Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Serena abhors the word experience, perception and the subjective world

14 views
Skip to first unread message

tubby

unread,
Apr 5, 2013, 7:30:14 AM4/5/13
to


I recently read an article by Graham Smetham in the magazine Philosophy Now (Dec 2012 edition titled) " On the Known to be false" Materialist philosophies of the Mind" page 29 which I think clearly highlighted the assumptions and beliefs of my dear friend and foe the wonderful soooooophisticated resident Muse Serena Nordstruuup

Namely that " there exists a realm of "stuff" which has no mental qualities and which exists independently of mind and in some mysterious way, this mindless material stuff somehow manages to produce minds"1 Page 29 Nov Dec edition.

Thus when it comes to discussions all these assumptions which IMO she holds so dearly are never discussed or challenged and therefore she allows herself to have free reign and circle jerk the topic at hand.


To my mind then this is why the wonderful logical all questioning Serena is so dispassionate and not interested in discussing such terms as , Perception, experience , or Subjectivity because in her world its all impersonal and just about sensations.


To her the world is according to Daniel Dennet ' An impersonal, un-reflective, robotic ,mindless little scrap of molecular machinery is the ultimate basis of all the agency, and hence meaning, and hence consciousness, in the Universe."( Darwins Dangerous ideas 1996 page 27) 2. page 29 Nov/Dec edition Philosophy Now.

I wonder where she is hiding in the heavens maybe?????


Cheers

Serena Nordstrup

unread,
Apr 7, 2013, 5:48:08 AM4/7/13
to
On Apr 5, 11:30 pm, tubby <btono...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I recently read an article by Graham Smetham in the magazine  Philosophy Now (Dec 2012 edition titled) " On the Known to be false" Materialist philosophies of the Mind"  page 29  which I think  clearly highlighted the assumptions and beliefs of my dear friend and foe the wonderful soooooophisticated resident Muse Serena Nordstruuup
>
> Namely that " there exists a realm of "stuff" which has no mental qualities and which exists independently of mind and in some mysterious way, this mindless material stuff somehow manages to produce minds"1 Page 29 Nov Dec  edition.

Witness our discussions on poetry, Bruno.

> Thus  when it comes to discussions all these assumptions which IMO  she holds so dearly are never discussed or challenged and therefore she allows herself to have free reign and circle jerk the topic at hand.
>
> To my mind then this is why the wonderful logical all questioning Serena is so dispassionate and not interested in discussing such terms as , Perception, experience , or Subjectivity

... whence our common interest in the link between the Subjective and
~experience~, as detected (but never grounded) by you in Caligari's
summary of Nietzsche ...

> because in her world its all impersonal and just about sensations.

... as opposed to perceptions?

> To her the world is according to Daniel Dennet ' An impersonal, un-reflective, robotic ,mindless little scrap of molecular machinery is the ultimate basis of all the agency, and hence meaning, and hence consciousness, in the Universe."( Darwins Dangerous ideas 1996  page 27)  2. page 29 Nov/Dec edition Philosophy Now.

What a lot of stuff you do make up, Bruno!

> I wonder where she is hiding in the heavens maybe?????

Those heavens of the non-mental physical world you depict?

tubby

unread,
Apr 8, 2013, 1:26:46 AM4/8/13
to
On Apr 7, 7:48 pm, Serena Nordstrup <s_nordst...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> On Apr 5, 11:30 pm, tubby <btono...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I recently read an article by Graham Smetham in the magazine  Philosophy Now (Dec 2012 edition titled) " On the Known to be false" Materialist philosophies of the Mind"  page 29  which I think  clearly highlighted the assumptions and beliefs of my dear friend and foe the wonderful soooooophisticated resident Muse Serena Nordstruuup
>
> > Namely that " there exists a realm of "stuff" which has no mental qualities and which exists independently of mind and in some mysterious way, this mindless material stuff somehow manages to produce minds"1 Page 29 Nov Dec  edition.
>
> Witness our discussions on poetry, Bruno.
>
> > Thus  when it comes to discussions all these assumptions which IMO  she holds so dearly are never discussed or challenged and therefore she allows herself to have free reign and circle jerk the topic at hand.
>
> > To my mind then this is why the wonderful logical all questioning Serena is so dispassionate and not interested in discussing such terms as , Perception, experience , or Subjectivity
>
> ... whence our common interest in the link between the Subjective and
> ~experience~, as detected (but never grounded) by you in Caligari's
> summary of Nietzsche ...

