homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » In Praise of IngoB! (Page 10)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  7  8  9  10  11  12  13 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: In Praise of IngoB!
Kelly Alves

Bunny with an axe
# 2522

 - Posted      Profile for Kelly Alves   Email Kelly Alves   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Make me. MAKE ME CHILLAX. GO AHEAD.

(I should never drink coffee this late in the day.)

--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.

Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696

 - Posted      Profile for Evensong   Author's homepage   Email Evensong   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm having visions of Go ahead punk. Make my day and wondering how to turn the image to use in this context.

--------------------
a theological scrapbook

Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Left at the Altar

Ship's Siren
# 5077

 - Posted      Profile for Left at the Altar         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No, I'm serious. There's something about this place that brings out the worst in me. My Mr Hyde emerges.

Of course, I'm not the only one, and I'm far from the worst (you know who you are; or if you don't, someone will be along to tell you - it's that kind of place).

I only drop in ever so occasionally, and I am much better when I don't. So I think I'll mosey along now that I've buggered up Ingo's weekend.

If I return in a fit of weakness, kindly tell me to rack off.


ETA. Stupid autocorrect

[ 26. April 2014, 04:53: Message edited by: Left at the Altar ]

Posts: 9111 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696

 - Posted      Profile for Evensong   Author's homepage   Email Evensong   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Come, come LATA. You've done Bingo a public service.

Now that you've drawn blood, the crowd is more likely to disperse.

--------------------
a theological scrapbook

Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815

 - Posted      Profile for Gee D     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
But it's been good to have you back LATA, if a fluffy bunny comment is allowed in Hell.. If you decide to leave this board, keep going on others please.

--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican

Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
orfeo

Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878

 - Posted      Profile for orfeo   Author's homepage   Email orfeo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
If there's one thing people need to learn in 21st Century living, it's how to handle the internet.

I'm at a bit of a loss as to how Ingo can survive with a mindset that says interactions here aren't like real life. Does this apply to email? Phone calls? I would say that 95% of my clients at work are people I never actually meet. I can't imagine regarding them as mattering less for that reason.

At the same time, we've all got to be at least a little bit aware that some of the inhibitions we normally use when dealing with people proximate to us tend to get switched off when we're dealing with people thousands of miles away. We have a sense that there are fewer consequences for our actions.

But the world is getting more and more interconnected.

Before I was born, my family sent reel-to-reel tape recordings halfway around the world to stay in touch.

When I was a kid, Dad was halfway around the world and a postcard would take weeks to arrive.

In 2000, when I was halfway around the world I got a hotmail email address and found internet cafes where I could get in touch with home every few days.

Last year, when I was halfway around the world I could play Scrabble against my mother, and she would ask what I was doing up so late on a Saturday night in Chicago.

[ 26. April 2014, 08:28: Message edited by: orfeo ]

--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.

Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Words have their own magic, and I sure can spin them. But there is a glass in my hand, and a whisky on my tongue and if you were here you could have one, too. But you are not here. And nothing I can say can change that. Ever.

I understand that completely. I'm a very physical person and relate to the world very much through my senses.

One of the times I feel most connected to God is when I'm painting. This is one of my, very large, paintings called 'Advent', maybe you can see a connection with God in it too?

But words, written and spoken, are simply another medium with which we connect with each other and God - they are not separate from our selves at all imo.

--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk

Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Curiosity killed ...

Ship's Mug
# 11770

 - Posted      Profile for Curiosity killed ...   Email Curiosity killed ...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's obvious that IngoB sees debate as exercise in winning or losing in Purg - I more or less said that when I challenged him in this thread. Which means I either start a thread, like the example, prepared for a contest or I scroll past his posts when I don't have time to get into a pugilistic battle or when it's something that I find sensitive and know that slugging it out with someone forensically dissecting my arguments will be painful.

Two other points - I have spent time with him in the café, a few years back but not as long ago as LaTA, and got a far more human response. I seriously debated turning up to a Birmingham meet because I wanted to meet the real person (and a couple of other people who were going along)

Secondly, this assumption that on-line communities are not real is very common. I've heard Professor Mary Beard completely dismissing MOOCs in a debate because the discussion wasn't as good as that found in Oxbridge tutor groups, Ironically I thought of the level of debate in Purgatory and the effort put in by people like IngoB when I was talking to one of the proponents of MOOCs after the debate.

--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat

Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:

I'm at a bit of a loss as to how Ingo can survive with a mindset that says interactions here aren't like real life.

It needs the presumption that all parties are operating on the same principles to even begin to resemble reality.
If we replace real with can be more complete then I might agree.
Online is only not real if we choose to not represent ourselves accurately. Of course, this is also true of face to face interaction.
Limited, yes; but real no less for that.

--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou

Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The thing that I find vexatious about IngoB is his unwillingness to engage with theological debate at a level of personal experience or personal views. I find it hard to believe that, as a neuroscientist, Ingo simply uncritically submits himself to the doctrine of the Catholic Church - in its most unloving iteration - with such a complete lack of intellectual curiosity or a looking at the bigger cultural-evolutionary matrix into which religion itself fits. He has a background in Zen Buddhism, so one would very much infer that he has a religiously subtle, questing mind (unless he surrendered that utterly in order to have something solid to hold onto in a particular type of Catholicism). Of course, I do recall that Ingo was lecturing us on Catholic teaching before he was even received into the Church. As others have said, all we get from him is rhetoric. If I want that, I can just go to the SSPX website, or I can read the Catechism in the most mechanical way possible. I think I'd prefer to hear Ingo hold forth on issues of neuroscience than Catholic doctrine.

