caroljane

Lower than this we cannot go. The city of Toronto is currently saddled with a mayor who has but half a brain, and that halfbrain is bent upon destroying the city for the betterment of its more deserving suburbs. Our hockey team is enthrall to the best friend of its GM, neither or whom have the faintest clue how to win hockey games. My son has given up on the Leafs, he will not hear the name or watch them or read about them. He says he gave them 25 years of his life to them and they gave back but gall and wormwood (paraphrase). He did not put his new baby in a leafs Jersey, even. He is very bitter.He is like me, slow to anger, long to hold a grudge. Go Jets . Go Flames.

I agree with your assessment. Darren is a very astute type, who instantly spots the weak points in a debate opponent's argumentation. His 'emotional' intelligence seems to be somewhat underdeveloped though. He kept insulting LP, with the insults increasing in coarseness as the debate progressed. No forum owner would have tolerated that. Darren was downright cruising for being banned. It struck me that Claude/Aristotle/Darren did show a kind of bad faith. Whatever his smarts and his immersion in topics of interest, he did not engage with the front-line. His sneers about evolution were not delivered to evolutionists, and his epic fails in supporting design arguments come precisely from his insults and refusal to engage with those actually debating such issues. He haunts the Objective-ish purlieus but even there he does not do what many others like me do, identify himself. So now, like Janet, he is reduced to five posts a day here, to Dissent at RoR if not banned, at SOLO, unlike Janet, he is no more. Having myself been made no more at SOLO a couple of times, may he suffer the pain well ... if anything may soothe him is that although he is excluded from the "most open" site in the objectivish universe, he still has the real world open to him. He can join ongoing ruckuses at all manner of places where ID idiocies abound or are eviscerated, whether Uncommon Descent, Panda, Pharyngula, or the hundreds of other forums devoted to arguing the fine points of dreary ID. The cloak is what annoys me. If he was always Darren from Greektown, why did he not name himself in RoR as later at SOLO? And if he indeed is the Mystery Greek Aristotle of OL, then why did he not self-identify as aka Claude Shannon. So many of us here use our real identities (or like 9th and Jonathan, explain their akas), it seems strange to not only evade identifying oneself, but using guises. What point? This annoys me also, because although ideas are free and anonymous, those who uphold them must be identifiable, as single individuals who hold the ideas they say they hold. Multiple identities might work in primary votes or opinion polls, but not in one-on-one conversations.

Thank you Michael, comme toujours.

Adam, I am sorry, it is my keyboard, dead but it wont lie down.

