The Bash Fuji Thread

[simon482]

He thinks he's in a one sided conversation. That's why in all of his replies he rewrites whatever I said, and responds to his imaginary version of what I wrote, rather than responding to what I actually wrote.

at this point you don't have to say anything of substance they just think they are right and you are dumb. anything said right now if you just entertaining yourself by forcing them to respond.

 

[LancsLad]

at this point you don't have to say anything of substance they just think they are right and you are dumb. anything said right now if you just entertaining yourself by forcing them to respond.

This Brown nosing is getting a little too intimate . You should get a room and take it private.

.

 

[red]

This Brown nosing is getting a little too intimate . You should get a room and take it private.

.

simon cant hear you, he is too busy punching his dad

 

[simon482]

This Brown nosing is getting a little too intimate . You should get a room and take it private.

.

don't be thinking i like fuji cuz i think he iss a stuck up fuck bag. i am just on the outside watching him play you all like a fiddle.

 

[simon482]

simon cant hear you, he is too busy punching his dad

are you refering to when i broke my dads nose for being a fuck head or when i put a knife to my step dad's throat ?

 

[LancsLad]

don't be thinking i like fuji cuz i think he iss a stuck up fuck bag. i am just on the outside watching him play you all like a fiddle.

Right. Sure, good cover story. I was just looking at the Penthouse for the articles. We understand.

I really couldn't care less about whether "Fuji" wins this little agrument ( aka contradiction ) game. I think he's a pompous prat and will never admit defeat, so both sides can play with the others sincerity.

.

 

[fuji]

Sure, you're right--we do. My assertion is that we ought not to give up on who and what we are, on our core identity. When you've got by varying accounts between a quarter and a half of the population engaged in a behavior it's not something deviant, it's a basic, core, fundamental human behavior. It's not like theft, murder, or rape--outlier acts committed by deviants--it's stuff regular, ordinary people do in the course of their regular, ordinary lives. Making moral codes that prescribe against such fundamentally human behavior is nonsensical. Or rather, life denying.



It's an assumption, and I have clarified it a few times, and I'm happy to clarify it again. I'm drawing heavily on Nietzsche here, also from D H Lawrence, if you want more elaborate explanations of the concept.

But in short all moral codes require an assumption at some point. They've value judgements, and we, as human beings, are the creators of value. Sooner or later we just make it up. The question is, what's a good moral code to make up? There have been varying answers over the history of the human race.

One of those most common assumptions out there is the life-denying assumption. This is the core assumption embedded in the moral codes of most of the world's religions. The idea underlying this assumption is that the real world is a bad place, that should be resisted in favour of a more perfect, ideal after-life of some sort. Major religions from buddhism to christianity are founded on this principle. The Buddhists perceive the real world to be a corrupt illusion, the goal of life being to transcend the corruption of the real world. Christianity perceives the world to be tainted by original sin, a horrible place in need of redemption, full of sin, to be rejected in favour of a better afterlife.

The life denying assumption underlying the world's religions is that who and what we are is a bad thing, to be resisted and opposed through moral codes which deny and suppress fundamental human wants and desires in favour of a more perfect idea.

That's a perfectly valid assumption, as far as they go, but it's not one that I choose. I choose to affirm life. I choose to say that who and what we are is a good thing, that our existence should be celebrated, and that who and what we are is desirable, to be furthered, to be championed. That there is not some more perfect idea--that Platonic notions of a more perfect world are illusory. That this world is real, and that what we are, who we are, how we are made, are good things that should be celebrated.

I take it a bit further than that. I believe in life in the sense that I believe in growth, in adaptation, in the ongoing process of improvement and development that underpin the whole progress of not only human society, but life itself.

In any case, by "life" I mean who and what we are, essentially, and by "life denying" or "life affirming" I mean moral codes which either devalue who and what we are, such as Christian or Buddhist moral codes, or affirm who and what we are, such as mine.

If you want to choose a life denying moral code I don't have any way to debate that, other than by saying that personally, I choose life. Sooner or later we all have to make some assumptions about what we will value.