[ 26. April 2014, 17:45: Message edited by: Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras ]

Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

 - Posted      Profile for Chesterbelloc   Email Chesterbelloc   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ohhhkay. It's beginning to get a bit glaringly patent to me by now - can I really be alone? I ask - that for some of the posters on this thread, no matter what IngoB says, no matter how or how many different ways he says it, they'll keep coming back with precisely the same criticisms of his posting as they came here to vent in the first place.

If one of IngoB's failings is supposed to be that he won't give in until he bludgeons an opponent into defeat, it's definitely some of his most frequent critics' that they will never admit IngoB has justified himself to any substantial degree whatever. If IngoB is too fond of pure argumentative reason - mileage on that varies, and for this fellow Catholic[*] he's not - then way too many of his opponents are fairly obviously too touchy to admit when he has established a point. Ever.

I suspect - and you'll just have to try to forgive me - that a lot of his opponents are as mad as a sinkful of honey-badgers precisely because IngoB's take-no-prisoners rational approach to theology profoundly prods their own theological presuppositions and emotional defences, when they'd much rather leave them safely and snugly undisturbed. The sleep of theological reason produces comfort-blankies. But it's something else entirely that sets you free.

Anyway, I'll say this - and I'm pretty sure that even some of his detractors here know it without ever allowing themselves to acknowledge it: whatever faults he is perceived to have, on this thread alone IngoB has proved himself one of the most outstandingly unrestful, eloquent and bloody decent posters on this barque. Some of the posters to this thread have, I think, aquitted themselves pretty shameworthily - but not the target himself. God bless him, says I.

[*By all means, attribute my entire opinion of IngoB to my being his co-religionist if you like. But if you do so out loud, be prepared for some non-Catholics to post something tending to the contrary.]

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
The thing that I find vexatious about IngoB is his unwillingness to engage with theological debate at a level of personal experience or personal views.

I've seen plenty of personal views from Ingo - he hasn't been shy, for example, about describing where he sees the actions of the current Pope as enabling sloppy or incorrect thinking.

But if you're looking to hear Ingo preaching against RC dogma, I think you'll have to wait a while. As I recall, the man himself has said that he has two choices: 1. assent to all the things to which the (RC) church requires him to assent or 2. stop being a Catholic.

I enjoy Ingo's posting. I don't always agree with his premises, but it's rare that I disagree with his logic, and he's good at ferreting out any sloppy thinking that I might be guilty of.

Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
I agree, and that is why I've stopped trying to debate with IngoB. He avoids the substance of what is being put and simply responds in terms of pure rhetoric - the subject matters not, the grinding of the other into the ground is what debate is all about. That's OK at school, but not in real life.

I'm not sure that pure rhetoric is even possible, it would be like Cage's 4'33''. However, to characterise my contributions (in Purgatory at least) as generally "avoiding the substance" is remarkably close to pure bullshit, which I guess is a form of pure rhetoric. So, we are getting there.

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
So frustrated right now. Bingo just wrote something that brought tears to my eyes--in a good way, for a change--and I fully expect he will just write it off as a neurotic blip of some sort. Gahhh! That's the shit I live for!

It's like you people have never known anyone who really likes to do something. Let's say playing basketball. That makes him a baller. You get invited to coffee at the baller's place. Curious, it must be another way of saying "let's have a short game of basketball". You go there, and the man actually serves you coffee and plays with his baby. And no, I don't mean that he's throwing the baby through a hoop. You go home marvelling and worry that he will jumps out of the bushes, shouting "Got you! Just kidding, let's play ball now." But no, you get home with not a basketball in sight... What's going on? The baller must be sick somehow, or on drugs. Yet the next day you see him again playing basketball in the court. He is a baller after all. Order is restored to the universe.

That's what so many people are doing, just because I actually really like debating. And because I'm debating in a particular way, I must be the bastard child of Attila the Hun and an ogre princess in real life. Well, I'm not. I'm not either, of course, a completely different person in real life. But you are running into one specific aspect of me, not some feature-length presentation of the life of IngoB.

quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
I relate to all sorts of people in RL who don't massage me.

One of the things that keeps places like SoF going is the near infinite capacity of people to completely miss each other's points. I bet if you counted the number of re-explanations, they would easily amount to 50% of the traffic generated. Anyway, you completely missed my point there. Again.

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I don't understand the denigration of words.

Nobody has denigrated words here. Certainly not the Word, which I incidentally gave special mention. However, our words have no solidity of their own. I can give you a promise, and I can break it. It's not the words that bind me, per se, rather I can bind myself to words. I can describe a juicy steak to you, but you cannot eat it. But if I fry one for you, you can. Etc. Words can become real through agents, but they are fundamentally virtual. And if you have a "community" that interacts essentially only with words, then that is challenging in a fundamental way. It is not simply a real community but now on the internet.

There are plenty of more comments to go through, but I have to run. I just want to briefly thank LatA for bothering with a more comprehensive (and dare I say, kinder) evaluation, and note that she really does not have to leave on my account.

