Ontological Disproof of God

[KevinM1]

"Well then." is the most radically readily comprehensible terse reverse of the Khemikal obverse-Confucian type stupid wisdom, which, because, "Well then.", immediately follows a great-Duaneian tyrade, and is, thereby, totally and immediately intelligible, via being caught-up in the coattails of Duane's great expectations, regarding what ridiculous bullshit Khemikal, the great reverse sage, who enunciates stupidity in lieu of wisdom, will posit next. 


And, by virtue of Kit, and, Khemikal, being respectively coattail intelligible, and, reversely wise, Kit, and Khemikal are, hereby, awarded 250,000 advance anti-demerit points each, as insurance against the possibility of being subjected to possible Kafkaesque existentially absurd punishment, inflicted by the series pre-reflectively free inauthoritative ''staff'' authorities, who purposely both disrupt and destroy philosophical dialogical dialectical truth-generation, via ontologically unintelligibly disrupting the pursuit of knowledge within the philosophy forum, by enforcing destructive "Staff" law.

You don't say.

Consider this an internet high five

[vulcanlogician]

I have made my disproof understandable to others, because the language wherein the disproof is cast is per se intelligible.  It will not be intelligible to all Others, for, all Others are not energetic enough, and, toughminded enough to apprehend what is, in fact, intelligible. 
My central task is to posit an intelligible language, not subject to future defeat; my responsibility is not, cannot possibly be, to reduce my language to being intelligible to every non-toughminded weakling.
If I eject/toss-away the authentic difficulty which is attendant upon my position, I subject my position to being killed by Other intellect.  If I make my position readily available to everyman, to every non-toughminded person, to weaklings, I thereby compromise the indefeasibility of my argument, by diluting the inherent defensive structure contained therein.  Negatio.

Maybe, then, you are too wise to be a philosopher. It happens sometimes. People gain so much knowledge that they can't relate to those who seek knowledge, and love knowledge.

Isn't it obvious by now, Socrates, that those who love wisdom are not wise nor ignorant but the ones in between, like Love himself. In addition, the young god Love loves wisdom because wisdom and knowledge are the most beautiful things we know of, and Love is always drawn to beauty. It follows that love must be a lover of wisdom and that all lovers of wisdom, that is, philosophers, like Love himself, are somewhere in between total ignorance and complete omniscience.

[Whateverist]

QFT

Whateverist, what does QFT mean? Negatio

I had to look it up too: Quoted For Truth


I think I asked too. It is better just to google it in order to be less of a drag. I learned. You can too.

[negatio]

I have made my disproof understandable to others, because the language wherein the disproof is cast is per se intelligible.  It will not be intelligible to all Others, for, all Others are not energetic enough, and, toughminded enough to apprehend what is, in fact, intelligible. 
My central task is to posit an intelligible language, not subject to future defeat; my responsibility is not, cannot possibly be, to reduce my language to being intelligible to every non-toughminded weakling.
If I eject/toss-away the authentic difficulty which is attendant upon my position, I subject my position to being killed by Other intellect.  If I make my position readily available to everyman, to every non-toughminded person, to weaklings, I thereby compromise the indefeasibility of my argument, by diluting the inherent defensive structure contained therein.  Negatio.

Maybe, then, you are too wise to be a philosopher. It happens sometimes. People gain so much knowledge that they can't relate to those who seek knowledge, and love knowledge.

Isn't it obvious by now, Socrates, that those who love wisdom are not wise nor ignorant but the ones in between, like Love himself. In addition, the young god Love loves wisdom because wisdom and knowledge are the most beautiful things we know of, and Love is always drawn to beauty. It follows that love must be a lover of wisdom and that all lovers of wisdom, that is, philosophers, like Love himself, are somewhere in between total ignorance and complete omniscience.

                                                                                                                                

I spoke to a member earlier regarding the question of my being a philosopher, and, I informed the member that, at best, I am merely an ideaologist.  As vain and fucking great as fucking Duane may be, he is not, and, will not be so presumptuous as to declare himself a philosopher!  I am not a fucking philosopher, merely one who studies and engages what, in the world, is called "philosophy".  Wow, Vulc what a beautiful thing to say to me, and, what a beautiful quote from Plato, I had not seen that before, far out!  If I am too wise to be a mere philosopher, it might be that I am wise enough to be one of Plato's philosopher kings!  and, thereby lead the world into a totally fresh and new understanding of what we human beings are, and, I am convinced, it is via employing understanding of what we are, and by using ourselves as pattern, we could live an ontological civilization which is structured consistently with what we are, instead, of what we are doing now, by continually railing against what we are via both religion and law, and, instead, engage and embrace what we are, and have the fucking guts to be the absolutely horridly scary fucking goddamn thing that we are, and, I believe that if and when we can, all, together, become reflectively free, we will dissolve the majority of the problems transpiring within our sociosphere.  I suggest we quit thinking of ourselves as sinners, as criminals, for we are none of those...we are absolutely free, and, I think the very best thing to do is to let freedom reign, for, by taking/gaining a reflective understanding of what our absolute freedom is, we will become, as well, equipped to live in civil/civilized fashion, among ourselves, without law, or, with a compromised form of law, which we will arrive at only be engaging in a dialogical dialectic with law, which Platonic dialogical dialectic is means to knowledge, to truth.  History proceeds dialectically, and, thereby we can reach a point in history where we can actually reflectively control our history, thereby calculatedly obviating cultural problems like what we have now, which we call crime.  Crime is a man made construct...we humans can learn to live absolutely freely together, for we are structured by whatever force(s) which  did make us, to control each others potential misconduct; however, any rotten motherfucker who wants to do horrid shit which no one whomsoever will countenance, let that mother fucker watch out for what we are capable of doing to his ass, even, or even especially within a civilization without law, and, with only our own ontological structure as the modulator, interpersonally, of our conduct.  Negatio.

[The Grand Nudger]

I also kick puppies, if that helps.

[Losty]

I am now asking for your honest opinion: Am I coding correctly now?

Maybe, then, you are too wise to be a philosopher. It happens sometimes. People gain so much knowledge that they can't relate to those who seek knowledge, and love knowledge.

[quote-''Vulcanlogician'']

[/quote]

No, you’re still adding in extra tags for no reason.

[negatio]

I also kick puppies, if that helps.

Well, look at 'em; its the radically charming cracker embarrassment himself, come to pull more chicken-shit-ig'nt cracker bullshit on the great fucking Duane.  Did you see where I have totally re-written your being!? Narco fuck, Khemikal, indeed! Negatio.

[The Grand Nudger]

I leave the toilet seat up, too!

[Abaddon_ire]

QFT

Whateverist, what does QFT mean? Negatio

Fucking christ on a unicycle.

Let me once again google that for you.

Are you really this bone ass lazy?

[The Grand Nudger]

Magic hateball says yes, definitely.