Which was circle jerked by you from the start.
>
> > because in her world its all impersonal and just about sensations.
>
>  ... as opposed to perceptions?
>
> > To her the world is according to Daniel Dennet ' An impersonal, un-reflective, robotic ,mindless little scrap of molecular machinery is the ultimate basis of all the agency, and hence meaning, and hence consciousness, in the Universe."( Darwins Dangerous ideas 1996  page 27)  2. page 29 Nov/Dec edition Philosophy Now.
>
> What a lot of stuff you do make up, Bruno!

You think so?? Nuh that' s you to a tee.
At least be honest about it.

Anyhow you did not answer me are you bringing Werner with you to
Canton??

Cheers

Serena Nordstrup

unread,
Apr 8, 2013, 7:55:04 AM4/8/13
to
On Apr 8, 5:26 pm, tubby <btono...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 7, 7:48 pm, Serena Nordstrup <s_nordst...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 5, 11:30 pm, tubby <btono...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I recently read an article by Graham Smetham in the magazine  Philosophy Now (Dec 2012 edition titled) " On the Known to be false" Materialist philosophies of the Mind"  page 29  which I think  clearly highlighted the assumptions and beliefs of my dear friend and foe the wonderful soooooophisticated resident Muse Serena Nordstruuup
>
> > > Namely that " there exists a realm of "stuff" which has no mental qualities and which exists independently of mind and in some mysterious way, this mindless material stuff somehow manages to produce minds"1 Page 29 Nov Dec  edition.
>
> > Witness our discussions on poetry, Bruno.

And our discussions about concepts. And about ideas.

> > > Thus  when it comes to discussions all these assumptions which IMO  she holds so dearly are never discussed or challenged and therefore she allows herself to have free reign and circle jerk the topic at hand.
>
> > > To my mind then this is why the wonderful logical all questioning Serena is so dispassionate and not interested in discussing such terms as , Perception, experience , or Subjectivity
>
> > ... whence our common interest in the link between the Subjective and
> > ~experience~, as detected (but never grounded) by you in Caligari's
> > summary of Nietzsche ...
>
> Which was circle jerked by you from the start.

Which start you unleashed by associating the Subjective with
~experience~. On what grounds, Bruno?

> > > because in her world its all impersonal and just about sensations.
>
> >  ... as opposed to perceptions?
>
> > > To her the world is according to Daniel Dennet ' An impersonal, un-reflective, robotic ,mindless little scrap of molecular machinery is the ultimate basis of all the agency, and hence meaning, and hence consciousness, in the Universe."( Darwins Dangerous ideas 1996  page 27)  2. page 29 Nov/Dec edition Philosophy Now.
>
> > What a lot of stuff you do make up, Bruno!
>
> You think so??

Yup.

> Nuh that' s you to a tee.

When I see the building of elaborate ad-hominems on the basis of
convenient authority-figures, all done without evidence, I get
suspicious. Strange, huh? Probably unique in the history of human ~
conversation ~...

> At least be honest about it.
>
> Anyhow you did not answer me are you bringing Werner with you to
> Canton??

My apologies: some computer-system swallowed my attempt to find out
how to engineer such an encounter for you. It went along the lines of:
does the ~werner~-entity come when one whistles? And does it change
its name in the interim?

TJ

unread,
Apr 8, 2013, 8:09:37 AM4/8/13
to
Does anyone ever understand or even care what this Nordstrop dude is talking about?

tubby

unread,
Apr 8, 2013, 10:05:11 AM4/8/13
to
On Apr 8, 10:09 pm, TJ <thetroublewitht...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Does anyone ever understand or even care what this Nordstrop dude is talking about?

Hi TJ stick around so you can fully understand the nuances and
sooooophistication that our resident
Muse brings to a topic.

I do agree with you though I hardly ever understand where she is
coming from but I try to play her game
fruitlessly I must admit.

You couldn't help me to decipher what she means regards Nietzsche and
the subjective or was it the objective world????