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
OK, more bluntly, I can't imagine that Ingo really believes many of the things he argues for, unless he willfully turns off all independent critical judgment, or unless he is just playing games with language. I understand that his subjective, experiential religion may be quite different to the intellectual argumentation he presents on the Ship. I just think his apparent subscription to the dogmatic authority of the Roman Catholic Church is either disingenuous or neurotically rigid. If he is not simply winding us all up, then it's not very different to me from any other variety of unquestioning fundamentalism. Since that can't be put down to ignorance in his case, it would seem to express a rigidity of character and a need for absolutes that finds expression in his approach to Catholicism.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
OK, more bluntly, I can't imagine that Ingo really believes many of the things he argues for, unless he willfully turns off all independent critical judgment, or unless he is just playing games with language. I understand that his subjective, experiential religion may be quite different to the intellectual argumentation he presents on the Ship. I just think his apparent subscription to the dogmatic authority of the Roman Catholic Church is either disingenuous or neurotically rigid. If he is not simply winding us all up, then it's not very different to me from any other variety of unquestioning fundamentalism. Since that can't be put down to ignorance in his case, it would seem to express a rigidity of character and a need for absolutes that finds expression in his approach to Catholicism.

This is really well put.

I'm not sure which, if either, is true - only IngoB knows that. But it is exactly how he comes over time and time again.

--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk

Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
A.Pilgrim
Shipmate
# 15044

 - Posted      Profile for A.Pilgrim   Email A.Pilgrim   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
IngoB’s post about engaging in debate as if in a boxing ring has explained perfectly why I find his engagement style so dissatisfying. It means that any point made by another shipmate has to be responded to as if it were a thrown punch – it has to be dodged, ducked, evaded, as he twists and turns, and returns a flurry of blows in response.

In a boxing ring, the other person is an opponent to be defeated. But if you succeed, what have you gained? A defeated opponent, that’s all. What I prefer is an engagement style more like diplomatic negotiations between representatives of wary but hopeful potential trading nations, in which the negotiations look for common ground on which to establish a tentative link, and the areas of disagreement can be identified and debated; possibly resolved by a change of position by one party or the other, or possibly unresolved and left as an agreement to disagree, but where both parties have the common ground of an understanding of what they disagree about. The end result of such negotiations can be not defeat of one party by the other – as would have been achieved by a fight – but an allegiance (perhaps of varying degree from wholehearted to very limited).

I hope that this illustration shows the inadequacy of IngoB’s posting style: he can only turn an opponent into a defeated opponent, never into an ally on an agreement of whatever common ground can be found. Other shipmates have an engagement style that does enable the latter to happen, and the best example that I can think of offhand is orfeo – whose earlier posts in this thread I agree with wholeheartedly. (Josephine would be another example.)

GeeD summed the subject up very well for me:
quote:
I agree, and that is why I've stopped trying to debate with IngoB. He avoids the substance of what is being put and simply responds in terms of pure rhetoric - the subject matters not, the grinding of the other into the ground is what debate is all about.
Though perhaps I might rephrase ‘avoids the substance of what is being put’ as ‘avoids recognising any validity in the point that is being made’.

And IngoB’s subsequent reply is a perfect demonstration of what GeeD and I are trying to express:
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
I agree, and that is why I've stopped trying to debate with IngoB. He avoids the substance of what is being put and simply responds in terms of pure rhetoric - the subject matters not, the grinding of the other into the ground is what debate is all about.

I'm not sure that pure rhetoric is even possible, it would be like Cage's 4'33''[link removed to save hostly effort]. However, to characterise my contributions (in Purgatory at least) as generally "avoiding the substance" is remarkably close to pure bullshit, which I guess is a form of pure rhetoric. So, we are getting there.

No hint at all of any recognition of the point that GeeD was trying to make – just a clever parry and deflection. It’s quite ironic really. I doubt that my post will get through IngoB’s defences either – it’s intended for other shipmates, to say ‘yes, I know what the problem is, too’.

Angus

Posts: 434 | From: UK | Registered: Aug 2009  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hear hear, A.Pilgrim (and others further upthread). Like IngoB, I enjoy a spirited discussion, but I don't think I'd ever use his boxing contest analogy.

I suppose there's always going to be some element of a contest - because if I think I'm right then I'll want to convince others of that - but it just seems much healthier and more respectful to treat a discussion as an attempt to find truth together. Both 'sides' can win, that way.

--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.

Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So if IngoB invites you to dinner, expect to eat steak, but don't expect to talk, only debate. Got it. Words don't matter, only physical proximity.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

 - Posted      Profile for Chesterbelloc   Email Chesterbelloc   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Mousethief, if you're so determined to paint IngoB as a baddie that you're having baldly to misrepresent his posts - or are no longer able to make the effort to understand them in the first place - maybe it's time to quit.

As for LSK's comment above that IngoB'd have to be an idiot or a knave actually to believe what the RCC teaches - well, it shows that ol' mousie doesn't have a monopoly on desperate disparagement.

Then again, I suppose it is "Low" Sunday...

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
Mousethief, if you're so determined to paint IngoB as a baddie that you're having baldly to misrepresent his posts - or are no longer able to make the effort to understand them in the first place - maybe it's time to quit.

I'll quit when I'm good and ready, and certainly not at the request of Bingo's chief lickspittle. You're so uncritical of his writings that if he said the moon had turned paisley you'd rush outside with your camera in breathless excitement.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

 - Posted      Profile for Chesterbelloc   Email Chesterbelloc   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
As for LSK's comment above that IngoB'd have to be an idiot or a knave actually to believe what the RCC teaches [...]

