True Philosophers and Thought

Main Page | Report this Page

Science Forum Index » Physics Forum » True Philosophers and Thought

Page 1 of 7 Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Author

Message

Douglas Eagleson

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 4:06 am

Guest

A man would be always certain of the subject. He would alive make the
sentence relatable and so composition was to uniformly announce
topic. A subject topic allowed the thinking. Another type as
composition was relation. Subject considered would be a search for
the exact relation mentioned.

One reader has announced thought while the other uses all relation as
the possible subject.

So 2% can allow such act of thought. A consistency of composition was
the issue and my consistency would not fail a close scrutiny.

I am happy to announce a subject. A relation, a single thought.
Either reader should be forwarned.

A.

As a student philosopher "A" means my name. A person whose
composition skills are always relation.

All true philosophers are such in nature. And to emulate them was my
goal. A large relation.

"I think therefore I am."

A certain foundation to the philosopher was this famous sentence.
Relationship as person, a mind, to the world was always its subject.
A mind acts within the body given substance examinable to the depths
of the DNA strand. Minds examine.

So consider the complexity as a personal tribute.

tadchem

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:46 am

Guest

On Apr 15, 10:06 am, Douglas Eagleson <eaglesondoug...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Quote:

A new entry for the list of modern oxymorons:
"True philosopher"

Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA

Uncle Al

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:45 am

Guest

Douglas Eagleson wrote:

Quote:

A man would be always certain of the subject.
[snip crap]

1) Heisenberg
2) Goedel
3) idiot

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2

Androcles

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:08 pm

Guest

--
This message is brought to you by Androcles
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/

"tadchem" <tadchem@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2f4311aa-c223-4874-a77f-bb663514b477@b9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
| On Apr 15, 10:06 am, Douglas Eagleson <eaglesondoug...@yahoo.com>
| wrote:
| > A man would be always certain of the subject. He would alive make the
| > sentence relatable and so composition was to uniformly announce
| > topic. A subject topic allowed the thinking. Another type as
| > composition was relation. Subject considered would be a search for
| > the exact relation mentioned.
| >
| > One reader has announced thought while the other uses all relation as
| > the possible subject.
| >
| > So 2% can allow such act of thought. A consistency of composition was
| > the issue and my consistency would not fail a close scrutiny.
| >
| > I am happy to announce a subject. A relation, a single thought.
| > Either reader should be forwarned.
| >
| > A.
| >
| > As a student philosopher "A" means my name. A person whose
| > composition skills are always relation.
| >
| > All true philosophers are such in nature. And to emulate them was my
| > goal. A large relation.
| >
| > "I think therefore I am."
| >
| > A certain foundation to the philosopher was this famous sentence.
| > Relationship as person, a mind, to the world was always its subject.
| > A mind acts within the body given substance examinable to the depths
| > of the DNA strand. Minds examine.
| >
| > So consider the complexity as a personal tribute.
|
| A new entry for the list of modern oxymorons:
| "True philosopher"
|

hahaha!
Nice one, Tom. Second only to "relativistic velocity".

hanson

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 3:50 pm

Guest

"Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
news:R27Nj.15355$2b2.13578@newsfe12.ams2...

Quote:

--
This message is brought to you by Androcles
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/

| Douglas Eagleson <eaglesondoug...@yahoo.com
| wrote:
| > A man would be always certain of the subject. He would alive make the
| > sentence relatable and so composition was to uniformly announce
| > topic. A subject topic allowed the thinking. Another type as
| > composition was relation. Subject considered would be a search for
| > the exact relation mentioned.
|
| > One reader has announced thought while the other uses all relation as
| > the possible subject.
|
| > So 2% can allow such act of thought. A consistency of composition was
| > the issue and my consistency would not fail a close scrutiny.
|
| > I am happy to announce a subject. A relation, a single thought.
| > Either reader should be forwarned.
|
| > A.
|
| > As a student philosopher "A" means my name. A person whose
| > composition skills are always relation.
|
| > All true philosophers are such in nature. And to emulate them was my
| > goal. A large relation.
|
| > "I think therefore I am."
|
| > A certain foundation to the philosopher was this famous sentence.
| > Relationship as person, a mind, to the world was always its subject.
| > A mind acts within the body given substance examinable to the depths
| > of the DNA strand. Minds examine.
|
| > So consider the complexity as a personal tribute.
|
"tadchem" <tadchem@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2f4311aa-c223-4874-a77f-bb663514b477@b9g2000prh.googlegroups.com..
| A new entry for the list of modern oxymorons:
| "True philosopher"
|
Androcles wrote:
hahaha!
Nice one, Tom. Second only to "relativistic velocity".

hanson wrote:

