can retrain AND there's bound to be new jobs created by a safer society.

I would be more than pleased to see crime figures reduced at the same rate that medicine has reduced the rate of polio,tuberculosis, and other diseases that 100 years ago were major menaces to public health. Such success inevitably creates further advances in medical and scientific research with a net gain in employment. However at every step of the way we should be careful to avoid medical disasters like thalidomide.

Applying this to the crime analogy, a disastrous failure along the lines of thalidomide in the battle to eradicate crime would have the potential to create a significant net loss for society.
 

John_Cage

New Member
Dec 25, 2005
324
0
0
Agrippa said:
I've never heard of Nietzschean, I do however know a German fellow by the name of Nietzsche relatively well. When you're done thinking you're an Übermensch, you can come back and live amongst us ordinary Volk.

Are you speaking german? I never heard of german; I have only heard of Germany. lol.

Nietzschean refers to the ideas of Nietzsche (do look things up before responding).

Why do you insist of making points that can be taken apart in a matter of seconds? Take your time...

Btw, it's not quite "I have empathy or compassion", but rather "I put them aside and take a stoic stand". When a matter of GREAT importance is in question, we shouldn't let empathy cloud our judgement.
 
Last edited:

Agrippa

C o n s u l
Aug 22, 2006
582
0
0
www.merb.ca
John_Cage said:
Have you read any Nietzschean or Kant? Their ideas are going to be much harder to comprehand; if you can`t even grasp the concept of "Having to care about [a larger concept] in order to care about [its smaller details]".
Agrippa said:
I`ve never heard of Nietzschean, I do however know a German fellow by the name of Nietzsche relatively well. When you`re done thinking you`re an Übermensch, you can come back and live amongst us ordinary Volk.
John_Cage said:
Are you speaking german? I never heard of german; I have only heard of Germany. lol.

Nietzschean refers to the ideas of Nietzsche (do look things up before responding).

Why do you insist of making points that can be taken apart in a matter of seconds? Take your time...
This is really painful, but I`ll S P E L L it out for you, and even colour code it because you seem to have reading comprehension issues. This colour means good. This colour means bad.

Incorrect: I know a Germany fellow.
Correct: I know a German fellow.

Germany is a country made up German nationals. Nietzsche is a German person who was born in a country called Germany (well Prussia really, but anyhow). Do you understand the distinction?

Incorrect: Have you read any Nietzschean or Kant?
Correct: Have you read any Nietzschean or Kantian philosophy?
Correct: Have you read any Nietzsche or Kant?


Please heed my advice and express yourself more clearly. You are not a writer, but a hack. I feel sorry for your editors. That`s right editors--plural--because the publisher needs a team, no actually "a full staff" to edit your `book`.

John_Cage said:
When a matter of GREAT importance is in question, we shouldn`t let empathy cloud our judgement.
What judgment of great importance are we suddenly talking about? Judgment of other people? Is this whole thread still part of your vendetta against affirmative action?

Does anyone need more proof that IQ tests do not adequately measure intelligence?
 
Last edited:

Fat Happy Buddha

Mired in the red dust.
Apr 27, 2005
368
0
0
Montreal
I smell a thread closure coming. What more can be said on the topic that hasn't already been said?

(Unless, of course, someone want's to seriously address the issue of a genetic role in board affiliation.;) )
 

eastender

New Member
Jun 6, 2005
1,911
0
0
Nietzschean

Agrippa said:
I've never heard of Nietzschean, I do however know a German fellow by the name of Nietzsche relatively well. When you're done thinking you're an Übermensch, you can come back and live amongst us ordinary Volk.

Nietzschean is the correct expression and spelling for the philosophy of Frederich Nietzsche. Do a google on the word and you will see the word in common usage.

Kantian is also correct.

The reason is since Nietzsche ends in "e" , "an" is simply added to denote his philosophy.Since Kant does not end in a vowel "ian" has to be added to denote his philosophy.
 

Fat Happy Buddha

Mired in the red dust.
Apr 27, 2005
368
0
0
Montreal
Nietzschean is clearly an adjective.

"Have you read Nietzschean or Kant?" seems incorrect to me. If it was correct, why wouldn't one write "Have you read Nietzschean or Kantian" in order to maintain consistency.

I've read all of Nietzsche's works at least twice. In fact, they are sitting next to me in my bookcase. I haven't actually opened the books for many years however.

Didn't Nietzsche write “…even if my words were a thousand times right, still you would always do wrong with my words.”

