Orwell, may I ask your opinion?

Post Reply New Topic

Orwell, I looked into the Poe's Law thing. While I have a bit of issue with LAW [I can get literalminded], I recognize these terms are commonly used rather loosely - in Ling, Meinhof's Rule is the same thing as the Ganda Law, for example.

Still, I recognize the phenomenon - Swift's Modest Proposal comes to mind.

Anyhow, I would appreciate, if it is not too much trouble, your casting an eye over recent exchanges, Phil to Sand, particularly the dwarf references in the desire to live discussion.

Would you say HE is there "pulling a Poe"? I am the at least one person who can't be certain.

...there is a PM function on here, you know.

I don't think either of them was "pulling a Poe," although I have no idea what the dwarf references are about, so maybe Phil was. Sand is just being his usual sarcastic self.

Thanks - yes, I know about the PM, but I tend to use it minimally - unreasonable personal quirk, I realize, but I cannot get out of associating it with a stealth move and posible invasion of your privacy. Sort of like phone calls.

No, MY dwarf reference was not part of the Poe phenomenon - just an equivalent of modem handshaking, trying to explore what channels of communication may be possible. Reference is to a passage in C S Lewis The Last Battle.

I will respect anyone who will speak straight to me,

I am unlikely to respect someone who prefers amusement to discussion.

My biggest problem with Sand, to say sooth, is that I have myself a history of being sarcastically dismissive, in part honestly come by as a family trait, and it is a major effort to keep myself on track and out of the dungheap.

So fine - everything is to be questioned. The biggest things at least daily. I totally concur. What passes for science broadly defined, not excluding the slightly out of synch science theology.

If the thinker does NOT do so, he will soon or late lead himself into a pit by the nose folloowing a circular or descending not ascendinf spiral.

Yes. AND yes there is a whole lot of non-thinking going on.

But - leave us distinguish. It was not the way of Socrates [if we can trust Plato to come close to the facts] to dance around thumbing his nose. It is possible - perhaps desirable - to make a step in the direction of suggesting or modelling thinking.

You have claimed - and you are an honorable man - to feel for the rape victim and those suffering from the God virus. It is hard to see how your amusements realize your sympathy.

For me - my reaction is twofold: One, compassionate anger - your Bandar-Log act suggests that your psyche is not in a good place [is psyche within or without your worldview? If out, go for mental function].

The other is puzzlement. Take it if you will as a sign of limited mental function, but I am handicapped in social interaction in that I require - as I try to send - fairly clear messages. I will filter the flow, I may encode so as to communicate with only some within hearing, but [except for the occasional rather broad Swiftian modest proposition] what I send is straight.

The dwarf references you say - running joke. I did not do not get the joke - allee same like the gent with his list of millionaires.

No, I am not a Spartan dwarf ,millionaire. Thanks for asking. Wish I were.

Damnit, I thought PhiloLogos was going to ask Orwell whether he's a theist, agnostic, or agnostic theist!

Well, I will accept that with gratitude as as close to being in clear as I get from most. Reading between and perpendicular to your lines I am inclined to suspect that our wave forms are both [conceivably even equally] out of phase relative to the norm for our respective styles, but you are AM where I am FM [vice versa if it makes a difference to you, it is trivial to me.

I have lucked out, having gradually [starting from about my 33rd year] located scattered members of my own species [I maintain I am human and the majority are the aliens],