..... ahahahaha.... forget the "oxy", but continue the list with
"time dilation", "length contraction", "mass increase",
"curved space", and especially the "Like"-Group:...
point-like, time-like, mass-like, all being ass-like figments...
dangling like berries from Einstein's the sphincter region,
Thanks for the laughs, guys.... ahaha... ahahahanson

Androcles

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 4:39 pm

Guest

--
This message is brought to you by Androcles
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/

"hanson" <hanson@quick.net> wrote in message
news:ay8Nj.7799$El4.2750@trnddc05...
|
| "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
| news:R27Nj.15355$2b2.13578@newsfe12.ams2...
| > --
| > This message is brought to you by Androcles
| > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
| >
| > | Douglas Eagleson <eaglesondoug...@yahoo.com>
| > | wrote:
| > | > A man would be always certain of the subject. He would alive make
the
| > | > sentence relatable and so composition was to uniformly announce
| > | > topic. A subject topic allowed the thinking. Another type as
| > | > composition was relation. Subject considered would be a search for
| > | > the exact relation mentioned.
| > | >
| > | > One reader has announced thought while the other uses all relation
as
| > | > the possible subject.
| > | >
| > | > So 2% can allow such act of thought. A consistency of composition
was
| > | > the issue and my consistency would not fail a close scrutiny.
| > | >
| > | > I am happy to announce a subject. A relation, a single thought.
| > | > Either reader should be forwarned.
| > | >
| > | > A.
| > | >
| > | > As a student philosopher "A" means my name. A person whose
| > | > composition skills are always relation.
| > | >
| > | > All true philosophers are such in nature. And to emulate them was
my
| > | > goal. A large relation.
| > | >
| > | > "I think therefore I am."
| > | >
| > | > A certain foundation to the philosopher was this famous sentence.
| > | > Relationship as person, a mind, to the world was always its subject.
| > | > A mind acts within the body given substance examinable to the depths
| > | > of the DNA strand. Minds examine.
| > | >
| > | > So consider the complexity as a personal tribute.
| > |
| > "tadchem" <tadchem@comcast.net> wrote in message
| > news:2f4311aa-c223-4874-a77f-bb663514b477@b9g2000prh.googlegroups.com..
| > | A new entry for the list of modern oxymorons:
| > | "True philosopher"
| > |
| Androcles wrote:
| > hahaha!
| > Nice one, Tom. Second only to "relativistic velocity".
| >
| hanson wrote:
| .... ahahahaha.... forget the "oxy", but continue the list with
| "time dilation", "length contraction", "mass increase",
| "curved space", and especially the "Like"-Group:...
| point-like, time-like, mass-like, all being ass-like figments...
| dangling like berries from Einstein's the sphincter region,
| Thanks for the laughs, guys.... ahaha... ahahahanson

The amusing thing is that time dilation is built on Einstein's
papal bull:- 'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires to travel
from B to A' illustrated here:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Smart/tAB=tBA.gif
and then says 4 = 12 can't be right, but 1/2[tau(4) +tau(12)] = tau(12);
from which we get the famous cuckoo malformation,
tau = (t-vx/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2).
The moron is thought to be a genius by the moron-like sub-morons,
proving that intelligence is relativisitic and not absolut.
http://www.sccs.swarthmore.edu/users/06/adem/pictures/absolut/images/absolut%20australia.jpg

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 9:49 am

Guest

On Apr 16, 12:20 pm, Lester Zick <dontbot...@nowhere.net> wrote:

Quote:

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:46:34 -0700 (PDT), tadchem

tadc...@comcast.net> wrote:
On Apr 15, 10:06 am, Douglas Eagleson <eaglesondoug...@yahoo.com
wrote:
A man would be always certain of the subject. He would alive make the
sentence relatable and so composition was to uniformly announce
topic. A subject topic allowed the thinking. Another type as
composition was relation. Subject considered would be a search for
the exact relation mentioned.

One reader has announced thought while the other uses all relation as
the possible subject.

So 2% can allow such act of thought. A consistency of composition was
the issue and my consistency would not fail a close scrutiny.

I am happy to announce a subject. A relation, a single thought.
Either reader should be forwarned.

A.

As a student philosopher "A" means my name. A person whose
composition skills are always relation.

All true philosophers are such in nature. And to emulate them was my
goal. A large relation.

"I think therefore I am."

A certain foundation to the philosopher was this famous sentence.
Relationship as person, a mind, to the world was always its subject.
A mind acts within the body given substance examinable to the depths
of the DNA strand. Minds examine.

So consider the complexity as a personal tribute.

A new entry for the list of modern oxymorons:
"True philosopher"

Nature abhors philosophers.

~v~~

Nature abhors Zickisms.

