A revolution in thought

[Vivisectus]

Evidence that an observation is correct does not have to start out with data collection. I might observe something and make a correct inference without having to use the empirical method. The ultimate proof is if something works.

Sure you can. You might also make an incorrect inference, or even a nonsensical one. Until you gather some evidence that your inference is correct, there is no way to tell the difference.

And in a book supposed to convince everyone that it works, and that claims to prove it "beyond a shadow of a doubt" and in a way that "brooks no opposition", that is kind of an important stage to reach, don't you?

Chuck has passed judgment and thrown out the key. He has ruined it for every one else.

Can we have a complete list of people who have ruined it for everyone else? I know Shae did, and David, and Maturin and Spacemonkey, and now also Chuck. Am I missing anyone?

It's actually a blessing in disguise because I'm wasting too much time here

I am sure it is taking away valuable time from your own facebook forum, as well as the many marketing activities that you were about to begin to start to commence to initiate since about 3 years ago.

[ChuckF]

My friends, let me show you just how confused peacegirl is as she rejects the basic principles of the Authentic Text!

Originally Posted by peacegirl

He is forcing me to leave because his repetitions are worthless, yet he keeps persisting in order to dumb down the people who are tuning in.

. . .

My hands are tied.

Here, she claims that I am "forcing" her to leave, as though I am compelling her against her own will. As though she doesn't really want to leave, but has to (her "hands are tied.")

Friends, the Authentic Text is clear: peacegirl is obviously confused, and dishonest with herself and others.



That peacegirl is confused and dishonest is not news to those of us who reject her Corrupted Text, and interpret the Authentic Text as written by the Author and published in his lifetime.

But I hope this demonstration of the elegant power of the Authentic Text in the hands of me, its True Steward, helps deconfuse peacegirl, and those who may have been deceived by her Corrupted Text.

The base metals of peacegirl's Corrupted Text cannot withstand the purifying crucible of the Authentic Text.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

Sure you can. You might also make an incorrect inference, or even a nonsensical one. Until you gather some evidence that your inference is correct, there is no way to tell the difference.

And in a book supposed to convince everyone that it works, and that claims to prove it "beyond a shadow of a doubt" and in a way that "brooks no opposition", that is kind of an important stage to reach, don't you?

Yes, the ultimate proof is that it works. You don't just throw something away because it can't be tested in the usual way, or you don't believe him because the claims are extraordinary. It's amazing that you are all so closed-minded and as a result you're bypassing a revolutionary work.

Chuck has passed judgment and thrown out the key. He has ruined it for every one else.

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

Can we have a complete list of people who have ruined it for everyone else? I know Shae did, and David, and Maturin and Spacemonkey, and now also Chuck. Am I missing anyone?

Chuck takes the cake. He has ruined it for me. I can't stomach his repetition, his lies, and his disrespect.

It's actually a blessing in disguise because I'm wasting too much time here

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

I am sure it is taking away valuable time from your own facebook forum, as well as the many marketing activities that you were about to begin to start to commence to initiate since about 3 years ago.

It's not that easy Vivisectus. If it was, I would have done it already. I'm trying to learn marketing techniques that may help me.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Chuck takes the cake. He has ruined it for me. I can't stomach his repetition, his lies, and his disrespect.

peacegirl, I can't stomach your Corruption, your lies, and the disrespect you've shown to the Authentic Text. Your Corrupted Text is sick-making. That is why I, the True Steward of the Authentic Text, am compelled of my own free will to reject your Corrupted Text, and to interpret the Authentic Text as written by the Author and published in his lifetime. I shall do so without blame from you, peacegirl.

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Here, she claims that I am "forcing" her to leave, as though I am compelling her against her own will. As though she doesn't really want to leave, but has to (her "hands are tied.")

Friends, the Authentic Text is clear: peacegirl is obviously confused, and dishonest with herself and others.

Too right. It is mathematically, scientifically and undeniably (that is to say, undeniably, undeniably and undeniably) true that no one can make another person do something s/he does not want to do.

peacegirl has no understanding of this knowledge at all. None. Zip. Zilch. Zero. Bupkis. It was truly God's will that a True Steward found Lessans' authentic writings and saved them from utter annihilation at the hands of a wicked, dishonest, money-grubbing incompetent.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

peacegirl, I can't stomach your Corruption, your lies, and the disrespect you've shown to the Authentic Text. Your Corrupted Text is sick-making. That is why I, the True Steward of the Authentic Text, am compelled of my own free will to reject your Corrupted Text, and to interpret the Authentic Text as written by the Author and published in his lifetime. I shall do so without blame from you, peacegirl.