Forgot the third option: "freak".

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

 - Posted      Profile for Chesterbelloc   Email Chesterbelloc   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
Mousethief, if you're so determined to paint IngoB as a baddie that you're having baldly to misrepresent his posts - or are no longer able to make the effort to understand them in the first place - maybe it's time to quit.

I'll quit when I'm good and ready, and certainly not at the request of Bingo's chief lickspittle. You're so uncritical of his writings that if he said the moon had turned paisley you'd rush outside with your camera in breathless excitement.
Mine was just observation and advice, mousethief, certainly not a request. In fact, since I'm not as spiteless as I'd like to be, I'll admit that I will get a certain satisfaction from your carrying on exactly as you are. Every post you splurt makes IngoB seem less and less unattractive.

Yours, on the other hand, is one of the oldest intimidatory tricks in the book: try embarrass those who criticise your conduct into giving up by making them seem craven and contemptible for defending the other guy - in this case, the harried (and overwhelmingly under-supported) target of the attack. It's your tactic that's contemptible, however. It won't work on me, I'm afraid, so you may as well quit that too.

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
Yours, on the other hand, is one of the oldest intimidatory tricks in the book: try embarrass those who criticise your conduct into giving up by making them seem craven and contemptible for defending the other guy - in this case, the harried (and overwhelmingly under-supported) target of the attack. It's your tactic that's contemptible, however. It won't work on me, I'm afraid, so you may as well quit that too.

You should like this tactic -- it's closely related to IngoB's chief way of deflecting criticism, which is ignore-and-attack. I am a pompous ass, but I have a solid track record of taking criticism on board. IngoB has no such record. So if you're going to play the "let's compare how they accept criticism" game, your demigod is going to lose.

Your absurd claim that your attacks on me are all motivated by a desire to help are laughable. You can't seriously believe them, let alone expect others to.

And please. IngoB is hardly "harried" by this criticism, as he will be the first to admit.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Kelly Alves

Bunny with an axe
# 2522

 - Posted      Profile for Kelly Alves   Email Kelly Alves   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

And please. IngoB is hardly "harried" by this criticism, as he will be the first to admit.

And note how he has responded to people who have made a genuine attempt to reach out to him.


Ain't gonna try that again.

--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.

Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Secondly, this assumption that on-line communities are not real is very common. I've heard Professor Mary Beard completely dismissing MOOCs in a debate because the discussion wasn't as good as that found in Oxbridge tutor groups, Ironically I thought of the level of debate in Purgatory and the effort put in by people like IngoB when I was talking to one of the proponents of MOOCs after the debate.

I for one have no problems with MOOCs and the like. Other than that they may one day make superfluous the sort of job that I have currently. But I hope to be done with working by then. My point that online communities are not real says precisely nothing about their ability to teach people something. A book (as far as its written content goes) is not real in the same sense as well, but nobody doubts that one can learn something from a book.

quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
I find it hard to believe that, as a neuroscientist, Ingo simply uncritically submits himself to the doctrine of the Catholic Church - in its most unloving iteration - with such a complete lack of intellectual curiosity or a looking at the bigger cultural-evolutionary matrix into which religion itself fits. He has a background in Zen Buddhism, so one would very much infer that he has a religiously subtle, questing mind (unless he surrendered that utterly in order to have something solid to hold onto in a particular type of Catholicism).

There's a basic assumption behind this kind of critique. It is putting the individual person at centre stage, elevating one's own understanding as the ultimate arbiter, and turning all spiritual motions into a process of the self realising its goals. This is the central modern heresy. Its closest ancient predecessor is Pelagianism, but it really has its own flavour. Let's call it individualism. One curious feature of individualism is that it loves to call on (modern natural) science as its ally. However, other than by the cultural accident of both having come to the fore together during the "enlightenment", they have little to do with each other. Like any search for the truth, science is fundamentally opposed to individualism. It operates through group consensus, not by individual judgement. It establishes hierarchies and formalises its internal power structures in terms of these hierarchies. It relies deeply on authority, and the comprehensive "indoctrination" of those who wish to take part in its operations. The romantic view of science as proceeding by revolutionaries challenging the status quo is rubbish, as everybody in the sciences knows. The "challengers" are invariably deeply embedded in the community, indeed usually they are among the foremost authorities themselves; and they do not make their discoveries by leaving all that is known behind, but precisely by working the edge of the known in full light of all that has gone before. Individualism is basically incapable of approaching the truth. It is a delusion that impotently circles on itself. This is true in science, and it is true in religion. A single human mind simply does not cut it.

quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
If he is not simply winding us all up, then it's not very different to me from any other variety of unquestioning fundamentalism. Since that can't be put down to ignorance in his case, it would seem to express a rigidity of character and a need for absolutes that finds expression in his approach to Catholicism.

