Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9176 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: sirs
Post Volume: Total: 917,655 Year: 4,912/9,624 Month: 260/427 Week: 6/64 Day: 2/2 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What the H - Holmes is back!
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


(1)
Message 16 of 65 (434244)
11-15-2007 1:50 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Archer Opteryx
11-15-2007 12:02 AM


Matching form to content is an age-old aesthetic challenge
Ah, but this wasn't a poorly executed attempt at aesthetics I was apologizing for, it was a poorly executed attempt at manual dexterity.
That's an old-age challenge.
Heheheh.
Glad to see you're still here. Your powerful brevity is the dot I'd like to hit on the target.

h
"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing." - Robert E. Howard

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Archer Opteryx, posted 11-15-2007 12:02 AM Archer Opteryx has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1555 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 17 of 65 (434288)
11-15-2007 9:43 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Hyroglyphx
11-14-2007 11:46 PM


Re: Man, you really know how to kill the mood
Please understand, it seems you talk more poorly about him than me! That seems inconceivable given the fact you have less in common with me, with just as many, if not more, heated arguments.
Because you're not as dishonest, and while it's hard to get you to admit when you're wrong, there are at least some things you're not willing to do in advance of an argument.
You may be wrong but at least you're not nearly as pernicious about it. Does it make it a little more incomprehensible if I tell you that my respect for someone isn't based so much on what they know or if they agree with me, as much as how they act?
Give me an example so I can understand your frustration.
Sure, I was able to find something about that I collected a few years ago.
EvC Forum: An Inconvenient Truth
If you left and came back, and some people were rejoicing your return, I wouldn't trash you.
I appreciate it, but if people have cause to take issue with my behavior, I'd rather than they were open about their concerns rather than simply allow me to blunder along in a way that was an obstacle to more interesting debate.
Indeed I've long begged people to do just that; I rarely have takers. Either I've managed to completely cow everybody into submission, or this rumored silent majority that finds me so insufferable simply doesn't exist.
Of course, there are nonetheless a few members that will consider this false humility, but since nothing I could say could convince them otherwise, that's not really something that concerns me.
What changed?
A lot less signal, a lot more noise. Holmes became obsessed with winning arguments to the point where he abandoned all efforts to actually inform.
He's got reason to have a really unique perspective on things. I wouldn't presume to offer up his biography, and doubtless I'd get it all wrong, but that stuff was always a lot more interesting than the sophistry and misrepresentation his posting efforts seemed to devolve into.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-14-2007 11:46 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by kuresu, posted 11-15-2007 12:34 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 22 by Silent H, posted 11-15-2007 4:18 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 27 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-15-2007 6:24 PM crashfrog has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3380 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 18 of 65 (434314)
11-15-2007 11:54 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Silent H
11-14-2007 3:13 PM


Holmes writes:
I totally apologize for the long posts which I just made recently.
While you're at it, could you also try to tone down your philosophical writing style (aka philosophical lalaland) just a little bit?
I know that you're a philosopher. But you have to realize that most of us are (or at least I am) not so philosophically... lalaland-like. Sorry to put it that way, but I really can't think of any other way to describe it. So far since you came back, you have been doing fine in expressing yourself in a coherent and linear fashion. But in the past before you left, sometime when you really got into a conversation you really made it very difficult for us to see what you wanted to say. I have no doubt that they were still coherent, but they were certainly not linear.
Most of us here are biologists, physicists, mathematicians, etc. I don't know what it is with philosophers, but you guys tend to write like you're the only one that will ever read what you have to say. Other people are reading your stuff, too. It's like you guys were taught to model after 19th century German philosophers...
Personally, in the past I had always been reluctant to converse with you directly. You could call it fear, fear of having to spend too much time decrypting what you have to say. In fact, I don't know how crashfrog could have the patience to read all the stuff you have to say. Not only are they long, they are downright cryptic.
Personally, I'd recommend reading out loud what you just wrote. If you can imagine yourself talking out loud to a person facing you and not have him give you a weird look, you're fine. This isn't philosophy 500. This is an online debate forum.

Owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have occasionally used the academic jargon generator to produce phrases that even I don't fully understand. The jargons are not meant to offend anyone or to insult anyone's intelligence!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Silent H, posted 11-14-2007 3:13 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Silent H, posted 11-15-2007 3:32 PM Taz has replied
 Message 25 by nator, posted 11-15-2007 6:14 PM Taz has not replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2602 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


(1)
Message 19 of 65 (434331)
11-15-2007 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by crashfrog
11-15-2007 9:43 AM


Re: Man, you really know how to kill the mood
The silent majority has spoken on occassion. We do find you insufferable at times. And we've told you as much.
I personally find you bombastic and overbearing, and sometimes too arrogant.
Not sure if the silent are a majority, of course, but there are those who can't stand you at times.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by crashfrog, posted 11-15-2007 9:43 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by crashfrog, posted 11-15-2007 12:47 PM kuresu has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1555 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 20 of 65 (434335)
11-15-2007 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by kuresu
11-15-2007 12:34 PM


Re: Man, you really know how to kill the mood
I like bombast.
I'll try to work on the other stuff, though brevity demands that I not crowd a post with "by your leave" this and "I'm sure you're a great guy, but" that, which might give the impression of arrogance, I don't know.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by kuresu, posted 11-15-2007 12:34 PM kuresu has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


(1)
Message 21 of 65 (434351)
11-15-2007 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Taz
11-15-2007 11:54 AM


While you're at it, could you also try to tone down your philosophical writing style (aka philosophical lalaland) just a little bit?
Yes, and I'm glad to hear that my recent posts have been better. To be honest, while I sometimes think you need to increase your endurance to reading and understanding complex pieces, I take your comments to heart as completely valid about my writing style.
Welllll... I wish you wouldn't compare me to 19th century German Philosophers... except maybe Nietszche. Have you seen 18th century non-German philosophers? Could it be like them?
Personally though, I'd blame it on Lovecraft. I read his stuff way too much as a kid.
Heheheh. I will continue to try and improve my style along the lines you suggest.

h
"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing." - Robert E. Howard

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Taz, posted 11-15-2007 11:54 AM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Taz, posted 11-15-2007 5:10 PM Silent H has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


(1)
Message 22 of 65 (434364)
11-15-2007 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by crashfrog
11-15-2007 9:43 AM


Re: Man, you really know how to kill the mood
Unlike Faith, I was neither asked nor forced to leave because of bad behavior. I left because of a personal crisis, and have been gone for a year.
My return was hesitant because time is very precious to me now, and this place is somewhat addictive. I have changed as a person, and am trying to change my communication style (even for non-EvC areas of my life). I'm cognizant that some people had issues with my posts in the past and am trying to be extra careful going forward.
This may not guarantee that my posts will suddenly meet everyone's approval. I may still have people that don't like me or my writing. That could very well be you.
However, I asked for a clean slate, and have treated everyone I might have had issues with civilly on that same idea. If I am to be judged it should be my current writings and not tied to anything in the past. If you want to "keep a record" start the clock from when I returned and present it to me with a concise discussion of what needs to be improved.
I'm not going to be drawn into personal arguments anymore, which I'm sure will meet with everyone's approval. But that does make it annoying when a person repeats personal charges made in the past, after I just got done asking to let it go.
A lot could be said from my side as well. But I can only imagine it was painful enough for everyone else back then to witness our wrangling... so why resurrect it? Especially at this juncture?
Can we please agree to let go of past disputes, for the sake of civility and perhaps better times in the future?

h
"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing." - Robert E. Howard

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by crashfrog, posted 11-15-2007 9:43 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by crashfrog, posted 11-15-2007 5:15 PM Silent H has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3380 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 23 of 65 (434376)
11-15-2007 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Silent H
11-15-2007 3:32 PM


