Re: virus: Psychological Profile of Hall

From: Joe E. Dees (joedees@bellsouth.net)
Date: Thu Dec 07 2000 - 01:39:28 GMT

  • Next message: Chris Lofting: "RE: virus: Psychological Profile of Hall"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id BAA07153 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 7 Dec 2000 01:38:02 GMT
    Message-Id: <200012070134.UAA22212@mail0.lig.bellsouth.net>
    From: "Joe E. Dees" <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 19:39:28 -0600
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: Re: virus: Psychological Profile of Hall
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01b)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Date sent: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 17:32:19 +0000
    From: "Everett E. ALLie" <specieup@safari.net>
    To: virus@lucifer.com
    Subject: Re: virus: Psychological Profile of Hall
    Send reply to: virus@lucifer.com

    > Hello, Joe, long time since I've heard from you. I hope you're
    well. As to Hall:
    > No, he is a very open friendly fellow, however, he's very insistent
    about what
    > existence really is. So far, no one has been able to show him is
    wrong.
    >
    No one can show a blind man what color is, either, and he is
    inclined to dismiss it as a delusion held by mistaken interlocuters,
    much as you dismiss GR and QM. At the same time, one can
    never convince fanatics whose self-concept, self-esteem and sense
    of self-worth have been irretrieveably bound up with the validity of a
    truth-claim concerning some obnoxious flatulence or other. You
    have reduced your now one-dimensional self to the status of the
    epistemic Jehovah's Witness of Hallianism, and that fact does not
    render it any more correct than does a JWs' belief validate their
    particular monomyth. There is no proof for Hallianism, and
    overwhelmingly preponderant experimental evidence, fulfilled
    predictions, and technological utility for the science it futilely
    attempts to supplant. You remind me of a fellow on the memetics
    list named Chris Lofting, whose hebephrenic avalanche of word
    salad and complete ignorance (in both senses of the word) of
    conclusively refuting counterexamples, combined with a
    fascistically relentless 'true believer' cheerfulness, sustains him in
    the quixotic crusade that all mind is composed of dichotomies and
    recursions; when presented with irreduceable trichotomies, such
    as the sign-signifier-signified structure of signification, the focus-
    field-fringe structure of conception/perception, or the amplitude-
    frequency-waveform structure of distally originating stimuli (in vision
    this translates to brightness-color-shape; in audition to loudness-
    pitch-timbre), he either refuses to acknowledge such flies in his
    ointment or ludicrously attempts to fit the square pegs of 'factual
    reality' into the round (w)hole of his faith/belief system, which
    comprises the totality of his comprehension and understanding. In
    other words, the precise behavior that you exhibit towards Hermit's
    unansweable and crushing objections to your beloved memeset.
    You are both slouching towards a bethlehem grail which neither of
    you shall never reach, for in each case it is a mirage of your
    zobically memebotic minds. However, in either case, you are both
    shining, sterling examples of the virulent, rather than symbiont,
    side of what both lists study. We are already vaccinated against
    you and your ilk; perhaps one day we shall be able to offer you
    cures for your respective infections that you would accept - you
    each steadfastly refuse the elixirs of logic, reason and rationality,
    and the bread of presented evidence.
    >
    > Everett
    >
    > Humanity's Ultimate Challenge
    > http://www.specieup.com (soon to be 'specieup.org' )
    >
    >
    > Joe E. Dees wrote:
    >
    > > From: "Brian Brotarlo" <brofont@iloilo.net>
    > > To: <virus@lucifer.com>
    > > Subject: virus: Psychological Profile of Hall
    > > Date sent: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 07:38:32 +0800
    > > Send reply to: virus@lucifer.com
    > >
    > > > I think it's time to look at the man behind Analytical
    Metaphysics. We've
    > > > given enough crap about the pseudo-science. Time to put the
    pigeon in its
    > > > hole.
    > > >
    > > > For Starters:
    > > >
    > > > Hall is:
    > > >
    > > > 1. Loner (image of mad doctor in his mad laboratory)
    > > > 2. A Little Paranoid (won't publish because he thinks he
    won't get a fair
    > > > reading)
    > > > 3. Desperate (Everette being his disciple)
    > > > 4. Prone to Hallucinations (Analytical Metaphysics, e.g.
    fundamental
    > > > existence or whatever.)
    > > >
    > > You forgot Megalomania, complete with delusions of
    omniscience.
    > > >
    > > > That's all so far... anybody wants to add more? I'm kindof
    leaning to
    > > > Para-Schizo, but isn't it too cliche already. Maybe somebody
    can be more
    > > > creative.
    > > >
    > > > But not to be too mean, just wants the rat out of his hole.
    You understand
    > > > the frustration, of course. Believe me, I can't wait till this hits
    > > > Newsweek. Or when I die, and Fundamental Existence will
    hold my hand, I'll
    > > > be in tears. He says, "Welcome home, former unbeliever.
    For you were part of
    > > > mainstream society and now you have come back."
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    >
    >

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Dec 07 2000 - 01:39:27 GMT