I will blame you justifiably because you struck the first blow! Do you even understand what that means? Of course you don't. You understand nothing. You are a big fat fraud!

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

Too right. It is mathematically, scientifically and undeniably (that is to say, undeniably, undeniably and undeniably) true that no one can make another person do something s/he does not want to do.

peacegirl has no understanding of this knowledge at all. None. Zip. Zilch. Zero. Bupkis. It was truly God's will that a True Steward found Lessans' authentic writings and saved them from utter annihilation at the hands of a wicked, dishonest, money-grubbing incompetent.

This group is a collection of nutso's

[peacegirl]

[quote=Stephen Maturin;1293354]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Here, she claims that I am "forcing" her to leave, as though I am compelling her against her own will. As though she doesn't really want to leave, but has to (her "hands are tied.")

Friends, the Authentic Text is clear: peacegirl is obviously confused, and dishonest with herself and others.

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

Too right. It is mathematically, scientifically and undeniably (that is to say, undeniably, undeniably and undeniably) true that no one can make another person do something s/he does not want to do.

That is true. When I said he forced me, you should know by now that I didn't mean he actually can force me to do anything against my will. Let me help you here because you are obviously being sarcastic: His attitude is such that I can't stomach him, which is compelling me, of my own free will or desire, to move in a different direction for satisfaction. Lessans was not wrong.

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

peacegirl has no understanding of this knowledge at all. None. Zip. Zilch. Zero. Bupkis. It was truly God's will that a True Steward found Lessans' authentic writings and saved them from utter annihilation at the hands of a wicked, dishonest, money-grubbing incompetent.

You're all nuttier than a fruitcake, but chuck takes the prize

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I will blame you

Thou shall not blame, peacegirl. Thou shall not blame.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

When I said he forced me, you should know by now that I didn't mean he actually can force me to do anything against my will.

peacegirl, this is precisely why your Corrupted Text is Corrupt, and must be rejected: it cannot be trusted! When you Corrupt the Authentic Text by rewriting it to say what you think it should say (rather than what the Author actually wrote and published in his lifetime) you are reduced to saying absurd things, such as "You should know by know that I didn't mean ." You cannot even write what you mean to say - you cannot claim to speak for the Author when you Corrupt his words.

peacegirl, your Corrupted Text is a worthless pack of lies. It must be rejected. I am the True Steward of the Authentic Text, and I will interpret the Authentic Text as written by the Author and published in his lifetime, and I shall do so without blame from you.

[ChuckF]

Ok, taking a break for a second: peacegirl, have you actually tried to have liv or vm ban me from ? Did you use the "Report Post" feature? Did you PM one or both of them to ask them to do that? If so, can you post those PMs here, because I would really like to see them.

Thanks in advance

ChuckF
True Steward of the Authentic Text

[Florence Jellem]

Chuck takes the cake, and he takes the prize? What is Flo, chopped liver? Flo gets neither cake nor prize? Can I at least keep my whiskey and my precious memories of my poor little Adolf, whom peacegirl murdered?

Now I am mad at Chuck for hogging the cake and the prize!

[ChuckF]

[Florence Jellem]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Flo wants cake and a prize, too! I'm an old lady and I deserve cake and a prize!

peacegirl, can't you at least put Flo on the long list of People Who Ruined It For Everyone?

[But]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You're all nuttier than a fruitcake, but chuck takes the prize

He's not the one who takes his health advice from people who say that AIDS doesn't exist and that it's a good idea to stare into the Sun.

[Spacemonkey]

More blatant lies from PG...

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I never mutilated or fabricated his words.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

If you have a relevant question that is not derogatory in any way, I will be glad to answer.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I am giving my book away for anyone who wants to read it.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I could leave at any time.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Before [Chuck] came along I could have a conversation.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I'm trying to learn...

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Lessans was not wrong.

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

This individual who has taken over this thread has nothing to actually refute.

If you are referring to ChuckF, the True Steward of the Authentic Text, then you are correct. He has nothing to actually refute because there is nothing of substance in your Corrupted Text. In order to refute something there must be something there to refute. You've got nothing.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

The sad thing about it is that no one has the guts to defend my right to discuss the book.

Your "right" to discuss the book has not been infringed upon in any way. Therefore, no defense is necessary.