Nietzsche mixed with The Bell Curve--a toxic cocktail for all but the most nuanced minds! (Thus Spake Fat Happy Buddha:D )
 
Last edited:

Agrippa

C o n s u l
Aug 22, 2006
582
0
0
www.merb.ca
eastender said:
Nietzschean is the correct expression and spelling for the philosophy of Frederich Nietzsche. Do a google on the word and you will see the word in common usage.

English is my mother tongue; I do not need a lesson from you. Your Mortal Kombat playing buddy wrote "Have you read any Nietzschean or Kant?" A native English speaker would correctly interpret this to mean 'Have you read any books by a person whose last name is Nietzschean or a person whose last name is Kant.' There is no such person as Nietzschean. Or at least no such person worth reading. There is however a German philosopher who goes by the name of Nietzsche. I pointed this out two posts ago, and illustrated it in my previous post. I am baffled that neither of you understand this.

You are both digging yourselves deeper and deeper into holes. Stop, it is embarrassing everyone.
 
Last edited:

Fat Happy Buddha

Mired in the red dust.
Apr 27, 2005
368
0
0
Montreal
Agrippa said:
English is my mother tongue; I do not need a lesson from you.

Agrippa, eastender, does this mean the three of us are not going to get together for a beer at Cleo's? I planned to reserve a table in the special High IQ Section just for our visit.
 

eastender

New Member
Jun 6, 2005
1,911
0
0
Nietzschean or Kantian

Fat Happy Buddha said:
Nietzschean is clearly an adjective.

"Have you read Nietzschean or Kant?" seems incorrect to me. If it was correct, why wouldn't one write "Have you read Nietzschean or Kantian" in order to maintain consistency.

I've read all of Nietzsche's works at least twice. In fact, they are sitting next to me in my bookcase. I haven't actually opened the books for many years however.

Didn't Nietzsche write “…even if my words were a thousand times right, still you would always do wrong with my words.”

Nietzsche mixed with The Bell Curve--a toxic cocktail for all but the most nuanced minds! (Thus Spake Fat Happy Buddha:D )

FHB
Phrased properly question would be "Have you read either Nietzsche or Kant?"

You could also ask the following question "Are you familiar with either Nietzschean or Kantian Philosophy?".

Basically you do not read adjectives.You read nouns. The quote from Nietzsche has been open to much debate with scholars claiming that it was meant as a nuanced insult meaning that regardless of how right the words used by Nietzsche were certain readers( the you) did not have the ability to act correctly.
 
Last edited:

Agrippa

C o n s u l
Aug 22, 2006
582
0
0
www.merb.ca
Agrippa said:
Correct: Have you read any Nietzschean or Kantian philosophy?
Correct: Have you read any Nietzsche or Kant?

eastender said:
Phrased properly question would be "Have you read either Nietzsche or Kant?"
You could also ask the following question "Are you familiar with either Nietzschean or Kantian Philosophy?".
Blah, blah, blah...
 

eastender

New Member
Jun 6, 2005
1,911
0
0
Friederich Nietzsche

Agrippa said:
English is my mother tongue; I do not need a lesson from you. Your Mortal Kombat playing buddy wrote "Have you read any Nietzschean or Kant?" A native English speaker would correctly interpret this to mean 'Have you read any books by a person whose last name is Nietzschean or a person whose last name is Kant.' There is no such person as Nietzschean. Or at least no such person worth reading. There is however a German philosopher who goes by the name of Nietzsche. I pointed this out two posts ago, and illustrated it in my previous post. I am baffled that neither of you understand this.

You are both digging yourselves deeper and deeper into holes. Stop, it is embarrassing everyone.

There WAS a German philosopher named Friederich Nietzsche - long dead.

Those with the intellectual curiosity to learn more about him and his philosophy could visit the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/philosophy_of_friederich_nietzsche

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/nietzschean_(andromeda)

www.friesian.com/nietzsch.htm

The academic world recognizes Nietzschean Philosophy as one of the most complex views of its time.
 

Fat Happy Buddha

Mired in the red dust.
Apr 27, 2005
368
0
0
Montreal
eastender said:
FHB
Phrased properly question would be "Have you read either Nietzsche or Kant?"

You could also ask the following question "Are you familiar with either Nietzschean or Kantian Philosophy?".

I don't think you will get any argument from Agrippa or me on the above points. I think they basically conform to the position that Agrippa has already taken.

eastender said:
Basically you do not read adjectives.You read nouns.

I don't understand what you mean.

eastender said:
The quote from Nietzsche has been open to much debate with scholars claiming that it was meant as a nuanced insult meaning that regardless of how right the word used by Nietzsche were certain readers( the you) did not have the ability to act correctly.

