Noyau (2)

…the noyau, an animal society held together by mutual animosity rather than co-operation

Robert Ardrey, The Territorial Imperative.

[to work around page bug]

2,941 thoughts on “Noyau (2)”

  1. petrushka:
    I don’t see FMM as lying, but I see his stance as asserting that everyone who disagrees with him as being a liar. Same with mung.

    It is not possible to be a nonbeliever; therefore, anyone who does not believe is lying.

    FMM is just regurgitating Romans 1:18.

    ‘It’s in the bible therefore it’s true‘ is a lot easier than actually thinking about stuff.

  3. Kantian Naturalist: The difficulties many of us have with FMM actually don’t have anything to do with his commitment to theism. The difficulties stem from his commitment to presuppositional apologetics. It’s because of that commitment that he thinks that everyone knows that God exists, no matter what one says to the contrary, or that one cannot have any intelligible thoughts whatsoever without accepting the reality of God. Presuppositionalism is a very specific approach that is widely rejected by other theists.

    Do you suppose his religion requires this approach, or that this approach explains his religion?

  4. Woodbine: FMM is just regurgitating Romans 1:18.

    ‘It’s in the bible therefore it’s true‘ is a lot easier than actually thinking about stuff.

    I doubt laziness has anything to do with it. Do you seriously suggest that if FMM were to sit down and try to think, he could somehow set his bible aside?

  5. I’ve been over this with FMM before on several occasions. I take it that one can’t know P without believing that P. And all the atheists here, myself included, insist we don’t believe that God exists. It would follow then that it must be false that we know that God exists.

    But FMM takes a different view of ordinary knowledge and belief, I think. They are both taken by him to presuppose some sort of extraordinary “knowledge” of God which we must “have” in order to think at all. So, as might be expected, there’s a lot of talking past each other going here.

    I’m hoping FMM will respond to the question I asked him over at Noyau.

  6. Woodbine: FMM is just regurgitating Romans 1:18.

    ‘It’s in the bible therefore it’s true‘ is a lot easier than actually thinking about stuff.

    Actually, I believe it’s a common misinterpretation of Romans 10, particular Romans 10:14-21

    14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

    15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

    16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?

    17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

    18 But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.

    19 But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.

    20 But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me.

    21 But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.

    Fundamentalists hold that this applies to all people, but actual scholars recognize that Paul is speaking of the covenant with Israel (the text does actually say as much, so it’s a little odd to decide to take it as metaphorical or worse, allegorical, but rationality was never the fundamentalist Christian strong suit…)

    Be that as it may, I’m with Petrushka. I don’t think FMM is being dishonest in anyway. Such folks do have an annoying inability to lack any empathy or ability to understand others in any capacity, but they are not dishonest in their approach. For me, it’s just not worth engaging with such folks anymore; I find nothing can be gained from such conversations. Your mileage may vary however…

  7. Flint: Do you seriously suggest that if FMM were to sit down and try to think, he could somehow set his bible aside?

    At this point in his life probably not.

    He’s supped long and deep from the presuppositional cup and is convinced that his particular creed is a necessary (in fact the only) prerequisite for thought itself.

  10. Actually some of my acquaintances like “Turtle” were featured in the movie, “The Hot Shoe”:

    The Hot Shoe

    Unfortunately, I never had the privilege of meeting the star of The Hot Shoe Edward O. Thorp, who was an MIT math professor, turned gambler, turned super successful Wall Street Executive.

  11. stcordova:
    For a season, I even thought hotshoe was card-counter (hotshoe means the remaining cards in the deck/shoe give advantage to the card counter, hence the shoe is “hot”).

    I assumed she is a photographer:

  17. Goddamn Mung.

    Goddamn mangy weasel Mung.

    Worth less than a bucket of shit, because a bucket of shit might at least be used to fertilize the plants.

    I hope he chokes to death on his own puke.

  19. Alan Fox:
    hotshoe_,

    I feel your frustration!

    Umm, thanks for the sympathy.

    I’ll stop being righteously pissed off. Some day. I guess. Maybe not in this lifetime, though.

  20. Araratia reported:

    Couldn’t happen to more deserving guy

    I know that this is off topic for the OP, but completely on topic for the title of the OP.

    Mapou has been banned from UD. First Joe (who isn’t Frankie) and then Virgil (who is also not Frankie) and now Mapou. This will leave a vacuum at UD that can only be filled by Frankie.

    OK. I realize that this may be guano, but the devil made me do it.

    I nominate Mung to fill the void left behind by Mapou.

  22. Regarding commenting on Mung’s comments:

    Moderation Issues (3)

    I was worried for a second we’d have to say something like, “Mung your comments are brilliant” in order to avoid getting guanoed.

  23. Alan:

    @ Keiths

    In case you are not ignoring it but have just overlooked this comment, I’ll wait a little longer for a response.

    You never learn, do you, Alan? This won’t go any better for you than it did the last time (here and here).

    Suit yourself. You’ll need to be patient, though. I have plans this weekend.

  24. keiths:
    Alan:

    You never learn, do you, Alan?

    I’ve learned lots! 🙂

    This won’t go any better for you than it did the last time (here and here).

    You seem not to have understood. I’m asking you two questions:

    Is my summary of your allegations correct?

    Do you claim other members here agree with you about those allegations?

    It only needs yes/no answers. I’m interested in testing your claim that everyone here agrees with you that I am a self-confessed habitual liar. If you no longer make that claim or I’m misrepresenting it, then a couple of words of clarification is all that is needed.

    Suit yourself. You’ll need to be patient, though. I have plans this weekend.

    Enjoy!

  25. keiths: Suit yourself. You’ll need to be patient, though. I have plans this weekend.

    I hope you’ll be recharging your batteries, keiths. We NEED you!!

  26. I’ll miss Alan this summer. No one to send rule-breaking posts by keiths to Guano.

  27. walto: BTW, mung. Don’t ask him about st. Catherine. He hates that!!

    There’s probably some mommy issues there.

  28. Alan Fox:
    Folks

    May I suggest we reserve this thread for discussion of specific moderation issues and use the noyau thread for the fun stuff.

    Of course! I’m just grateful that this site has ANYPLACE wherein the improvement of my character can be ministered to by the awesome keiths. It’s certainly more than such lowly shitheads as I deserve!

    Long may he reign!

  33. In heaven there is no beer,
    That’s why we drink it here,
    And when we are gone from here
    All our friends will be drinking all our beer!

    IF you grew up where I did, there’s another verse which I recollect goes something like this:

    In heaven there is no dope,
    That’s why we’ll have another toke …

  34. Neither coin flips nor physical law can program cybernetic or semiotic systems.

    – David L. Abel

    Sorry Sal.

  35. walto: Violations on his one part are, you know, ok, because they represent a reaching toward some principle that he’s decided is “higher” or more important to the general good.

    Can we name this the keiths principle?

  36. Mung: Can we name this the keiths principle?

    It’s a little different, I think. keiths will make the argument, good or bad, that whatever he’s done is not rule violative. Patrick just says that he doesn’t care, that his actions transcend any lowly rule.

  37. Patrick: People with integrity don’t put conditions on behaving honestly.

    Guess that means keiths lacks integrity. News Flash!

  38. hotshoe_: I think the two fuckwads around here who are most likely to demand “evidence” are the same two fuckwads who are the least likely to be able to see it.

    Some folks just aren’t cut out to work in missing persons.

    What evidence do you have that your daughter is missing?

  39. Well, at first I was worried you were being serious, then I thought you were trying to be funny, then I realized you do have a serious point after all.

    Thanks, I think. Where’s my squinty-eyes emoji?

  40. hotshoe, to Mung:

    …then I realized you do have a serious point after all.

    I think you’re overestimating him again.

  41. hotshoe_: Where’s my squinty-eyes emoji?

    😉

    Don’t mind that keiths didn’t get it. Thankfully he doesn’t work missing persons cases.

  45. I just happened to be logged out and thus my Ignore shield was accidentally down.

    Thus I saw another example of Mung’s stupidity as a result.

    Sorry Sal.

    Abel proved my point.

    Reaffirms why you remain on my ignore list.

  47. Not really the point of this comment:

    Moderation Issues (3)

    Your significant other asks “Do these pants make me look fat?”

    But it made me think of an honest engineering type answer.

    No, the pants don’t make you look fat. What makes you look fat is all the fat in your body that is making you look fat.

    🙂

  48. Mung:
    We missed you keiths. Not really.

    (To the tune of “Green Grow the Rushes O”)

    I’ll sing you one, O
    Green grow the rushes, O
    What is your one, O?
    Keiths is one and all above, however fast he reads, O
    How the hell we got through that whole weekend is bizarro!

    I’ll sing you two, O
    Green grow the rushes, O
    What is your two, O?
    Patrick joins his buddy keiths and watch the two just soar, O
    If its integrity you want, you’ve nowhere else to look, NO!

    I’ll sing you three, O
    Green grow the rushes, O
    Three, three, the rivals
    Two, two, the lily-white boys
    (Clothed all in halos)
    But one is one and all alone
    And evermore shall be so.

  50. keiths: And:

    Hahaha! Your eyes are turning brown again, keith– as everyone here well knows, you’re the biggest liar and quote-miner in these parts.

    I thought that was a given. One of those too obvious to need further elucidation.

Leave a Reply