Lester Zick

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 12:20 pm

Guest

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:46:34 -0700 (PDT), tadchem
<tadchem@comcast.net> wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 15, 10:06 am, Douglas Eagleson <eaglesondoug...@yahoo.com
wrote:
A man would be always certain of the subject. He would alive make the
sentence relatable and so composition was to uniformly announce
topic. A subject topic allowed the thinking. Another type as
composition was relation. Subject considered would be a search for
the exact relation mentioned.

One reader has announced thought while the other uses all relation as
the possible subject.

So 2% can allow such act of thought. A consistency of composition was
the issue and my consistency would not fail a close scrutiny.

I am happy to announce a subject. A relation, a single thought.
Either reader should be forwarned.

A.

As a student philosopher "A" means my name. A person whose
composition skills are always relation.

All true philosophers are such in nature. And to emulate them was my
goal. A large relation.

"I think therefore I am."

A certain foundation to the philosopher was this famous sentence.
Relationship as person, a mind, to the world was always its subject.
A mind acts within the body given substance examinable to the depths
of the DNA strand. Minds examine.

So consider the complexity as a personal tribute.

A new entry for the list of modern oxymorons:
"True philosopher"

Nature abhors philosophers.

~v~~

Eric Gisse

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 12:58 pm

Guest

On Apr 16, 11:49 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 16, 12:20 pm, Lester Zick <dontbot...@nowhere.net> wrote:

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:46:34 -0700 (PDT), tadchem

tadc...@comcast.net> wrote:
On Apr 15, 10:06 am, Douglas Eagleson <eaglesondoug...@yahoo.com
wrote:
A man would be always certain of the subject. He would alive make the
sentence relatable and so composition was to uniformly announce
topic. A subject topic allowed the thinking. Another type as
composition was relation. Subject considered would be a search for
the exact relation mentioned.

One reader has announced thought while the other uses all relation as
the possible subject.

So 2% can allow such act of thought. A consistency of composition was
the issue and my consistency would not fail a close scrutiny.

I am happy to announce a subject. A relation, a single thought.
Either reader should be forwarned.

A.

As a student philosopher "A" means my name. A person whose
composition skills are always relation.

All true philosophers are such in nature. And to emulate them was my
goal. A large relation.

"I think therefore I am."

A certain foundation to the philosopher was this famous sentence.
Relationship as person, a mind, to the world was always its subject.
A mind acts within the body given substance examinable to the depths
of the DNA strand. Minds examine.

So consider the complexity as a personal tribute.

A new entry for the list of modern oxymorons:
"True philosopher"

Nature abhors philosophers.

~v~~

Nature abhors Zickisms.

Oh god, not again.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 7:33 am

Guest

On Apr 17, 12:30 pm, Lester Zick <dontbot...@nowhere.net> wrote:

Quote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 15:58:01 -0700 (PDT), Eric Gisse

jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 16, 11:49 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:20 pm, Lester Zick <dontbot...@nowhere.net> wrote:

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:46:34 -0700 (PDT), tadchem

tadc...@comcast.net> wrote:
On Apr 15, 10:06 am, Douglas Eagleson <eaglesondoug...@yahoo.com
wrote:
A man would be always certain of the subject. He would alive make the
sentence relatable and so composition was to uniformly announce
topic. A subject topic allowed the thinking. Another type as
composition was relation. Subject considered would be a search for
the exact relation mentioned.

One reader has announced thought while the other uses all relation as
the possible subject.

So 2% can allow such act of thought. A consistency of composition was
the issue and my consistency would not fail a close scrutiny.

I am happy to announce a subject. A relation, a single thought.
Either reader should be forwarned.

A.

As a student philosopher "A" means my name. A person whose
composition skills are always relation.

All true philosophers are such in nature. And to emulate them was my
goal. A large relation.

"I think therefore I am."

A certain foundation to the philosopher was this famous sentence.
Relationship as person, a mind, to the world was always its subject.
A mind acts within the body given substance examinable to the depths
of the DNA strand. Minds examine.

So consider the complexity as a personal tribute.

A new entry for the list of modern oxymorons:
"True philosopher"

Nature abhors philosophers.

~v~~

Nature abhors Zickisms.

Oh god, not again.

Which god did you have in mind?

~v~~

The one that abhors Zickisms.

gdewilde@gmail.com

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 8:03 am

Guest

On Apr 17, 7:30 pm, Lester Zick <dontbot...@nowhere.net> wrote:

Quote:

Eric cant think ~ therefor he isn't.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 8:18 am

Guest

On Apr 17, 1:03 pm, "gdewi...@gmail.com" <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 17, 7:30 pm, Lester Zick <dontbot...@nowhere.net> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 15:58:01 -0700 (PDT), Eric Gisse

jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 16, 11:49 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:20 pm, Lester Zick <dontbot...@nowhere.net> wrote:

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:46:34 -0700 (PDT), tadchem

tadc...@comcast.net> wrote:
On Apr 15, 10:06 am, Douglas Eagleson <eaglesondoug...@yahoo.com
wrote:
A man would be always certain of the subject. He would alive make the
sentence relatable and so composition was to uniformly announce
topic. A subject topic allowed the thinking. Another type as
composition was relation. Subject considered would be a search for
the exact relation mentioned.