You mean I inadvertantly quoted a "nuanced insult" on Merb? Oh, woe is me!!!:D

Actually, I didn't intend it as an insult. I just meant to point out that Nietzschean philosophy is very heady and because it isn't systematic it has a strong potential to be misinterpreted, as history has clearly illustrated.

The fact that John Cage cites The Bell Curve and then brings up Nietzsche gives us a pretty good indication of the erroneous route that his thought is taking. I'm not saying this to ridicule him. In fact, when I was in my early twenties I was strongly influenced by Nietzsche and my incorrect interpretation of his writings led me to many incorrect opinions that I would be ashamed to hold today.
 
Last edited:

John_Cage

New Member
Dec 25, 2005
324
0
0
Agrippa said:
Incorrect: Have you read any Nietzschean or Kant?
Correct: Have you read any Nietzschean or Kantian philosophy?
Correct: Have you read any Nietzsche or Kant?


What judgment of great importance are we suddenly talking about? Judgment of other people? Is this whole thread still part of your vendetta against affirmative action?

Does anyone need more proof that IQ tests do not adequately measure intelligence?

You said you never "heard" of Nietzchean... I just told you what Nietzchean is, please be glad that you learned something.

Have you read any A or B means this:
Have you read any A? and
Have you read any B?

Nietzchean refers to Nietzche's philosophy; just like Kant refers to Kant's philosophy.

Have you read any Nietzchean? CORRECT
Have you read any Kant? Also CORRECT
Thus "Have you read any Nietzchean or Kant?" is also correct.

It is not neccessary for the two terms to belong to the same familly, as long as they do not require an additional article.

If I had said "Have you read anything BY Nietzchean or Kant" it would be wrong; because the article "BY" cannot work with the first term (BY Nietzchean does not make sense).

Example:

"Do you want Sandwiches or Subways'?" (Imagine asking someone want they want to eat, Sandwiches is a object, while Dairy Queens is a qualifier that describes an object (not shown). It means "Do you want Sandwiches or [Food] from Subways?")

Similarly, "Have you read any Neitzchean or Kant?" operates on the same principle.

English is my first language... The only difference is I KNOW grammar because I actually bothered to learn how it functions; and NOT just by "hearing it and guessing if it SOUNDS right". I analyse its parts (when I actually bother to).

Could I have just as easily said Nietzchean and Kantian? Sure. Does it make it wrong otherwise? No.

The psychological reason behind my choice of words is probably this: I am more familliar with Nietzchean; thus I identify with it as a "philosophy" (in my mind) more readily than Kant's ideas.

Let me remind you, you said you have "NEVER HEARD" of Nietzchean; which implies you have problem with the word and NOT its usage. How could you have problem with the word's usage IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT IT MEANS?

Please, take your time before you make a fool out of yourself again. Then again, I don't expect much from someone who failed to understand: "One must care about an individual in order to care about where his/her origins."
 

John_Cage

New Member
Dec 25, 2005
324
0
0
Fat Happy Buddha said:
Agrippa, eastender, does this mean the three of us are not going to get together for a beer at Cleo's? I planned to reserve a table in the special High IQ Section just for our visit.

I feel left out... *cry*
 

chef

Foodie
Nov 15, 2005
889
0
0
Fat Happy Buddha said:
Agrippa, eastender, does this mean the three of us are not going to get together for a beer at Cleo's? I planned to reserve a table in the special High IQ Section just for our visit.
This section is no doubt what us Low-IQ folks refer to as "Perv Row". Right ? :p
 

Fat Happy Buddha

Mired in the red dust.
Apr 27, 2005
368
0
0
Montreal
John_Cage said:
I feel left out... *cry*

I was trying to calm the tension between two people I've met, respect and consider friends. In the hope that you could become part of that group of people, I would love for you to attend also. Just don't forget your IQ test results, your SAT results and a detailed analysis of your DNA.:D
 

John_Cage

New Member
Dec 25, 2005
324
0
0
chef said:
I beg to differ. The expression should be, "Have you read anything Nietzchean?"

If you choose to write out every word, then "Have you read any Kant?" would be wrong too.

You can't read a "Kant"; you could read a book about Kant's philosophy.

Similarly, I meant Nietzchean Philosophy when I said Nietzchean. It's implied.

EDIT: My idea of how the word "Nietzchean" is used came from my experience with the word. I understood it as a noun (Ideas of Nietzche). But people like Agrippa like to argue endlessly, so here it is...

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=nietzschean

Nietzchean is a noun; thus it's correct to state "Have you read any Nietzchean?"
 
Last edited:
Toronto Escorts