Ontological Disproof of God

[KevinM1]

KevinM!, you  have been on my case, big time, ever since I arrived here.  Look at the history of your posts; and, you swing back and forth between nice, and, being a little dick!  You address me in such a hostile, disrespectful, and condescending manner in your continuous harassing attempts to make me over into a being which you prefer for me, and, so is everyone else.  Did you see the great interaction between Vulcanlogician and Negatio, where I explained why I write the way I write; however, you constantly insist that my being me is entirely insufficient.  Your above criticism takes the same condescending tone, yea, sure, you are going to make me over into the image of you, and, then, all will be well.  To me as an older guy, you are coming-off, in the past, and now, in a very peevish and immature fashion, ordering me to straighten-up and fly it right! And, so are many others, who scream scream for simplicity...read the Vulcanlogician/Negatio interchange from yesterday because, the dialectical pressure which Vulcanlogician subjected me to, in gentlemanly fashion, excited me to giving him a solid answer regarding why I had to write the OP  in the way in which I did. Negatio.

RE: the bolded -

You're right.  That's because I'm of two minds regarding you:

1. On the off chance you're not simply trolling us, I'd honestly rather have a new member in the community than not.  So, part of me does want to help you.

2. That said, I'm about 99% certain that you're simply having a good laugh at our expense, because who simply:

• Dumps a poorly formatted treatise on a bunch of strangers without any kind of introduction?
  
• Uses a random online forum as a digital archive when there's so many better options (which have been laid out for you)?
  
• Becomes irrationally defensive and rude when people ask for clarification/better formatting/less superfluously flourished language?
  
• Takes 18.5 (roughly) pages to not even meet us half way with the above?
  

I mean, let's be clear here - you started your bullshit when pgrimes asked for some clarification.  You responded with:

You  have simply encountered a totally different perspectival world view, and, you have neither the education nor the reflection requisite to possibly follow the distinctive and different weltanschauung, which you just now  encounter !  I sincerely appreciate you deeming my writing as potentially significant; while, all the while, it is a radically beautiful and glib song which has, in fact, overthrown "law" within a purely theoretical sphere...

How is that not trolling?  And if it's not trolling, then why would you expect anyone to treat you politely when you lead off with this kind of display?

So, congratulations - you either did a fairly competent (if obvious) troll job on the rest of us, or you're a person that really needs to learn how to play well with others.

[vulcanlogician]

[brewer]

[edit]

mh.brewer can post me and openly laugh and scorn me, and you don't care.  However, let me do the slightest little thing, and you prejudicially are right on me!

It's about time I made the list.

Determination is subjective and does not necessarily represent the truth.

Not all determination is negation. 

na-ne-na-ne boo boo! (wanted to make sure I made the peevish and immature list)

[KevinM1]

[negatio]

KevinM!, you  have been on my case, big time, ever since I arrived here.  Look at the history of your posts; and, you swing back and forth between nice, and, being a little dick!  You address me in such a hostile, disrespectful, and condescending manner in your continuous harassing attempts to make me over into a being which you prefer for me, and, so is everyone else.  Did you see the great interaction between Vulcanlogician and Negatio, where I explained why I write the way I write; however, you constantly insist that my being me is entirely insufficient.  Your above criticism takes the same condescending tone, yea, sure, you are going to make me over into the image of you, and, then, all will be well.  To me as an older guy, you are coming-off, in the past, and now, in a very peevish and immature fashion, ordering me to straighten-up and fly it right! And, so are many others, who scream scream for simplicity...read the Vulcanlogician/Negatio interchange from yesterday because, the dialectical pressure which Vulcanlogician subjected me to, in gentlemanly fashion, excited me to giving him a solid answer regarding why I had to write the OP  in the way in which I did. Negatio.

RE: the bolded -

You're right.  That's because I'm of two minds regarding you:

1. On the off chance you're not simply trolling us, I'd honestly rather have a new member in the community than not.  So, part of me does want to help you.

2. That said, I'm about 99% certain that you're simply having a good laugh at our expense, because who simply:

• Dumps a poorly formatted treatise on a bunch of strangers without any kind of introduction?
  
• Uses a random online forum as a digital archive when there's so many better options (which have been laid out for you)?
  
• Becomes irrationally defensive and rude when people ask for clarification/better formatting/less superfluously flourished language?
  
• Takes 18.5 (roughly) pages to not even meet us half way with the above?
  