There is nothing here but tripe, trite and simplistic arguments. You know, simon is correct... I've given you your last chance to actually say something of substance and you can't... Rather than debate a losing battle, you are now the first, and probably only Terbite I'm putting on ignore. I don't want to hear from you again.

Any honest reader would think there was a lot of substance there. You're blubbering now.

I suspect you were cheated on, and that's why you are reacting in such an anti-rational way to my posts. You may disagree with what I've written but to call what you quoted free of content says more about you than it says about me.

You weren't looking for a response with content I think. I think perhaps someone cheated on you, and you're bitter about it.

 

[LancsLad]

are you refering to when i broke my dads nose for being a fuck head or when i put a knife to my step dad's throat ?

Christmas dinner must be a real hoot at your house.

Please pass the turkey and the wound dressing.

.

 

[LancsLad]

Any honest reader would think there was a lot of substance there. You're blubbering now.

"blubbering', no need to whale on him like that.


.

 

[simon482]

Right. Sure, good cover story. I was just looking at the Penthouse for the articles. We understand.

I really couldn't care less about whether "Fuji" wins this little agrument ( aka contradiction ) game. I think he's a pompous prat and will never admit defeat, so both sides can play with the others sincerity.

.

that is the beautiful thing about this, he is not trying to win, he is making you guys make yourselves look dumb.

Christmas dinner must be a real hoot at your house.

Please pass the turkey and the wound dressing.

.

christmas at my house is just me, i don't go to places or celebrate really.

 

[red]

are you refering to when i broke my dads nose for being a fuck head or when i put a knife to my step dad's throat ?

lets pretend that punching involves hitting a person with your fist. if we can agree on that premise, then we should agree that i was referring to the time you hit your dad.

 

[LancsLad]

that is the beautiful thing about this, he is not trying to win, he is making you guys make yourselves look dumb.



christmas at my house is just me, i don't go to places or celebrate really.

Gotta admit, the wound dressing and turkey quip was a good one though.

.

 

[red]

Gotta admit, the wound dressing and turkey quip was a good one though.

.

he really gobbled it up

 

[simon482]

Gotta admit, the wound dressing and turkey quip was a good one though.

.

i admit nothing

 

[simon482]

lets pretend that punching involves hitting a person with your fist. if we can agree on that premise, then we should agree that i was referring to the time you hit your dad.

well technically i had to hit my step dad as well.

 

[red]

i admit nothing

you would make a good doorman then

 

[red]

well technically i had to hit my step dad as well.

i bet that upset your father. made him feel less special.

 

[fuji]

"blubbering', no need to whale on him like that.

You're right, he was just spewing through his blowhole.

 

[simon482]

i bet that upset your father. made him feel less special.

i am already out of the will so it's cool

 

[fuji]

I am comfortable with my arguments because I quoted you directly.

You've quoted me directly, and then misrepresented what you quoted in horrendously inappropriate ways. You may be "comfortable" with that--it makes you dishonest.

You formulated invalid arguments because you consistently moved from is to ought directly.

No, I haven't. I've given you that as an acknowledged assumption: "A good moral code affirms life" way back in post #130, and probably earlier if I go look back through the other thread too. You are a fool if you think I'm going to let you get away with this ongoing misrepresentation.

Shit, i gotta stop doing that directly, you said to yourself. Maybe you even googled some social darwinist or sociobiology website about how to avoid the naturalistic fallacy, and saw some reference to the need for an additional clause.

I laid out the assumption back in post #130, before you ever brought up "naturalistic fallacy". This is just you back-pedalling, hoping nobody notices your dishonest slight of hand, and your misrepresentation. Inf act your FIRST claim of "naturalistic fallacy" was in reply to a message where I clearly spelled out what the assumption was.

You either intentionally misrepresented what I wrote, or were simply too stupid to understand it.

But sure Sw1tch I guess you think I am so omnipotent that I foresaw your claim, and wrote up that assumption in advance, just to make you look stupid later...