Silent writes:
To be honest, while I sometimes think you need to increase your endurance to reading and understanding complex pieces
See, I can endure more complex pieces. In college, I took many philosophy classes. I did fine in them.
Just think of it like your upper body endurance and strength. Sure, I can comfortably do 200 on a chest bench. It doesn't mean I want to always lift 200 lb everytime I want to move an object.
Perhaps it is normal for you to think and write the way you do sometimes, but it's not for the rest of us. If need be, I'll endure as many and as much complex pieces as need be. It doesn't mean I want to do it every time I get online.
But please, don't let me stop you if that's your normal style and it would take extra effort for you to write the way you talk. Just remember that not all of us have the time to read through complex pieces. In fact, I tend to just speed read through most of the posts here. When I find something I'm interested in then I'll put a little more brain power into it. If it appears like something Brad McFall had written, I just skip right over it. Not really worth the time.
Heheheh. I will continue to try and improve my style along the lines you suggest.
Well, I wouldn't use the word "improve" as much as "temporarily change".
Think of it this way. In a live debate, we talk to each other almost like the way we would talk in an everyday situation. When we submit our academic papers, they tend to be more complicated and they certainly resemble nothing like the way we talk. I tend to think of an online conversation as resembling more of a face to face thing than academic papers. The only difference, really, is we can't interrupt each other in the middle of a sentence.
While you were gone, there was a thread about the way creationists tend to write on here. We concluded that the reason creationists tend to write so badly is because they try to immitate academic papers without actually being able to tell the difference between a technical paper and gibberish. I understand that the way you write is not gibberish, but when it gets to certain levels technical writings aren't that far from jargon.
Please don't take this as a criticism of the way you write. It's not. I'm just telling you that a lot of us simply don't have the time to go through academic papers on an everyday basis. You don't have to do much, really, to change. Just write more like the way you talk and it will be just fine.
PS Ever considered having a great debate with Brad McFall?

Owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have occasionally used the academic jargon generator to produce phrases that even I don't fully understand. The jargons are not meant to offend anyone or to insult anyone's intelligence!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Silent H, posted 11-15-2007 3:32 PM Silent H has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Brad McFall, posted 11-15-2007 6:31 PM Taz has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1555 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 24 of 65 (434377)
11-15-2007 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Silent H
11-15-2007 4:18 PM


Re: Man, you really know how to kill the mood
However, I asked for a clean slate, and have treated everyone I might have had issues with civilly on that same idea. If I am to be judged it should be my current writings and not tied to anything in the past.
I guess I don't understand what you're asking. The opportunity you have to not engage in disruptive and dishonest behavior now is the exact same opportunity you had when you left.
You're asking for some kind of "clean slate", but there really is no slate to clean. There's not some punishment waiting in the wings for you for what you did in the past. My complaint then, and my fear now, is that you'll continue to support ideas you know are probably wrong with disingenuous argumentation; that you'll continue to substitute rebutting your opponents with attacking assertions no one has made; that you'll continue to quote-mine your opponents and deliberately misinterpret their remarks in the most impeachable way; and that you'll do so in the middle of messages so long and confusing, none of the admins will read them (thus, your misconduct goes undetected while my frustration becomes the basis of moderator action.)
It's not within my power, H, to punish you for your sins. I have no interest in doing so. I'm merely asking now what I asked you more than a year ago - to go forth and sin no more. The opportunity for you to do just that is as wide open as it's ever been.
Can we please agree to let go of past disputes, for the sake of civility and perhaps better times in the future?
I have not brought up the past because I'm trying to get you sanctioned for past behavior. That's not in my power to do, and if the admins were going to take action for the behaviors I chronicled, they would have done so back then.
I only brought it up because NJ asked me to do so. He wanted an example of what I thought was objectionable behavior on your part, so I provided one. I linked to that post merely for his edification, not to seek sanctions against you.
If I ever do have cause to complain, it'll be about the things you say from now on, I assure you. The past is not forgotten, but it will only be an impediment to your current activities if you choose to make it one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Silent H, posted 11-15-2007 4:18 PM Silent H has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Michael, posted 11-15-2007 6:42 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2258 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 25 of 65 (434388)
11-15-2007 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Taz
11-15-2007 11:54 AM


removed by author
Edited by nator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Taz, posted 11-15-2007 11:54 AM Taz has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2258 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 26 of 65 (434397)
11-15-2007 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Hyroglyphx
11-14-2007 10:07 PM


Re: Man, you really know how to kill the mood
quote:
Instead of throwing a tantrum while every one else is rejoicing the return of EvC's prodigal son, why not just say nothing at all, or at least reserve your scorn for an appropriate thread?
1) He's not EvC's "prodigal son". He's just been gone a while.
2) "Everyone else" isn't rejoycing. A few people are.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-14-2007 10:07 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 65 (434398)
11-15-2007 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by crashfrog
11-15-2007 9:43 AM


Re: Man, you really know how to kill the mood
Because you're not as dishonest
Gee, thanks.
and while it's hard to get you to admit when you're wrong, there are at least some things you're not willing to do in advance of an argument.
Eh, I'll take any compliment from you, no matter how small.
That aside, I still don't see why you think he is disingenuous.
Does it make it a little more incomprehensible if I tell you that my respect for someone isn't based so much on what they know or if they agree with me, as much as how they act?
I would hope that's where your respect lies.
I was able to find something about that I collected a few years ago.
Was I supposed to read the succeeding dialogue as well, or just that post?
I'd rather than they were open about their concerns rather than simply allow me to blunder along in a way that was an obstacle to more interesting debate.
But people do try to do that all throughout the forum. Everyone thinks they've found their Eden and their way is the right way, which, if you think about it, makes sense. Anyone that ascribes to a belief obviously does so because they belief in the veracity of the claim.
Indeed I've long begged people to do just that; I rarely have takers. Either I've managed to completely cow everybody into submission, or this rumored silent majority that finds me so insufferable simply doesn't exist.
There have been a few people who have been vocal about it. I don't need to name names, but there have been a few people to call you out on it-- otherwise, how would you even know that people have taken issue with it?
That also doesn't mean you aren't liked here. Sure, you annoy the hell out of me, just as I'm sure its likewise for you. But you are a valuable asset to EvC. Besides, we need that contrast to keep EvC interesting. Yin-yang... I'm up, you're down. You're darkness and I'm light (A little joke)
Holmes became obsessed with winning arguments to the point where he abandoned all efforts to actually inform.
He's got reason to have a really unique perspective on things. I wouldn't presume to offer up his biography, and doubtless I'd get it all wrong, but that stuff was always a lot more interesting than the sophistry and misrepresentation his posting efforts seemed to devolve into.
I don't see it. I guess like most of our discussions, we'll simply have to agree to disagree.

“This life’s dim windows of the soul, distorts the heavens from pole to pole, and goads you to believe a lie, when you see with and not through the eye.” -William Blake

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by crashfrog, posted 11-15-2007 9:43 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Taz, posted 11-15-2007 6:45 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 31 by crashfrog, posted 11-15-2007 7:04 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5121 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


(1)
Message 28 of 65 (434405)
11-15-2007 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Taz
11-15-2007 5:10 PM


Brad and Holmes - past
I had to use google to find
quote:
Evolutionary Psychology continues to pop up in various threads regarding human behavior. This is particularly true for explanations of human sexuality, or attraction.
These explanations are not usually supported with evidence from science, or (rarely) when papers are mentioned, that a critical examination of their contents take place. And yet these explanations are treated by posters as if acceptable or accepted by both evolutionary theorists and psychologists alike... despite conflicting evidence presented on this matter.
this.
I cant see how things would have changed to where I would differ from what Holmes wrote here(declining to agree or not towards the end of the second section etc). Well before this post I discussed evopsych with Holmes and came to some amount of agreement about how wrong it was being taught (for me at Cornell)or used. So I really did not have much to disagree with Holmes about in the areas of most interest to me.
In this topic angle I can say that on reading Lloyd’s book more closely since, that whatever agreement Holmes and I might create it would only amount to arguments against the audience that Lloyd asserts is Dawkins’ target. Thing is not only is this not my target I think Dawkins is wrong. I dont see much of need for a great debate on that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Taz, posted 11-15-2007 5:10 PM Taz has not replied

  
Michael
Member (Idle past 4726 days)
Posts: 199
From: USA
Joined: 05-14-2005


(1)
Message 29 of 65 (434410)
11-15-2007 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by crashfrog
11-15-2007 5:15 PM


Re: Man, you really know how to kill the mood
Your posts really can not be distinguished from those written by a complete and utter asshole.
My feelings about you personally I will keep to myself.
Cheers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by crashfrog, posted 11-15-2007 5:15 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3380 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 30 of 65 (434414)
11-15-2007 6:45 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Hyroglyphx
11-15-2007 6:24 PM


Re: Man, you really know how to kill the mood
Nem writes:
But people do try to do that all throughout the forum. Everyone thinks they've found their Eden and their way is the right way, which, if you think about it, makes sense. Anyone that ascribes to a belief obviously does so because they belief in the veracity of the claim.
Speak for yourself. I am one of those that are constantly doubting our own interpretation of reality. Now, don't confuse this with absolutely not having any idea what something is not. While I still have doubts as to what right and wrong are, I can definitely tell that what you believe are wrong most of the time.
Us skeptics are not as "all knowing" as people often think.
Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

Owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have occasionally used the academic jargon generator to produce phrases that even I don't fully understand. The jargons are not meant to offend anyone or to insult anyone's intelligence!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-15-2007 6:24 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-15-2007 10:47 PM Taz has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024