The basic problem here is the idea that one can question faith. One cannot. One can question based on faith, one can question in what one should have faith, but faith itself cannot be questioned without dissolving. Because faith just is an answer one has chosen in the absence of conclusive evidence. If one is questioning faith, then one is simply removing that very part of faith in question from the faith, at least temporarily. And if one questions all of faith, then one simply has none. There is however a difference between faith proper, and "blind faith" or even "blinding faith". The principle that truth cannot contradict truth is deeper than faith, and hence faith can be challenged by the discovery of independent truth, and the potential contradiction it may bring. However, the usual "truths" that are brought forward against the traditional truths of Christianity are for the most part not independent truths at all. Rather, they are alternative faiths, different answers that have been chosen, not contradictory truth that has been discovered. I've looked fairly hard at Catholicism, and there certainly is nothing there that is in irresolvable contradiction to well-established natural science. There is however plenty there that is in tension with the secular individualist-humanist-hedonist faith of modernity.

quote:
Originally posted by A.Pilgrim:
What I prefer is an engagement style more like diplomatic negotiations between representatives of wary but hopeful potential trading nations, in which the negotiations look for common ground on which to establish a tentative link, and the areas of disagreement can be identified and debated; possibly resolved by a change of position by one party or the other, or possibly unresolved and left as an agreement to disagree, but where both parties have the common ground of an understanding of what they disagree about.

To each his own. Have a go with that then. My personal suspicion is that the "diplomatic negotiations" will turn out to have been "preaching to the choir" where successful. It's amazing how far you can get when you try to convince people of things they already believe in. But then I'm admittedly rather cynical, and youthful enthusiasm can only invigorate the discussion.

quote:
Originally posted by A.Pilgrim:
No hint at all of any recognition of the point that GeeD was trying to make – just a clever parry and deflection.

GeeD wasn't making a point. If you have followed my posting in Purgatory at all, then you know that the claim that my posts are free of substance is patently absurd. GeeD was simply launching a personal attack based on an outright falsehood, and I called her on it. That's all.

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I am a pompous ass, but I have a solid track record of taking criticism on board.

Interesting. I would have said that you are pretty much the same mousethief I have always known, except that you are for some reason increasingly out to get me. But perhaps the changes have occurred concerning parts of the Ship I do not participate so much in, or perhaps they were slow so that every step along the way you appeared "the same old" even though there was a substantial change if one compares the end with the beginning. In what way have you become a new and improved mousethief?

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
And note how he has responded to people who have made a genuine attempt to reach out to him. Ain't gonna try that again.

You have been spending a lot of time talking about me, judging my various performances by your standards, rather than talking to me. That's not "reaching out". It's also nice that you appreciated one thing I wrote to the point of tears. But instead of leaving it at that, you tried to turn that into a teaching moment about communication for me. Perhaps that's a kind of "reaching out", but one that tries to pull me precisely where others have been trying to push me. I don't like either. Finally, instead of letting that one moment of genuine interaction simply stand (whether I learn something from it or not), you had to go and predict that I will trash it. Well, guess what, that prediction itself pretty much trashed the moment for me (as expressed in the baller analogy: because it just blithely assumes that I'm one-dimensional).

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Kelly Alves

Bunny with an axe
# 2522

 - Posted      Profile for Kelly Alves   Email Kelly Alves   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
And note how he has responded to people who have made a genuine attempt to reach out to him. Ain't gonna try that again.

You have been spending a lot of time talking about me, judging my various performances by your standards, rather than talking to me. That's not "reaching out".
Not really a lot of time, I only chimed in fairly recently. And I kind of gave myself huge latitude to be judgemental, because 1. you said it doesn't bother you in the slightest and 2. you have said over an over again you like challenge. I genuinely thought any thing I would have to say-- which is pretty tame compared to what lots of other people have said--would shed off your back unnoticed. My reason for believing this comes from a steady stream of such claims coming from you!

In fact, I can not think of a single descriptor I gave of you that didn't come from you first.
quote:
It's also nice that you appreciated one thing I wrote to the point of tears. But instead of leaving it at that, you tried to turn that into a teaching moment about communication for me. Perhaps that's a kind of "reaching out", but one that tries to pull me precisely where others have been trying to push me. I don't like either. Finally, instead of letting that one moment of genuine interaction simply stand (whether I learn something from it or not), you had to go and predict that I will trash it. Well, guess what, that prediction itself pretty much trashed the moment for me (as expressed in the baller analogy: because it just blithely assumes that I'm one-dimensional).
So, the way I spoke to you effected you in an emotional way, ruined the moment for you, and now you are disinclined to take whatever positive feedback you might have gotten from it.

Fair point. TBH, I genuinely was frustrated, because you have made so many sneery comments about touchy feely talk that I was struggling to come up with something that wouldn't come off as sappy and Joan Baez- y, and tried to craft something that would fit more with what I imagined would be language you prefer. I guess the closest thing I have to Bingo- speak is Teacher- speak, and you are not the first person who has complained about me lapsing into teacher-speak. I guess it is just as much an occupational hazard as physicist speak, but maybe we need Alan to weigh in on that.

My Achilles heel is trying to figure you the fuck out-- I am not a pugilist, I am a high school biology student with rusty tools and your brain pinned to a lab pan. Maybe I need to drop the scalpel.

[ 28. April 2014, 00:21: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]

--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.

Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thank you for your refutation, IngoB. I don't buy it, as you might imagine. First, i make a distinction between faith regarding such ineffables as the Incarnation, Resurrection, and Atonement, and the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist on the one hand, and intellectual subscripfion to many other aspects of the magisterium such as its utter pomposity in dogmatising the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of the BVM, and its superstitious and archaic teachings regarding various aspects of sexuality and gender. In regard to the latter, the RCC is about as up with objective reality as its reactionary rejection of the heliocentric understanding of our own solar system. A scientifically trained mind capitulating to the social control dogma of the RCC - and its reactionary political compensations - is simply pathetic. I don't think Ingo uncritically believes that shit unless he desperately needs an external authority to define all his world view. So Chesterbelloc, there is another option: IngoB is an intellectual and moral coward.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
art dunce
Shipmate
# 9258

 - Posted      Profile for art dunce     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
I don't think Ingo uncritically believes that shit unless he desperately needs an external authority to define all his world view. So Chesterbelloc, there is another option: IngoB is an intellectual and moral coward.

He's intellectually developed and emotionally, morally and spiritually stunted. A very common dysfunction here in Silicon Valley.

--------------------
Ego is not your amigo.

Posts: 1283 | From: in the studio | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I am a pompous ass, but I have a solid track record of taking criticism on board.

Interesting. I would have said that you are pretty much the same mousethief I have always known
How would you know since all you care about is pugilism? To try to judge people's character, and whether or not it changes, requires treating them as feeling beings and not just sparring partners. My faith in your ability to do so, therefore, is just slightly less than nil.

quote:
In what way have you become a new and improved mousethief?
I also have absolutely no faith in your ability to accept anything I might say here. Your ability to accept anything I say is stunted and withered, and even where I agree with the teachings of the Catholic Church, or do my best to present its teachings fairly and even-handedly, you find infinitesimal nits to pick, if you don't attack me outright.

That and your vomitously fake apology above make me think that your relating to me on any ground other than as punching bag is a bunch of fermented shit.

And you wonder why I am hostile to you? Ho boy. Self-awareness of a rock.

(Cue chesterbollocks whining about how I just don't like losing arguments. Give it a rest, brown-noser.)

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Not really a lot of time, I only chimed in fairly recently.

Page 2, but OK, you really started getting into this only on page 7.

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
And I kind of gave myself huge latitude to be judgemental, because 1. you said it doesn't bother you in the slightest and 2. you have said over an over again you like challenge. I genuinely thought any thing I would have to say-- which is pretty tame compared to what lots of other people have said--would shed off your back unnoticed.

That I can take most crap thrown at me without flinching doesn't mean that I like people to approach me by throwing crap at me. Anyway, given the rising polarisation so typical to Hell it would be rather tricky to "genuinely reach out" to me now without joining "my side". Hell has worked its usual magic and the trenches have been dug deep.

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
TBH, I genuinely was frustrated, because you have made so many sneery comments about touchy feely talk that I was struggling to come up with something that wouldn't come off as sappy and Joan Baez- y, and tried to craft something that would fit more with what I imagined would be language you prefer.

I'm actually OK with touchy feely talk, where we talk about touchy feely things. I don't like touchy feely talk where that is used to circumvent arguments, or where that is even directly wielded as an attack weapon. And let me be clear about this, a Hell call, where I'm trying to fend off one attack wave after the other, is not exactly the best time to ask for a bit of touchy feely time. Or indeed, the best time to expect a pleasant response from me. I try to switch modes appropriately as I move from post to post, but some spill-over is unavoidable. Finally, I am actively working towards ending this Hell call, and I have been from the start. My way, which doesn't involve white flags much. Again, that leads to some responses that I would not make if I was just dealing with a single person. So I'm sorry if things didn't go so well. I suggest as a general principle to just write what you would like to write, without second-guessing me, and to just lower your expectations of what may happen in this particular setting.

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
I guess the closest thing I have to Bingo- speak is Teacher- speak, and you are not the first person who has complained about me lapsing into teacher-speak.

I'm the son of a teacher. Some allergic reactions to teacher-speak are to be expected...

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
My Achilles heel is trying to figure you the fuck out-- I am not a pugilist, I am a high school biology student with rusty tools and your brain pinned to a lab pan. Maybe I need to drop the scalpel.

Perhaps instead of trying to figure out my internal mechanisms, you should adopt a "black box" approach. Simply take note under what circumstances I produce the behaviour that you like, and then make those happen.

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Kelly Alves

Bunny with an axe
# 2522

 - Posted      Profile for Kelly Alves   Email Kelly Alves   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
So I'm sorry if things didn't go so well. I suggest as a general principle to just write what you would like to write, without second-guessing me, and to just lower your expectations of what may happen in this particular setting.
Reasonable advice. My perception was that you seemed to be taking in comments in an unusually receptive way-- from my experience-- and yeah, a teacher will jump on shit like that like ants on a crumbcake.

You're mom was a teacher? [Big Grin] Ok. Got it. I will consider my tone in future engagements with you. We have a tendency not to know when to shut it off.

--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.

Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Kelly Alves

Bunny with an axe
# 2522

 - Posted      Profile for Kelly Alves   Email Kelly Alves   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Oh, but I'm not gonna put in the time and effort to "black box" you. I have enough of my own behaviour to modify without taking on that venture [Big Grin]

--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.

Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
The basic problem here is the idea that one can question faith. One cannot. One can question based on faith, one can question in what one should have faith, but faith itself cannot be questioned without dissolving. Because faith just is an answer one has chosen in the absence of conclusive evidence. If one is questioning faith, then one is simply removing that very part of faith in question from the faith, at least temporarily.

I think when most people say 'questioning faith' they mean questioning in what one should have faith.

I certainly do.