I asked a simple point of clarification once and she has been haunting
me with ever since then.

I think I even heard her bark in the Forest at Gembrook in Melbourne
Australia
She is everywhere.

I do like your direct questions though at least I understand them.

Hope you stick around to bring some balance to the conversation.

I think though you were a bit too harsh with Caligari because IMO the
organisation shafted him.

They moved on as if it was no loss to them and Caligari paid the
price.

Regards Bruno

tubby

unread,
Apr 8, 2013, 10:07:06 AM4/8/13
to
That's right dear Muse.
You finally get it!!!!!!

Cheers
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

Serena Nordstrup

unread,
Apr 9, 2013, 7:30:36 AM4/9/13
to
~Get~ the inconsistencies you've propounded? -- Well, perhaps some of
them...

Serena Nordstrup

unread,
Apr 9, 2013, 7:33:43 AM4/9/13
to
On Apr 9, 2:07 am, tubby <btono...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 8, 9:55 pm, Serena Nordstrup <s_nordst...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 8, 5:26 pm, tubby <btono...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 7, 7:48 pm, Serena Nordstrup <s_nordst...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Apr 5, 11:30 pm, tubby <btono...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > I recently read an article by Graham Smetham in the magazine  Philosophy Now (Dec 2012 edition titled) " On the Known to be false" Materialist philosophies of the Mind"  page 29  which I think  clearly highlighted the assumptions and beliefs of my dear friend and foe the wonderful soooooophisticated resident Muse Serena Nordstruuup
>
> > > > > Namely that " there exists a realm of "stuff" which has no mental qualities and which exists independently of mind and in some mysterious way, this mindless material stuff somehow manages to produce minds"1 Page 29 Nov Dec  edition.
>
> > > > Witness our discussions on poetry, Bruno.
>
> > And our discussions about concepts. And about ideas.
>
> > > > > Thus  when it comes to discussions all these assumptions which IMO  she holds so dearly are never discussed or challenged and therefore she allows herself to have free reign and circle jerk the topic at hand.
>
> > > > > To my mind then this is why the wonderful logical all questioning Serena is so dispassionate and not interested in discussing such terms as , Perception, experience , or Subjectivity
>
> > > > ... whence our common interest in the link between the Subjective and
> > > > ~experience~, as detected (but never grounded) by you in Caligari's
> > > > summary of Nietzsche ...
>
> > > Which was circle jerked by you from the start.
>
> > Which start you unleashed by associating the Subjective with
> > ~experience~. On what grounds, Bruno?

Wvhat grounds did you have for associating the Subjective with
~experience~, Bruno?

> > > > > because in her world its all impersonal and just about sensations.
>
> > > >  ... as opposed to perceptions?
>
> > > > > To her the world is according to Daniel Dennet ' An impersonal, un-reflective, robotic ,mindless little scrap of molecular machinery is the ultimate basis of all the agency, and hence meaning, and hence consciousness, in the Universe."( Darwins Dangerous ideas 1996  page 27)  2. page 29 Nov/Dec edition Philosophy Now.
>
> > > > What a lot of stuff you do make up, Bruno!
>
> > > You think so??
>
> > Yup.
>
> > > Nuh that' s you to a tee.
>
> > When I see the building of elaborate ad-hominems on the basis of
> > convenient authority-figures, all done without evidence, I get
> > suspicious. Strange, huh? Probably unique in the history of human ~
> > conversation ~...
>
> > > At least be honest about it.
>
> > > Anyhow you did not answer me are you bringing Werner with you to
> > > Canton??
>
> > My apologies: some computer-system swallowed my attempt to find out
> > how to engineer such an encounter for you. It went along the lines of:
> > does the ~werner~-entity come when one whistles? And does it change
> > its name in the interim?

Does the ~werner~-entity come when one whistles, Bruno? And does it
change its name in the interim?

> > > Cheers
> > > > > I wonder where she is hiding in the heavens maybe?????
>
> > > > Those heavens of the non-mental physical world you depict?
>
> > Those heavens of the non-mental physical world you depict?
>
> That's right dear Muse.
> You finally get it!!!!!!

Something to ~get~!
0 new messages