</p><p>I agree with your assessment. Darren is a very astute type, who instantly spots the weak points in a debate opponent's argumentation.</p> <p>His 'emotional' intelligence seems to be somewhat underdeveloped though. He kept insulting LP, with the insults increasing in coarseness as the debate progressed. No forum owner would have tolerated that. Darren was downright cruising for being banned.</p> <p> </p><p>It struck me that Claude/Aristotle/Darren did show a kind of bad faith. Whatever his smarts and his immersion in topics of interest, he did not engage with the front-line. His sneers about evolution were not delivered to evolutionists, and his epic fails in supporting design arguments come precisely from his insults and refusal to engage with those actually debating such issues. </p> <p> </p> <p>He haunts the Objective-ish purlieus but even there he does not do what many others like me do, identify himself. </p> <p> </p> <p>So now, like Janet, he is reduced to five posts a day here, to Dissent at RoR if not banned, at SOLO, unlike Janet, he is no more. Having myself been made no more at SOLO a couple of times, may he suffer the pain well ... if anything may soothe him is that although he is excluded from the "most open" site in the objectivish universe, he still has the real world open to him. He can join ongoing ruckuses at all manner of places where ID idiocies abound or are eviscerated, whether Uncommon Descent, Panda, Pharyngula, or the hundreds of other forums devoted to arguing the fine points of dreary ID.</p> <p> </p> <p>The cloak is what annoys me. If he was always Darren from Greektown, why did he not name himself in RoR as later at SOLO? And if he indeed is the Mystery Greek Aristotle of OL, then why did he not self-identify as aka Claude Shannon. So many of us here use our real identities (or like 9th and Jonathan, explain their akas), it seems strange to not only evade identifying oneself, but using guises. What point?</p> <p> </p> <p>Why should an Objectivish person have to go toe to toe with an ID adherent. The real opponents who put in the labour are at other places. "Darren" rarely quotes from rebuttals or critical responses to hoary old ID bullshittery, nary a word taken from real arguments is quoted beyond a soundbite, so I long ago looked past the arch and sneering tone. </p> <p> </p> <p>Of course, Lindsay tolerated him for a long long time, as he was often a very engaging debater offside his obsessions and nastiness of approach. I personally do not like to engage with folks as nasty and abrasive and chauvinist as Darren. I considered him one of the obsessed one-eyed kooks of SOLO, albeit one with a large cerebral cortex, verbal facility, and rightfully proud of some success in the world, and for some success in pricking a few balloons on some subjects. </p> <p><br /> Ultimately, the behaviour of Darren/Aristotle/Claude is under someone's control, and it is not us. I find the implacable chauvinism of a Darren to be uncongenial, always in a tone of attack and rather relishing denigration and insult for its own sake.</p> <p> </p> <p>So, I hope if Darren is represented here in one already standing account or another, I hope he takes the opportunity to enter discussions that interest him -- if not to answer questions about the Evul of SOLO or the Awfulness of the tormenters and censors. Better yet if he takes his learning and immersion in ID issues to places where he can get a strong argument back. </p> <p> </p> <p>Too bad he finally descended into nastiness and subverted his own message and platform. If indeed it was bad faith to go after Perigo in such personally-denigrating terms, then who can say he did not bring it on himself. </p> <p> </p> <p>Funny how all the mini-purges and exclusion zones in the Objectivish online worlds commands attention. Does it put any Objectivist principles in action or is it just housekeeping?</p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p><p>Some of what must attract some folks to Rand -- her polemical writing passages, her tone of righteous anger and a certain pointed and oft-powerful vituperative edge -- some of this is ugly in the hands of a fan or former fan. Taking her outrage and insulting asides made against Mystics and Dewey and other devuls on the one hand -- stirring, satisfying punctuation on a ruthless argument against that which she finds odious -- this is good stuff, as they say. </p> <p> </p> <p>But when nasty lesser lights get down to and below Rand's occasional excesses of condemnatory rhetoric, ugly minds and hearts show ugly results. </p> <p> </p> <p>Not that Darren gets belligerent and nasty when drunk (as once was said about the Emperor hisself) but that he plays with folks he considers stupid kids, zombified also-rans, addled fools under tutelage, third-rate minds trapped in ordinary bodies plagued by dreams of superhumanity. </p> <p> </p> <p>If Darren was and is so grand and correct on certain themes, why harry only the Objectivish? and why should the Objectivish carry the load of response for the entire scientific community that finds Darren arguments specious, uninformed, avoidant of counter-arguments. </p> <p> </p> <p>On the whole, I found Darren like a lifeguard at the toddle pond all angry at the waterwinged screamers. If he didn't like the water and the talent there, surely he could get a better gig at a bigger and smarter and more challenging adult beach.</p> <p> </p> <div id="-chrome-auto-translate-plugin-dialog" style="opacity: 1 !important; background-image: initial !important; background-attachment: initial !important; background-origin: initial !important; background-clip: initial !important; background-color: transparent !important; padding-top: 0px !important; padding-right: 0px !important; padding-bottom: 0px !important; padding-left: 0px !important; margin-top: 0px !important; margin-right: 0px !important; margin-bottom: 0px !important; margin-left: 0px !important; position: absolute !important; top: 0px; left: 0px; overflow-x: visible !important; overflow-y: visible !important; z-index: 999999 !important; text-align: left !important; display: none; background-position: initial initial !important; background-repeat: initial initial !important; "> <div style="max-width: 300px !important;color: #fafafa !important;opacity: 0.8 !important;border-color: #000000 !important;border-width: 0px !important;-webkit-border-radius: 10px !important;background-color: #363636 !important;font-size: 16px !important;padding: 8px !important;overflow: visible !important;background-image: -webkit-gradient(linear, left top, right bottom, color-stop(0%, #000), color-stop(50%, #363636), color-stop(100%, #000));z-index: 999999 !important;text-align: left !important;"> <div class="translate"> </div> <div class="additional"> </div> </div> <img onclick="document.location.href='http://translate.google.com/';" src="http://www.google.com/uds/css/small-logo.png" style="position: absolute !important; z-index: -1 !important; right: 1px !important; top: -20px !important; cursor: pointer !important;-webkit-border-radius: 20px; background-color: rgba(200, 200, 200, 0.3) !important; padding: 3px 5px 0 !important; margin: 0 !important;" /></div> This is very to the point. We all contain " multitudes within us" and the[ parts of the we choose to display, we display.

Awwww.

I agree that here "handle" is reflective of her intellectual approach to argument and thinking. It also allows me to call her Madame X, but can't decide whether she would be Lana Turner, or, Tuesday Weld. Madame X (1966 film) starring Lana Turner Madame X (1981 film) starring Tuesday Weld However, those thoughts are, of course, X rated! I would go for Tuesday, just because she had one of the great screen names of all time,. I hope our X will be marking the spot for a long time to come,

Carol: Since I labor under the blessing, or curse, of speaking "Merican" "Anglish," what exactly does that phrase mean? I could guess, but I would prefer to know. Adam lol "Well, I never!" "That's a new one on me!" "Lawks-a mercy-" etc (any help? there are many hilarious Maritime Lexicons you would enjoy if you ever got the chance to visit and enlighten Anneland)

Also I would add that I think Xray's username is totally apt. It describes her way of honing in on an issue with specific focus, plus being the name of a good hockey helmet! which she did not know when she chose it (a postmodern touch). Also it is convenient for her correspondents to address her just as X without writing out a whole long name.

Adam, I think you would meet the same response from my cousin's Anglican congregation, and have an equally good discussion. I remember when my parents met my Objectivist boyfriend for the first time. My utterly religious mother's comment was. "He says he doesn't believe in God! he has a lovely way of speaking. I asked him, how would he bring up children to think, and he said he would let them make up their own minds. Did you ever hear the like?"

I was just reading a short article about actors and their original names. It is easy to see why most of them do that, for marquee purposes, but saddening to see how many young actors still change their names, it seems, just because their original ones are "too Jewish." i have always liked the actress Tovah Feldshuh, not just for her terrific acting, but for her "too Jewish" name. And who knows, she may have been born Jane Smith. I never thought of changing my name. On marrying it was pretty easy to decide to keep one name that is usually misspelled, rather than adopt another which is always misspelled and mispronounced. I get to use both names legally and informally. I also read a hilarious Gene Weingarten piece about the awful "unique" weirdly spelled names people are giving their babies these days. I foresee a spike in employment for paralegals working in deed-poll name changes in 18 years. Adopting a username online must be a matter for deep thought, and I wonder how soon some get tired of the original ones they picked. Negative Meat Popsicle comes to mind, along with Frolicsome Quipster and many others.( Ninth Doctor is exempted from this speculation, there is no getting tired of the Ninth or any of the Doctors, anymore than there is getting tired of London, or of life).

Xray said, Carol, remember that simply awful hat Fergie's daughter Beatrice was wearing at the Royal Wedding? This is among the most hideous headgear I've ever seen! http://nowmagazine.m...-Beatrice15.jpg Janet would probably call it a "postmodern" hat ... lol it was nonlinear for sure! X, if you get a kick out of Hideous Royal Fashion there is great stuff on the Royal Order of Sartorial Splendour, one of my fave brain relaxer sites, along with watching national anthem singings at sports events and great hakas You would simply not believe some of the stuff Queen Margrethe of Denmark wears in her hair. Let alone some of the dresses which she designs herself. She is an "arty" type queen.

Xray said, Carol, remember that simply awful hat Fergie's daughter Beatrice was wearing at the Royal Wedding? This is among the most hideous headgear I've ever seen! http://nowmagazine.m...-Beatrice15.jpg Janet would probably call it a "postmodern" hat ... lol it was nonlinear for sure!

In my list of cultural expressions of the masculist aesthetic I should have included the Joe Tex classic, "Skinny Legs and All."

Good catch, Seymour! On the royal clothes & jewels fansite I am deeply involved in debate on whether the Duchess of Cambridge should wear her hair up more often, and what tiaras the Queen ought to lend her. Don't know about Ellen though, she seems to be more intelleckshewal than me.

lol "Everyone would have a new song to sing" and if it wasn't one of Lanza's greatest hits they would not be singing long! That Slobba lady looks like one of my buds down at the Hag & Sporran. Life of the party type.