Everyone has faith in many things - a bit like everyone has trust in many things. Questioning 'faith' or 'trust' themselves doesn't make any sense, of course. They are things which are part of us, like skin.

--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk

Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
A scientifically trained mind capitulating to the social control dogma of the RCC - and its reactionary political compensations - is simply pathetic. I don't think Ingo uncritically believes that shit unless he desperately needs an external authority to define all his world view. So Chesterbelloc, there is another option: IngoB is an intellectual and moral coward.

No, it's not especially pathetic or cowardly. But it's VERY convoluted and a waste of time. He could be using his time to enjoy life and help others do the same rather than tying himself in knots defending such stuff.

--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk

Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Patdys
Iron Wannabe
RooK-Annoyer
# 9397

 - Posted      Profile for Patdys     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Simples.

--------------------
Marathon run. Next Dream. Australian this time.

Posts: 3511 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Like any search for the truth, science is fundamentally opposed to individualism. It operates through group consensus, not by individual judgement. It establishes hierarchies and formalises its internal power structures in terms of these hierarchies. It relies deeply on authority, and the comprehensive "indoctrination" of those who wish to take part in its operations. The romantic view of science as proceeding by revolutionaries challenging the status quo is rubbish, as everybody in the sciences knows. The "challengers" are invariably deeply embedded in the community, indeed usually they are among the foremost authorities themselves; and they do not make their discoveries by leaving all that is known behind, but precisely by working the edge of the known in full light of all that has gone before. Individualism is basically incapable of approaching the truth. It is a delusion that impotently circles on itself. This is true in science, and it is true in religion. A single human mind simply does not cut it.

Except that you're only partially and marginally correct.

Most scientists do their ground-breaking work in their 20s or early 30s. They know enough about the science to do the experiments. They're not so thoroughly indoctrinated that they don't do things that are different or dangerous. They're not 'foremost authorities' - they become them. At the time of their breakthroughs, they're young whippersnappers that have their professors shaking their heads.

Your narrative is misleading, at odds with reality, and self-serving.

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
First, i make a distinction between faith regarding such ineffables as the Incarnation, Resurrection, and Atonement, and the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist on the one hand, and intellectual subscripfion to many other aspects of the magisterium such as its utter pomposity in dogmatising the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of the BVM, ...

Tell you what, you convince our Protestant brethren of the Real Presence, and I will come back to you on the Immaculate Conception and Assumption. In other breaking news, I believe that the RCC is what she says she is, and has the authority that she claims she has, and you don't.

quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
... and its superstitious and archaic teachings regarding various aspects of sexuality and gender. In regard to the latter, the RCC is about as up with objective reality as its reactionary rejection of the heliocentric understanding of our own solar system.

A committee of psychologists rewriting DSM definitions concerning "abnormal" sexuality is admittedly not the kind of "science" I was thinking about. The sort of science that is involved in the usual secular hagiography of Galileo Galilei indeed is more like it. I'm not aware that the RCC denies the existence of various LGBT circumstances though, she differs simply in their moral and social evaluation.

quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
A scientifically trained mind capitulating to the social control dogma of the RCC - and its reactionary political compensations - is simply pathetic. I don't think Ingo uncritically believes that shit unless he desperately needs an external authority to define all his world view. So Chesterbelloc, there is another option: IngoB is an intellectual and moral coward.

I wonder, just how mainstream does your view have to become, and just how few people have to maintain mine, before you stop pretending that your view requires heroic courage and mine the instincts of a lemming? I'm also not quite sure why you would consider for example the RC social principle of subsidiarity to be pathetic and reactionary. But perhaps your social concerns are entirely genital...

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I also have absolutely no faith in your ability to accept anything I might say here.

Perhaps, but you are not otherwise shy to appeal to the audience when talking to me. It seems to me that it is quite reasonable to ask you to back up a claim you have made.

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
And you wonder why I am hostile to you? Ho boy. Self-awareness of a rock.

Seems to me that if I am indeed as entirely incapable of both empathy and introspection as you say that I am, then there is not much reason to be hostile. It would be like remonstrating a quadriplegic for performing so badly in the long jump.

quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Oh, but I'm not gonna put in the time and effort to "black box" you. I have enough of my own behaviour to modify without taking on that venture [Big Grin]

It was actually a suggestion to save you some time and emotional energy...

quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I think when most people say 'questioning faith' they mean questioning in what one should have faith.

In which case I would say that many people spend a lot of time going over the same faith issues again and again, rather than coming to a decision once and then moving on to other issues. Frankly, I just don't see this big stream of new evidence rushing in that would justify that.

quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
He could be using his time to enjoy life and help others do the same rather than tying himself in knots defending such stuff.

But I am enjoying myself. Well, not here right now so much, but that's because Hell involves dealing with incessant personal attacks. I like defending stuff, not myself. I find it very tiresome to defend my own person.

quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Most scientists do their ground-breaking work in their 20s or early 30s. They know enough about the science to do the experiments. They're not so thoroughly indoctrinated that they don't do things that are different or dangerous. They're not 'foremost authorities' - they become them. At the time of their breakthroughs, they're young whippersnappers that have their professors shaking their heads.

Well, that's a view skewed by the last reverberations of an unique time in physics in the early 20th century. See here (primary source here): "Today, the average age at which physicists do their Nobel Prize-winning work is 48. Very little breakthrough work is done by physicists under 30."