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

I have often wondered where Peacegirl came up with notion that a discussion can be brought to a stand-still by one party failing to fully accept the other party's argument. I see now where she got that idea.

Does this mean that you are also in complete agreement so I can proceed?

Peacegirl clearly imbibed this principle at her father's feet.

Lessan's First Law of Conversation: There can be no conversation in the absence of complete agreement.

[Vivisectus]

Yes, the ultimate proof is that it works.

A proof we do not have. So at this point we have no reason to assume it does, or that the inferences drawn from the observations (which we cannot check) are correct.

It does not help that your book is full of claims about how undeniable and scientific it is, when you admit it is neither.

This is the problem: you are asking people to believe something based on observations we cannot check and evidence that does not exist yet.

Well, let's be honest, one of problems. It is in the top ten anyway.

You don't just throw something away because it can't be tested in the usual way, or you don't believe him because the claims are extraordinary.

You are putting the cart before the horses mouth here! You don't just accept something as correct before you see that there is evidence that it is correct. Until such time, it is not rejected per se. It just belongs in a large set of other ideas that may or may not be true. This set includes a few things which are actually true, and vast loads of nonsense.

But you are asking that we treat your idea as if it is true, despite the fact there is no reason to assume it is, and when that does not happen you complain about bias.

It's amazing that you are all so closed-minded and as a result you're bypassing a revolutionary work.

Open-mindedness does not require a person to accept any hunch. That is just credulousness. It merely requires a person not to dismiss evidence because they do not like the idea.

This is one of the examples of you accusing people of bias when you do not even give them any reason to believe you are correct!

Chuck takes the cake. He has ruined it for me. I can't stomach his repetition, his lies, and his disrespect.

Have you really not worked him out yet?

It's not that easy Vivisectus. If it was, I would have done it already. I'm trying to learn marketing techniques that may help me.

What marketing tachniques are these, and how are you trying to learn them?

Granted, it is a herculean task you have set yourself. It is like trying to sell a broken bicycle when all your potential customers are fish.

But then again, there are plenty of examples out there of people managing just that, and successfully. There are vast teeming hordes of gullible people who seem to be rearing to part with their hard-earned money in exchange for the most dubious of products. Hell, there is a thriving industry out there that manages to sell people magically medicinal water!

Why not take a page out of their book? I already showed you a good way to start copying their tactics: seek out compatible stories, pieces of research, and news. Then re-iterate your point, and make it seem like compatibility equals confirmation.

Use the Dunning-Kruger effect to your advantage!

Remember, no-one likes to think other people may be smarter than them. They prefer to think that experts and academics are either biased, corrupt, or so blinkered by established scientific consensus that they are unable to see the big picture. They prefer intuition to knowledge, because intuition comes free while knowledge takes a lot of hard work and is, like, complicated.

It is not difficult to tell them it is actually a good thing not to understand complex things: complicated stuff is probably just an attempt to fool people for money, or overly theoretical nonsense flying in the face of common sense.

Generally, people like to feel like they already pretty much know everything they need to know to understand everything around them, and that they are pretty much right about it already. Everything that they do not really get is scary, while simple concepts give a sense of control.

They also like to feel that they are special. That they are spiritual. Intuitive. Emotionally intelligent. University of Life graduates. They may not have much formal knowledge, but somehow they can feel truths hidden from sterile intellectual elitism.

This is the carrot. But we also need a kind of stick: the scary stuff.

Blind juggernauts of governments are coming for their rights! Big business is looking to keep them down in order to make money! Conspiracies are trying to control them and the whole damn system is rigged anyway! Academic elitists are just protecting their cozy little club! Doctors worldwide are making you swallow scary chemicals to keep you buying more!

Handily, this also explains any lack of success that your punters may be experiencing. No wonder that an intelligent, intuitive and insightful person ended up on the dole, in such a system! No wonder that the medical profession has no faith in the gentle healing power of diluted water and aura-balancing aromatherapy! No wonder that scientists have not yet validated my manifesto!

The awesome thing is, that once you have managed to insert your idea into the head-space of people who think like this, it is almost impossible to change their minds again. No-one wants to admit they were rather foolishly wrong. They will prefer to double down on the stupid ninety-eight times out of a hundred rather than let their idea fall by the wayside, so to speak. And handily, you have already supplied them with some ready-made excuses that explain why they may seem to be wrong, but are actually right!

You are already familiar with quite a few groups of people who operate like this: the anti-vaxxers. The alternative medicine guru's. The conspiracy theorists.