I mean, let's be clear here - you started your bullshit when pgrimes asked for some clarification.  You responded with:

You  have simply encountered a totally different perspectival world view, and, you have neither the education nor the reflection requisite to possibly follow the distinctive and different weltanschauung, which you just now  encounter !  I sincerely appreciate you deeming my writing as potentially significant; while, all the while, it is a radically beautiful and glib song which has, in fact, overthrown "law" within a purely theoretical sphere...

How is that not trolling?  And if it's not trolling, then why would you expect anyone to treat you politely when you lead off with this kind of display?

So, congratulations - you either did a fairly competent (if obvious) troll job on the rest of us, or you're a person that really needs to learn how to play well with others.

I absolutely and truly did not know what trolling was when I wrote my honest reply to pgrimes; he was being cool, I merely gave him the way I honestly
 have been conditioned to think during 46 years of fun on campus, and, that is essentially what I said in my interchange with Vulc yesterday, in a very rational and effective manner. Everything around here is trolling and, everyone is trolling me constantly, however, all I have to do is simply stand up to you against insult, and, thereby, I am for sure a troll; this troll mentality is so goddamn destructive.  If the very first thing I did was a horrid act, that was the very last think I thought it was.  I did not mean archiving in the sense you are taking it; I meant placing my paper among other persons, where it would essentially stay there for good. I had many other papers on many other forum type places, Abaddon dug out a far out one. Hell, I had my  desktop choke up and die just today.  These sites do serve me as caches, their sit does not  die.

Will further study your excellent response and get back to you later. Negatio.

[LadyForCamus]

So, are you going to talk about your argument, or...?

[negatio]

Yes Jamie Lee is totally dynamite in the scene  ''They just don't understand it !''  I say they would if they stuck to it for as many years as it takes, in fact, I can pretty much guarantee even a stupid person can understand, perhaps not entirely completely, however, it is indeed hard, hard work, and, not necessarily brains that centrally count and makes for achieving an understanding.
It is interesting to me that you, even though you may or may not have heard that Hegel deemed the three word dictum to contain infinite riches, thought the subordinate clause was relevant just to accounting for figure/ ground object isolation. Sartre dipped in for the sake of action origination; me for the sake of raising as figure upon a cultural ground, what I see as serious errors in need of eventual correction. Three little dynamite words indeed, by a lens grinder who passed at a mere forty five years of age.  Those three little words have had a tremendous effect on the world; founding Sartre's Being and Nothingness can be considered a major achievement, too bad the dead don't get to know their post mortem accomplishments. Thank you. Negatio

[The Grand Nudger]

[KevinM1]

[negatio]

RE: the bolded -

You're right.  That's because I'm of two minds regarding you:

1. On the off chance you're not simply trolling us, I'd honestly rather have a new member in the community than not.  So, part of me does want to help you.

2. That said, I'm about 99% certain that you're simply having a good laugh at our expense, because who simply:

• Dumps a poorly formatted treatise on a bunch of strangers without any kind of introduction?
  
• Uses a random online forum as a digital archive when there's so many better options (which have been laid out for you)?
  
• Becomes irrationally defensive and rude when people ask for clarification/better formatting/less superfluously flourished language?
  
• Takes 18.5 (roughly) pages to not even meet us half way with the above?
  

Kevin, you are looking at me strictly from the provincial perspectival view of the world view which you entertain here within the forum. You completely neglect the facts that I did not know, when I posted the OP, that there was a series of persons on the forum, which was not picked at total random, who had the perspectives which you describe as ''dumping'' a ''wall of text''...'..for a good troll laugh at other's expense...absent ''introduction''.  I absolutely neither knew  of, nor could have possibly intended all of those things, absolutely not.  Politely informing someone they lack intellectual instrumentation requisite to understanding is not meant an insult/rudeness, it is simply a statement of what I am advising a person regading what a person may lack when he is unsure, and the paper ''may'' have something to it. The paper does in fact have something to it, and, I am informing him that his doubt is probably based in his lacks, rather than the paper's.
I am never, ever, irrational, son.

My responsibilities in the matter lie completely outside of all considerations concerning persons who's youth and cognitive development; who's lack of existentialist tools of thought hinder comprehension; those persons I must leave to wallow in their own freedom, for, I cannot learn the text for them, and, neither will I take a sledge hammer to the result of thirty years of hard won familiarity with the most difficult of concepts, thereby ruining a masterpiece to accommodate others  not able, for whatever reasons, to follow, to comprehend; I will not detotalize an accomplishment of mine in order to cull  undeveloped persons; let them develop, and, let not me undevelop. 

Why do 99% of members always have to pair accosting me with flippant, nasty, revolting insult, disrespect, disparagement, accusation, hatefulness and ignoble agumentum ad hominem? What has happened to civility? Negatio.