Oh......something like the fate of the world depending on it? Honestly, the question leaves me feeling, Where to begin? I guess you don't know much about the long, long history of Linz having extremely strong views on world politics and on what the US ought to do and on the importance of the US doing what he thinks the US ought to do (if only we'd all listen to him, what a wonderful world it would be, that sort of self-assessed significance placed on his own views). Plus he has this thing about "loyalty." Being disagreed with about politics by persons he considers -- or formerly considered -- friends gets him, if anything, even more worked up into a rage than being challenged on aesthetics. Ellen Good grief. I have read some of his aesthetics stuff and it was so overwrought, at first I thought it was parody. If the politics are worse i will just keep avoiding. I said I would avoid the politics over there, but I could not help reading the descriptions of candidates, one is an evil lunatic and another is a totalitarian nightmare, plus the previous idiot, and those are just the Republicans. What does he expect the US to do? Blow itself up in a tantrum?

Goshdurn yer corrections, If we all drink everything at the rate we drink beer, we'll be alright. Hic.

I tried it and they do not seem any more perceptive A fifth of a a 500 ml bottle induces a pleasant buzz when you have disguised the taste, though.

There are many routes to insanity. Spending too much time thinking is not likely to be one of them. As a psychotherapist you cannot seriously believe this. As a psychotherapist who is utterly convinced of the superiority of cognitive-behavioral therapy to all other modalities--and the enormous challenge of the mental work it entails--I most definitely believe this. Dennis, my apologies. From the little I know of psychotherapy, I think I would concur with your convictions. Thinking of insanity I was thinking of psychiatry, and the obsessive round of "thinking" that the afflicted endure. Again, I apologize.

Bob: What does you signature line in Yiddish mean? I said it referred to, "If my grandmother had testicles she would be my grandfather!" Canadian inquiring minds want to know... Adam I did not know that was how Yiddish was written down, I thought it was Hebrew and a continuation of his Famous Last Words theme.."I will pull down this Philistine Temple or die trying"! - Samson

There are many routes to insanity. Spending too much time thinking is not likely to be one of them. As a psychotherapist you cannot seriously believe this.

But don't you see, Dennis? It's all about her, really. Not the ideas. Extricate Her from the ideas and you have a philosophy, on its own to grow or contract. Leave Her in and you must continually reinterpret her motivations for saying every single thing she said. The genius who attracted followers she did not want, also attracted followers she did want. The unowned, uneaten cake is getting stale, and the much-enjoyed pieces of it are running out.

Oh......something like the fate of the world depending on it? Honestly, the question leaves me feeling, Where to begin? I guess you don't know much about the long, long history of Linz having extremely strong views on world politics and on what the US ought to do and on the importance of the US doing what he thinks the US ought to do (if only we'd all listen to him, what a wonderful world it would be, that sort of self-assessed significance placed on his own views). Plus he has this thing about "loyalty." Being disagreed with about politics by persons he considers -- or formerly considered -- friends gets him, if anything, even more worked up into a rage than being challenged on aesthetics. Ellen Good grief. I have read some of his aesthetics stuff and it was so overwrought, at first I thought it was parody. If the politics are worse i will just keep avoiding.

Well, technically, it was Nathaniel Branden who said that, with Rand's blessing, no doubt. (Branden, of course, changed his mind about that issue following their break.) In Rand's defense, she knew that many of her "admirers" did not really understand her message, and needed to spend more time studying her works before putting their words into her mouth. It was a perfectly legitimate request for her to make at that particular stage of Objectivism's growth as a radical new philosophy. With apologies to Thomas Jefferson, eternal vigilance is the price of (human) survival. Well, technically, it was Nathaniel Branden who said that, with Rand's blessing, no doubt. (Branden, of course, changed his mind about that issue following their break.) In Rand's defense, she knew that many of her "admirers" did not really understand her message, and needed to spend more time studying her works before putting their words into her mouth. It was a perfectly legitimate request for her to make at that particular stage of Objectivism's growth as a radical new philosophy. With apologies to Thomas Jefferson, eternal vigilance is the price of (human) survival. With apologies to Jefferson, eternal judgmental vigilance on everything which is presented to one's consciousness during the course of one 21st century day, is the price of insanity.