I really see no reason why you would not be able to sell at least a few of your books simply by adopting the same tactics. All it would take is a little effort.

[But]

peacegirl could write an anti-vaccine book. She has the perfect skills for that. Combine a vague fear of the unknown with debunked garbage science and conspiracy theories, and voilà!

[Stephen Maturin]

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

It is like trying to sell a broken bicycle when all your potential customers are fish.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

I am sure it is taking away valuable time from your own facebook forum, as well as the many marketing activities that you were about to begin to start to commence to initiate since about 3 years ago.

You seem to have missed that this forum is taking time away from her drinking and surely that activity would take precedence over the other activities you mentioned.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

Lessans' contentions regarding free will being accurate is indeed a necessary condition for the accuracy of his remaining contentions, but it's by no means a sufficient condition.

Herein lies lulz. Even if we assume for discussion's sake that everything Lessans said about determinism, the workings of conscience, and the ever-so-lulzily designated "two-sided equation" is true, Lessantology still has no transformative power of any sort.

According to Lessans, it makes no sense to blame others for their actions once we know that they didn't have the capacity (free will) to do otherwise. Lessans refers to "Thou Shalt Not Blame" as a "corollary" of his "discovery" that people lack free will.

Lessans also claims that human conscience doesn't operate at full capacity in a "free will environment." As we know others will consider the harm we do blameworthy, our conscience can "justify" dishing out harm. Conscience requires that consequences be imposed upon a harmful act. So long as blame from outside imposes such consequences, conscience need not impose consequences from within.

However, once we've internalized the "truth" that humans lack free will, and its no-blame corollary, we can't even consider harming others because we cannot appease our consciences through justification. Thus, with our conscience now fully buffed, the very thought of doing something harmful reduces us to a state of gibbering, drooling incontinence.

Accordingly, what will prevent people from acting to harm one another is fear of the dire internal consequences that conscience, liberated from the shackles of the belief in free will, would impose on us.

When everyone knows about the absence of free will and the no-blame corollary, then I will know that neither you nor anyone else will blame me for anything I do to you. Knowing that you will not hold me accountable, my conscience must do the work. Thus, we get Lessans' two-sided equation: I must hold myself accountable for harm I know you must excuse.

BUT! Lessans clearly wrote that the no-blame corollary applies only before a harm is delivered, not after. After a harm is delivered, we're entirely justified in fixing blame and responding. In one of his examples, Lessans wrote that he'd gleefully blow the everluvin' head off anyone who broke into his house. That being "true" (), the already-teetering edifice of the Great Man's system collapses to rubble.

What keeps us on the straight and narrow in the Golden Age is "knowledge" that no one would ever blame us for harming them. But we don't know that. Indeed, we can't know that because, according to Lessans himself, it isn't true. Again, "Thou Shalt Not Blame" applies only before a harm is delivered, not after. Accordingly, we know in advance that we will be blamed if we place one or more of our fellow human beings in a hurtlock. Buh bye, two-sided equation!

The "solution" to the above-described problem seems to involve Lessans' decree that we'll all need to sign no-blame contracts as a condition precedent to admission into the Lessantonian Grand Society. How that works is anyone's guess. After all, signing an agreement not to blame does nothing to change the "fact" that, according to Lessans, blame is justified after a harm is delivered. That being the case, the condition that supposedly eliminates the desire to do anything that could be harmful -- i.e., the "knowledge" that you'd never be blamed -- is chimerical.

peacegirl told me awhile back that signing no-blame contracts is a "necessary condition" to the advent of the novus ordo seclorum. When I asked why, I got some Authentic Lessantonian Gibberish amounting to "cuz it is." It's kinda like when people were asking how the same photons that are illuminating an object a thousand light years away can simultaneously be in physical contact with the retinas of an observer on earth. The answer: "Because of efferent vision."

show spoiler

I happened to find this post and it shows me how little you have understood. Unfortunately, because you thought you knew Lessans was wrong based on your inaccurate analysis, it caused you to feel justified in the way you've responded. It's really sad, but I want to let you know that your analysis of the two-sided equation is completely off. I'm not staying, don't worry, but I felt the need to tell you that you misunderstood the most important part of his work, the very core of what makes this a genuine discovery. No wonder you think your laughter is justified, but it only shows your ignorance.

[ChuckF]

Hi, peacegirl!

[Kyuss Apollo]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I'm not staying, don't worry

Can we hold you to this as a threat or a promise?