The Casaprov Era

[Contemporary Protestant]

Casaprov,

You should publish your philosophy because even though people disagree with you, it has caused a lot of discussion

A lot of Aristotelian theories are incorrect but are still intellectually stimulating, and just seeing all the posts about your views on the forum leads me to believe your views would really shake the boat

Kudos,

CP

[wolf39us]

Wouldn't something like this be more appropriate in a PM?

[Shiranu]

[Contemporary Protestant]

Eh maybe, maybe not

If someone is openly critical, why can't I be openly supportive

Besides, I'm anonymous so what could happen 

[Sargon The Grape]

Besides, I'm anonymous so what could happen 

This article describes something that happened in a gaming community that I'm a part of. Long story short, teh intarnetz r srs bznz.

[The Skeletal Atheist]

This article describes something that happened in a gaming community that I'm a part of. Long story short, teh intarnetz r srs bznz.

You're the real killer aren't you?

[Sargon The Grape]

You're the real killer aren't you?

Not funny.

[The Skeletal Atheist]

Not funny.

I do apologize, and I mean it. To me humor is a way of coping with the absolute insanity I see in the world. For that reason I may joke about topics most would consider not funny at all. I'm use to offending people, but usually they are people who deserve it in some way. From your reaction I understand that this has personal significance to you, and I'm sorry for any hurt that may have been caused.

[Sargon The Grape]

I do apologize, and I mean it. To me humor is a way of coping with the absolute insanity I see in the world. For that reason I may joke about topics most would consider not funny at all. I'm use to offending people, but usually they are people who deserve it in some way. From your reaction I understand that this has personal significance to you, and I'm sorry for any hurt that may have been caused.

Thank you, I accept your apology.

It probably doesn't have the same personal significance to me as it does some other members of that gaming community. But still, I did know the guy, and I loved his work. The point of me bringing it up is that one minute, people take for granted that you're anonymous on the internet. Then the next thing you know, someone gets stabbed 80 times because of a little tiff on a forum.

[Casparov]

Casaprov,

You should publish your philosophy because even though people disagree with you, it has caused a lot of discussion

A lot of Aristotelian theories are incorrect but are still intellectually stimulating, and just seeing all the posts about your views on the forum leads me to believe your views would really shake the boat

Kudos,

CP

O0 Thank you kindly CP, I appreciate the kudos.

[Shol'va]

Op, what you're missing is that Aristotelian theories were intellectually stimulating

[Berati]

Casaprov,

You should publish your philosophy because even though people disagree with you, it has caused a lot of discussion

A lot of Aristotelian theories are incorrect but are still intellectually stimulating, and just seeing all the posts about your views on the forum leads me to believe your views would really shake the boat

Kudos,

CP

His philosophy is already published in huge quantities. New ageism can be found in every online/offline bookstore.

[stromboli]

Yeah, by all means. Barnes and Noble is waiting with bated breath. Bated with what I'm not sure. Possibly bacon.

[stromboli]

Casparov an era? The Roman Empire was an era. Casparov is a hiccup on the cusp of reality. I was an English major so I understand what I just wrote.

[Icarus]

You should publish your philosophy because even though people disagree with you, it has caused a lot of discussion

A lot of Aristotelian theories are incorrect but are still intellectually stimulating, and just seeing all the posts about your views on the forum leads me to believe your views would really shake the boat

Sorry to hear that you were not able to understand the conversation that occurred between Casaprov and the rest of the forum. I assure you, and from what everyone else is saying I'm sure they would agree, that there wasn't a single intellectually stimulating idea present in the entire history of conversations. If something stimulating had been brought up we could have designed an experiment around it and tested it for ourselves. What actually happened was a very long and drawn out physics lesson given to someone who, not only isn't interested in understanding and carrying out physics experiments but also believes he is an expert on the topic. So much of an expert that he thinks he is able to form correct conclusions from data he never acquired or would know how to acquire and theories he doesn't understand.

Any discussion with huge walls of text and big words can look intellectually stimulating but in most cases it doesn't even make sense. For example:

Casprov:
"You seem to think that I am arguing that "reality doesn't exist" or "reality isn't real", but I'm not. Of course it's real! Of course it exists! It's just isn't as the Realist describes it. Realism is false and Materialism is false, this does not mean that nothing is real, only that the nature of reality is not as you believe it to be."

This doesn't stop him from attempting to use experiments that depend on the universe being material to prove that materialism is false. See the irony? He sure doesn't. When confronted with this, instead of actually addressing the problem we get this gem:

Casprov:
"Science is a method of asking questions, not a set of reality assumptions. Scientists are entitled to ask if what could be actually is so. The only constraint is that the question be decided by feedback gathered from the world by an accepted research method. Science does not require an objective world, only information to test theories against, which a Virtual Reality can easily provide. Not only can science accommodate the virtual world concept, a virtual world could also sustain science."

Which is ironic in a way because in this instance we have a non-scientist, philosophy layperson telling a scientist how science "actually works". He also made the assumption that virtual reality can be built on a subjective reality without outlining the anything in code. How he is going to prove this has yet to be seen as any virtual reality ever constructed has an architecture of programming outlining the objective reality. It goes on and on.

I'm sure other people on this forum can give better examples, that's just the one I was drawn to recently for it's stupidity.