[Serious Phil] Wittgenstein Slides

[SWM]

--- In Phil-Sci-Mind at yahoogroups.com, "larry_tapper" <Philscimind at ...> wrote:
>
> SWM> I think you mistake his humor for something more sinister. In fact, Sean always
> planned this site as the open alternative to sites like Analytic (and even his
> Wittrs). Initially I didn't even want to post here because of his insistence on
> this being a totally open forum since, frankly, I'd had my fill of the bile you
> guys had sent my way on Analytic. But eventually he cozzened me into posting and
> then, to my great consternation, the same nonsense that had prevailed on
> Analytic followed me here. If I'd wanted to control a list I'd have formed my
> own. But I have no interest in that. It's too labor-intenstive and bothersome as
> far as I'm concerned.
> 
> SWM,
> 
> This strikes me as a most peculiar account of what's happened.
> 
> It's quite obvious to me that Sean's primary purpose in starting this group was to set up a home for you specifically, and thereby to score a few virtue points. And I'd happily grant him those virtue points --- as I wrote much earlier, I think that was a generous gesture on his part. 
>

Nothing I said above contradicts a claim about his wanting to set up a "home" for me (as in a place where I could post without being incessantly bullied and ultimately shut down). But it's also true that I told Sean I had no interest in such a list, especially if it was going to be open to the same cast of characters, and that I was actually quite content to give up on-line posting for the time being if I did not find another place to exchange thoughts with others on subjects that interested me. (I had already given up posting on Wittrs because it had moved in a direction that held less interest for me.) However, Sean pressed me on a number of occasions to participate and I finally did. So you are again misreading as you are wont to do. 
 
> Why else would he start this group? Sean thinks conventional philosophy is bunk, and he's reiterated that point here several times. So what would be the point --- he likes to watch the flies moving about aimlessly inside the fly-bottle?
> 

I think you were right the first time that he felt I had been treated 
shabbily and wanted to do something in his way to right the matter. I think he also may have felt bad about my loss of interest in Wittrs.


> However, Sean may have made a mistake advertising the new group too widely, including Analytic. As a result, little has changed.
>


Precisely and, frankly, I asked him NOT to do that.
 

> Stuart, I think your best bet would be to start fresh and look for a group where nobody knows you.


That's a loaded remark as usual. The issue isn't who "knows" me but who I am discussing things with. Obviously a bunch of you have taken a dislike to me (to put it mildly) for whatever your peculiar reasons and that shows throughout. Moreover, I have come to feel an equivalent antipathy in response for reasons that should be equally obvious.

Of course you cannot say it's because you fellows are in the wrong so, on your view, it must have to do with me. Frankly, as you can imagine, I think it's to do with you and a few others. But nothing obliges you or Walter to hang around and post here. I'm not pushing you out and have no power to do so in any event. Moreover, I even find some of what you post of interest on occasion -- even some of Walter's comments. But I have no interest in being on the receiving end of your continued unjustified, hostility and I sure don't like seeing it directed at Sean either, whatever you feel about his ideas or methods of expressing them.

So whether you go or stay is up to you. But if you choose to stick around, don't do it just to continue your little on-line war with me and don't complain about the posts on this site since you're always free not to read them -- or to go elsewhere. 


> Seems to me the ideal spot for you would be a group mainly devoted to something like psychology. politics, history, etc., where you might have a chance of setting yourself up as the resident philosopher-sage.
> 
> LT 
> 


Ah, I see now what your issue with me comes down to. You seem to that I want to be some kind of "authority". I've always kind of seen that in you but it never seemed as clear as now, after that last remark. That I have fairly strong opinions in certain areas and defend them forcefully seems to suggest to you that I want to dictate the philosophical agenda. That's just baloney. But I'm not even going to argue the point anymore. Go or stay as you like. Just try to be honest with yourself while you're here -- if you can't be honest with the rest of us.

SWM   

> 
> --- In Phil-Sci-Mind at yahoogroups.com, "SWM" <Philscimind@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In Phil-Sci-Mind at yahoogroups.com, "walto" <Philscimind@> wrote:
> >  
> > > --- In Phil-Sci-Mind at yahoogroups.com, "SWM" <Philscimind@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In Phil-Sci-Mind at yahoogroups.com, "walto" <Philscimind@> wrote:
> > > >  
> > > > > --- In Phil-Sci-Mind at yahoogroups.com, "larry_tapper" <Philscimind@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sean writes:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > SW> Walter, I hope for God's sake Stuart doesn't ban you. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > This, incidentally, is kind of like the absurd use of "want" Sean happened to stumble upon.  What he actually means is, "Stuart, I'm absolutely begging you to ban this guy."
> > > > > 
> > > > > W
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > > Actually that's not true. Sean has explicitly asked me to lay off. 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Hard to believe, but I'll take your word for it.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >Personally I would never have invited you over 
> > > 
> > > I was not invited.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > nor would I have approved your participation if you'd come on your own. 
> > > 
> > > And my participation is not "approved."  It's just that it's hard for Sean to ban me (though he's had no qualms about doing just that to me and several others on his other sites) since this is supposed to be his free-for-all area, and he's accused Larry of Stalinism. Not that consistency is his hallmark, but there's apparently some limit even to his public shenanigans.  So, on this list, he'd like you to be the heavy instead of him.  
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > I think you mistake his humor for something more sinister. In fact, Sean always planned this site as the open alternative to sites like Analytic (and even his Wittrs). Initially I didn't even want to post here because of his insistence on this being a totally open forum since, frankly, I'd had my fill of the bile you guys had sent my way on Analytic. But eventually he cozzened me into posting and then, to my great consternation, the same nonsense that had prevailed on Analytic followed me here. If I'd wanted to control a list I'd have formed my own. But I have no interest in that. It's too labor-intenstive and bothersome as far as I'm concerned.
> > 
> > My interest is only in exchanging thoughts with others who have something to say that interests me. As it happens, as far as  philosophy goes, my interest are mostly to do with questions of mind, Wittgenstein's work and ethics (though the latter not so much these days). I have no great interest in metaphysical debates which, I think, go nowhere, nor am I especially interested in textual exegeses to do with the various technical issues of logic.  
> > 
> > To the extent posters here touch on areas I find interesting I will respond and to the extent some, like you, go postal, I will try to help tamp it down in the interests of a return to civil discourse. Beyond that, this list is Sean's baby and I am no less a guest here than you are. One difference between us though is that I try to conduct myself as a guest in another's home. You seem to have another approach.
> > 
> >  
> > > 
> > > >But that's not my role here since it's his list not mine. His >concession to my sensibilities has been to give me final say but >only after an extensive faux legal game has been played out and, >frankly, I don't feel inclined to engage in that. I think your sour, >sarcastic bile speaks for itself -- and then some.
> > > > 
> > > > SWM     
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Make it your role--fire away.  I wouldn't worry too much about any faux legal process. I'd have no intention of "asserting my rights."  I'd just wander off, giggling.
> > > 
> > > W
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Philscimind mailing list
> > > > Philscimind@
> > > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Philscimind mailing list
> > > Philscimind@
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Philscimind mailing list
> > Philscimind@
> >
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Philscimind mailing list
> Philscimind at ...
>