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
But I am enjoying myself. Well, not here right now so much, but that's because Hell involves dealing with incessant personal attacks. I like defending stuff, not myself. I find it very tiresome to defend my own person.

And there lies the problem for me.

My faith is so much a part of who I am that fighting over it seems wrong. I have very few certainties or absolutes - just about the polar opposite to you. But my attachment to God (or God's hold on me) has never gone away and it matters.

Arguing, chatting, discussing - yes. Fighting - no. It would be like fighting about my children or pets.

But, fair do's - you enjoy it, so you may as well get on with it.

<eta - saying 'pets' seems odd, but I think my dog IS more important to me than God, she with me far more than God seems to be!>

[ 28. April 2014, 10:20: Message edited by: Boogie ]

--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk

Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
"Today, the average age at which physicists do their Nobel Prize-winning work is 48. Very little breakthrough work is done by physicists under 30."

So what you're saying is that you were wrong, but now you're right? Uh huh.

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713

 - Posted      Profile for Sioni Sais   Email Sioni Sais   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
"Today, the average age at which physicists do their Nobel Prize-winning work is 48. Very little breakthrough work is done by physicists under 30."

So what you're saying is that you were wrong, but now you're right? Uh huh.
It could be that Nobel Prizes are now more commonly won by scientists working in well-funded institutions, whereas the prizes won by the young stars of the pre-war era were mostly of a different nature that didn't require much more than a blackboard, chalk, pencil and paper.

In the case of scientists working in well-backed research labs, maybe the institution should get the prize?

--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"

(Paul Sinha, BBC)

Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk&feature=kp : Ingo I had something far more comprehensive in mind than LGBT issues.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
"Today, the average age at which physicists do their Nobel Prize-winning work is 48. Very little breakthrough work is done by physicists under 30."

So what you're saying is that you were wrong, but now you're right? Uh huh.
It could be that Nobel Prizes are now more commonly won by scientists working in well-funded institutions, whereas the prizes won by the young stars of the pre-war era were mostly of a different nature that didn't require much more than a blackboard, chalk, pencil and paper.
Not exactly. Newton was in his twenties when he made breakthroughs in optics, gravity and calculus, Kepler was 24 when he published his first major work, Marie Curie was 31 when she isolated radium, Darwin was 28 when he started formulating the theory of evolution: some of them needed nothing more complicated than a bit of parchment, but Darwin's research needed a long sea voyage and a lot of specimens, the Curies worked out of a shed packed with stuff they'd made themselves, and Kepler had access to the latest astronomical instruments and tables of his time.

Since the Renaissance, young (under 35) scientists have made pretty much all the running, as every scientist knows... [Biased]

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk&feature=kp : Ingo I had something far more comprehensive in mind than LGBT issues.

I really like Monty Python, including their stuff on religion / Catholicism. There's something good-natured about their mockery, it is neither sour-faced nor vicious, and usually is quite even-handed. (I also think that "Life of Brian" is quite possibly the funniest film I've ever seen.) In particular, this particular song would not be complete without its Protestant coda.

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I also have absolutely no faith in your ability to accept anything I might say here.

Perhaps, but you are not otherwise shy to appeal to the audience when talking to me.
Well, yes. Because they are (by and large) not assholes about respecting other people. You are.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Tell you what, you convince our Protestant brethren of the Real Presence, and I will come back to you on the Immaculate Conception and Assumption.

A quibble: many Protestants - Anglicans, Lutherans and Calvinists - are in fact convinced of the Real Presence.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

 - Posted      Profile for Chesterbelloc   Email Chesterbelloc   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
(Cue chesterbollocks whining about how I just don't like losing arguments. Give it a rest, brown-noser.)

[Point of Information] I swear I am not paying mousethief to type this stuff. [/Point of Information]

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Caissa
Shipmate
# 16710

 - Posted      Profile for Caissa     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I always thought points of information belonged in Hell.
Posts: 972 | From: Saint John, N.B. | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713

 - Posted      Profile for Sioni Sais   Email Sioni Sais   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
I always thought points of information belonged in Hell.

If the points are those of a Rusty Farm Implement then yes, that is so.

--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"

(Paul Sinha, BBC)

Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Kelly Alves

Bunny with an axe
# 2522

 - Posted      Profile for Kelly Alves   Email Kelly Alves   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:

Originally posted by Kelly Alves:

Oh, but I'm not gonna put in the time and effort to "black box" you. I have enough of my own behaviour to modify without taking on that venture [Big Grin]
It was actually a suggestion to save you some time and emotional energy...

And that was actually A JOKE.

HENCE. THE SMILIE.


You now have to share the title "dink" with no_prophet.

[ 28. April 2014, 22:50: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]

--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.

Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858

 - Posted      Profile for Erroneous Monk   Email Erroneous Monk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
I like defending stuff, not myself. I find it very tiresome to defend my own person.


I think (I could be wrong) you don't think you should have to defend your own person. You are a Roman Catholic; you believe the Church is what she says she is and has the authority she says she has. Any beliefs that are a direct consequence of those two key points may be explained, but shouldn't have to be defended.

I would like to be in this position. But don't we now know that the Church was wrong about certain things in the past? And knowing this, doesn't our choice to believe everything the Church tells us now say something about ourselves that we shouldn't be surprised people expect us to defend?

--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.

Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  7  8  9  10  11  12  13 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools