Original RI quotes only

[Allegro]

Just a snippet. One could make a damn career out of trying to pierce the veil of secrecy that hides the truth of things and draw all the connections of who, what, when, where, why and the how of 911 as the (or ONE of several) lynchpin and rosetta-stone crystal balls distilling America Inc. Kleptocracy aka Autorepublocratic-demotechnocracy Imperialism, tracing its morphological emergence from the ashes of World War II thru the World Cold War III and into the current footnotes of World War IV.

Beware the voracious 911 labyrinthe! [REFER.]

[lupercal]

5) Harass key individuals who by their erudition and insight are natural leaders on the board so as to drive them out.

OH NOES, fearless natural leader, are you thinking of taking your marbles and going home?

Nordic hit that one outta the park.

[Jeff]

Thank you for your civil and thoughtful contributions, and your cooperation in helping to generate more light than heat.

[IanEye]

viewtopic.php?p=354565#p354565

If somebody shot MLK somebody DEFINITELY needs to shoot Beck at this point. If he wants to be like MLK, let him.

I really wish somebody would put an end to this bullshit. Just take him out BOOM.

_ _ _

http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board2/ ... 47#p356547

I peruse Cindy Sheehan's Facebook page, and there are people exactly like that there. I call them out when I see them.

The vast majority of those who protest for peace are actually into peace.

[IanEye]

viewtopic.php?p=406739#p406739

i do think people are wising up. maybe that's the optimist in me, but i'm in agreement with some who view the recent uprisings as being other than managed from central casting. specifically because their reactions are way behind the beat. also, i don't think "they" are that powerful. they never were in history. i fail to see why they should be now, so that show in my reactions to posts and discussions. which again doesn't mean i dismiss central casting's role. they do have a role. only, they are not as omnipotent as some would like them to be.

[Allegro]

RI has never been predominantly about free speech. It exists to foster better speech, especially but not exclusively with respect to controversial knowledge. I believe proscribing certain speech and conspiracy memes has helped foster an ethos that makes this place uncommonly valuable by attracting peculiarly intelligent and literate members. I know this can hit you libertarians where it hurts, but a good deal of RI's distinctiveness resides in what has not been permitted, both by guidelines and general consensus... [REFER.]

[Nordic]

You're as easy to read as a Pynchon book. Which isn't easy, but still readable.

82_28

[wintler2]

one should test one's own intuitions and be willing to have them subjected to testing.

[JackRiddler]

The most that can be said is scientists have observed correlations between a specific stimulus and specific measurements.

That might sound like nit-picking, but it's a colony of nits at every level: conceit #1 is that our instrumentation is actually showing us something important (for all we know we're measuring the exhaust system of a computer and assuming we're monitoring the CPU's actual command line) ... conceit #2 is that the specific stimulus in their experiment was the source of the EM activity being measured (which we have no mechanism to test or prove), conceit #3 is that said stimulus, applied in a lab setting, approximates normal human behavior in the real world, and conceit #4 is that the brain is the stand-alone computational center of the human organism.

I'm sure many of you reading this have noticed the tonal similarities between coverage of neuroscence and genetics -- just like every Time headline in the 90's was about how "Who You Are" is determined mechanically by Gene X, Y and Z, the past 20 years of neurofads have been about areas of the brain controlling us mechanically thanks to area X, Y and Z. Journalists latch on to narratives, not actual findings, which are too subtle for headlines and too complex for their readership. Subsequently, scientists use these popular narratives to explain their work and seek more funding, and thus do lazy mistakes become institutionalized problems.

(edit - more often than not, conceit #0 is that experiments on tortured, half-dead lab animals yield results which can be accurately extrapolated to human populations.)

Neurology is in a pre-paradigm state, so pop sci neurology has been a steady, reliable source for dangerous metaphors....buuuut that's about it.

[Seamus OBlimey]

whilst I admit there are hidden jobless who don't get into the official figures there are also a large number of hidden jobs that are never formally advertised via private or public agencies at all sorts of small-scale enterprises

that's why I am not sympathetic to people who scorn work that is "beneath" them - once you're in the door & can prove you actually want to work , can read/write/speak & actually turn up on Monday at 9:00 regualarly most companies would be delighted to employ you in the next available vacancy they get

Just straighten up and pull yourself up by your bootstraps and suck a few cocks and you'll be kicking peasants in the teeth by Tuesday. Yep, just used the strong position of the worker in the modern labour market to get yoursen a job scrubbing up some cunt's shit, then spend the next forty years of soul crushing drudgery in the vain hope that one day you'll be spotted and plucked from the dregs to become some cunt who expects other people to clean up his shit for him.

[Jeff]

these days I doubt anyone in power wants to do drugs which remind them of their oneness with all of the fellow humans that they are grinding into the dirt.

[Allegro]

… I think the three mentioned men were probably wrong or bound to be overcome in almost everything they wrote. Their most important contributions were not analyses or laws or manifestoes but discoveries of what had always been there, which can be put as metaphors or very basic insights. Einstein's was that there is no universal frame of reference and time and space are the same thing and created by motion. Whether anything will remain of the structure he put to that in 1000 years doesn't matter. Freud in effect discovered that you're not who you think you are, that your motives are irrational, that most of us is subconscious, that there are hidden primal drives, that these conflict with the reality of being helpless children at the mercy of parents and elements and produce psychodynamics and developmental stages, that sex drive is central to most of it and because you start out helpless it sets you up as a future neurotic before you even talk. What does it matter that he got almost everything about these phenomena wrong in the details? So did Copernicus. So did Galileo. [REFER.]

underscore mine

[barracuda]

I blame the Nazis. Being anti-Semitic used to be fine, was very popular, then they came along and ruined it for everyone.

[psynapz]

From here.

Well done.

You have just demonstrated the positive, actual benefits of a practical, thoroughgoing agnosticism. That is, openness to the possibility that anything you can imagine might be true. Perhaps it is one's attention that collapses the probabilistic quantum wave function of is or is not. We can wonder about the unknown without getting dogmatic about it, but it is intention and will that shape our destinies. With intention and will you can try to shape events to match your desire. It causes no end of trouble, to be quite honest. Will has got a lot to answer for.

The world is in disorder, my consciousness is in disorder. To become aware of disorder is to bring about order. Therefore we must all pay attention to bring to light the disorder in the mind of man. Which means we must pay attention to discover the roots of disorder within our consciousness.

That is what at least some of us are doing here, I sometimes like to think.

The internet will help us to work this out, to cooperate as one, when we see clearly that your interest and mine coincide because we are not others, but the same. There is no other.

Of course some folk like to divide and conquer, to set man against man. Man must become wise to these tricks in himself and others, to see with clarity so that intelligence can bring about order.

[barracuda]

nobody expects the critical thinquisition.