One reader has announced thought while the other uses all relation as
the possible subject.

So 2% can allow such act of thought. A consistency of composition was
the issue and my consistency would not fail a close scrutiny.

I am happy to announce a subject. A relation, a single thought.
Either reader should be forwarned.

A.

As a student philosopher "A" means my name. A person whose
composition skills are always relation.

All true philosophers are such in nature. And to emulate them was my
goal. A large relation.

"I think therefore I am."

A certain foundation to the philosopher was this famous sentence..
Relationship as person, a mind, to the world was always its subject.
A mind acts within the body given substance examinable to the depths
of the DNA strand. Minds examine.

So consider the complexity as a personal tribute.

A new entry for the list of modern oxymorons:
"True philosopher"

Nature abhors philosophers.

~v~~

Nature abhors Zickisms.

Oh god, not again.

Which god did you have in mind?

~v~~

Eric cant think ~ therefor he isn't.

Oh, thank God. The weeds in my yard can't think either. Therefore they
don't exist.

PD

Lester Zick

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 12:30 pm

Guest

On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 15:58:01 -0700 (PDT), Eric Gisse
<jowr.pi@gmail.com> wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 16, 11:49 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:20 pm, Lester Zick <dontbot...@nowhere.net> wrote:

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:46:34 -0700 (PDT), tadchem

tadc...@comcast.net> wrote:
On Apr 15, 10:06 am, Douglas Eagleson <eaglesondoug...@yahoo.com
wrote:
A man would be always certain of the subject. He would alive make the
sentence relatable and so composition was to uniformly announce
topic. A subject topic allowed the thinking. Another type as
composition was relation. Subject considered would be a search for
the exact relation mentioned.

One reader has announced thought while the other uses all relation as
the possible subject.

So 2% can allow such act of thought. A consistency of composition was
the issue and my consistency would not fail a close scrutiny.

I am happy to announce a subject. A relation, a single thought.
Either reader should be forwarned.

A.

As a student philosopher "A" means my name. A person whose
composition skills are always relation.

All true philosophers are such in nature. And to emulate them was my
goal. A large relation.

"I think therefore I am."

A certain foundation to the philosopher was this famous sentence.
Relationship as person, a mind, to the world was always its subject.
A mind acts within the body given substance examinable to the depths
of the DNA strand. Minds examine.

So consider the complexity as a personal tribute.

A new entry for the list of modern oxymorons:
"True philosopher"

Nature abhors philosophers.

~v~~

Nature abhors Zickisms.

Oh god, not again.

Which god did you have in mind?

~v~~

Wolf K.

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 6:50 pm

Guest

PD wrote:
[...]

Quote:

Nature abhors philosophers.
~v~~
Nature abhors Zickisms.
Oh god, not again.
Which god did you have in mind?
~v~~
Eric cant think ~ therefor he isn't.

Oh, thank God. The weeds in my yard can't think either. Therefore they
don't exist.

PD

Neither does my lawn, my lawnmower, the shed it's stored in, the house
it's attached to, the street on which its stands.... Good God, I'm all
alone in then universe!

Gonna have to do something about that.

Let's see - oops, can't see.

"Let there be light!"

That's better!

;-)

--
wolf k.

feedbackdroid

Posted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 5:13 am

Guest

On Apr 17, 5:50 pm, "Wolf K." <wolf...@sympatico.ca> wrote:

Quote:

PD wrote:

[...]

Nature abhors philosophers.
~v~~
Nature abhors Zickisms.
Oh god, not again.
Which god did you have in mind?
~v~~
Eric cant think ~ therefor he isn't.

Oh, thank God. The weeds in my yard can't think either. Therefore they
don't exist.

PD

Neither does my lawn, my lawnmower, the shed it's stored in, the house
it's attached to, the street on which its stands.... Good God, I'm all
alone in then universe!

Gonna have to do something about that.

Let's see - oops, can't see.

"Let there be light!"

That's better!

;-)

--
wolf k.

According to the guys quoting so-called "physicist philosophers" on
the other threads, it's all just an illusion anyways, and even you, I
guess. And here, I thought it was the buddhists who thought that.

Page 1 of 7 Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next All times are GMT - 5 Hours The time now is Sun Nov 23, 2008 5:03 am Science Forum Index