You're certainly a bunch of contradictions. Think I just won our discussion, in a philosophical sense, of course.
The Devil's Chaplain
Sort:
May 3, 2022
0
#43
Optimissed wrote:
darkunorthodox88 wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
One of them looks like me but one that sounds like you would be quite an anomaly. You couldn't pass a philosophy degree, at a good university, with that attitude to the subject. So either you're pretending in one way, or in another.
This idea that graduate students in philosophy look or appear a certain way is such nonsense lol. You see so many characters, but most common are just introverted smart people. Thats it. You find people with low esteem, narcissists, slackers, scholars, has-been mystics, social activists , I have seen it all in philosophy departments.
In that case, why did you make the childish comments about me not looking like a philosophy graduate?
Fair question?
because what you say is philosophically very amateurish. Like it shows a vague familiarity but clearly lacks exposure to the literature which tells right away you dont understand what is an acceptable response to X and Y problem.
And this is exactly how you can tell between amateurs and aspiring or established professionals.
Thought that might smoke you out. Does anyone else get furious when they lose?
Maybe because, here, we're not talking to philosophy graduates, for the most part?
Anyhow I'm genuinely so much better than 90% of published philosophers, because I can think better, faster, more creatively, more logically and just in general classier, that why should I even want to LOOK like them? Seriously?
If I ever decided to have a crack at becoming famous, I certainly wouldn't be so stupid as to try to do it via academia, where they think slowly, without much creativity, too carefully and just generally boringly and badly. Now, would I?
I find philosophic literature in general uninteresting, badly and clumsily written, and for the most part it's always obvious when these "aspiring or established professionals" are writing in their philosophic paradigm, that they're completely scared of actually trying to think. Because they had it knocked out of them by academic philosophy, which actually mainly consists of history of philosophy, progressing VERY slowly, if at all. It isn't the way to do it.
I'll ask again, why should someone with real talent ever want to look like an academic philosopher. Stupid! 
Anyway, I think you've gone away now but, just in case you haven't, I should mention that you say you think I should look like a philosopher to be one, and yet you say that they don't look any particular way. Except they're supposed to make cunning references to known and approved philosophical works, so people in the know can tell they're one of their own. But you haven't said what happens if they don't even want to look like one of their own because they think that people who think that way are stupid. To keep it simple for you, is that bad or good? Discuss.
Please Sign Up to comment.
If you need help, please contact our Help and Support team.
One of them looks like me but one that sounds like you would be quite an anomaly. You couldn't pass a philosophy degree, at a good university, with that attitude to the subject. So either you're pretending in one way, or in another.
This idea that graduate students in philosophy look or appear a certain way is such nonsense lol. You see so many characters, but most common are just introverted smart people. Thats it. You find people with low esteem, narcissists, slackers, scholars, has-been mystics, social activists , I have seen it all in philosophy departments.
In that case, why did you make the childish comments about me not looking like a philosophy graduate?
Fair question?