Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: Surviving The Schizo Gauntlet
Replies: 6   Last Post: Feb 27, 2013 4:23 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Kevin

Posts: 496
Registered: 5/1/10
Re: Surviving The Schizo Gauntlet
Posted: Feb 27, 2013 4:23 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Feb 27, 11:49 am, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 27, 9:00 am, Kevin <barry196...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>

> > On Feb 26, 12:45 pm, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 26, 10:09 am, Kevin <barry196...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 26, 12:03 pm, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Feb 26, 9:42 am, Kevin <barry196...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I made it through the Marine Corp's Schizo gauntlet... I made it
> > > > > > through Academe's Schizo gauntlet... I made it through Psychiatry's
> > > > > > Schizo gauntlet... and it must be true that I made it through the
> > > > > > Jew's Schizo gauntlet because the safe bet argument boils down to that
> > > > > > it must be a 'safe bet' that I'm a 'schizo'...The demented rabbit in
> > > > > > Alice in Wonderland has the right idea... (I'm late, I'm late, for a
> > > > > > very important date... No time to say hello, ***GOODBYE***) You can't
> > > > > > blame me for the 'safe bet' argument. That is what academe believes...
> > > > > > Why does my philosophy teacher present the 'safe bet' argument to his
> > > > > > class now that we all know what it means? (The 'safe bet' is untenable
> > > > > > in a philosophy class unless it is being presented to philosophy
> > > > > > majors, methinks... Sartre isn't presented in an introduction to
> > > > > > philosophy so why the 'safe bet'?) The Marine Corps doesn't actually
> > > > > > make it a high priority to weed out the gun infatuated schizos since a
> > > > > > poor judgement call is bad news for the drill instructors. The drill
> > > > > > instructors try and break the schizos and the schizos break in front
> > > > > > of me instead of the drill instructors. (It couldn't possibly be the
> > > > > > case that I have an aptitude for 'transferance issues' since it is
> > > > > > impossible for anyone to flatter me for my role in psychiatry given
> > > > > > that my expertise in psychiatry is out of dire necessity.) I'm working
> > > > > > at a machine shop in Texas and the Texas lead man goes into fits of
> > > > > > rage right in front of me and everybody else in the shop... So the
> > > > > > Texas lead man is a broken schizo, what happens next? The Texas boss
> > > > > > reasons that since the Texas lead man is really that much more
> > > > > > important than I am, the Texas boss takes his side over mine. Well, it
> > > > > > turns out that 'folding' is objectifiable. Folding is a means for a
> > > > > > self attenuating system to make adjustments on itself... in the
> > > > > > antimatter realm... so the possible relevance of this to me is that...
> > > > > > the math types who do folding are possibly hard nut whackos that I
> > > > > > should be leery of. No matter how leery you might happen to be of
> > > > > > strings, Marine Corps... a testable strings hypothesis would
> > > > > > completely decimate and annihilate quantum physics for all eternity so
> > > > > > if you're wondering why I obsess of other intangible aspects of
> > > > > > physics, it is because I'm twidling my thumbs while a testable strings
> > > > > > hypothesis, which I have no control of, comes to fruition. I can smell
> > > > > > obsession at this point because of Klein bottles. Am I the expert?
> > > > > > Well, since the rule is for me not to apply myself to anything that is
> > > > > > difficult then a banal remark takes precident. Klein bottles intrigue
> > > > > > me only once in a blue moon. (How untenable is it that any Jew is on
> > > > > > any faculty in American academe? If Jews want to be on a faculty in
> > > > > > academe, then what do we have Israel for? How doubly untenable is it
> > > > > > that any Jew has tenure on any faculty in American academe? How triply
> > > > > > untenable is it that I'm in a partnership with a tenured Jew in
> > > > > > American academe?... given that I'm the boss... and the Jew is my
> > > > > > subordinate... nevertheless, I'll go along with the charade since I
> > > > > > need the cash money at the present moment.)

>
> > > > > > The news media is enigmatic in a sense because, the better you are as
> > > > > > a scientist, the more obvious it is that you don't care for the
> > > > > > limelight... The media is infatuated with it's delusion of being
> > > > > > altruistic but it's not true since being under the media gives me
> > > > > > what... The government is entitled to control the news media after
> > > > > > hostilities have ended between America and another country since how
> > > > > > are diplomatic concerns something the news media needs to have control
> > > > > > of? Britian is sensitive to militaristic cultures and they always
> > > > > > benefit when hostilities have ended between America and another
> > > > > > country. America is a diplomatic vassel of the British. Britian is
> > > > > > always supportive of American diplomacy and therefore, I think I
> > > > > > represent the British sentiment by saying: 'Hilary, it really isn't
> > > > > > your fault.' Barak Obama is an obsession of mine due to the fact that
> > > > > > he must Lord of the Lunatics if he thinks that confidence and false
> > > > > > confidence are the same thing. Barak Obama must have been Nero in a
> > > > > > former life. Barak can't exist since my obsession is to have
> > > > > > absolutely no knowledge of what is inside of his head.

>
> > > > > > Psychiatry claims that they find it difficult to identify which schizo
> > > > > > is capable of gun violence but the fact of the matter is that no
> > > > > > decent human being cares to involve himself on the topic of
> > > > > > transferance issues. It's a real simple rule, psychiatry. Just ask me
> > > > > > who the schizos are and I'll point them out to you... and the most
> > > > > > obvious schizos of all don't even need my input and that would be
> > > > > > anyone who claims that I'm a schizo.

>
> > > > > > So I know this guy and I'd estimate his IQ to be around 80... He
> > > > > > claims to be clairvoyant... It seems to be a true representation of
> > > > > > what he believes to be true so why should I have a problem with it? He
> > > > > > is sometimes hostile but does he have just enough on the ball to mock
> > > > > > hostility for the sake of making himself an enigma to me? What he
> > > > > > seems to really want from me is for me to be proud of him since he
> > > > > > believes that he can make someone with an exalted intellect such as
> > > > > > mine... think... and I admit that it is true, someone with an IQ of 80
> > > > > > can make me think... so what is it that I don't think about? I don't
> > > > > > think about the crown that is too heavy for any man to lift... Sounds
> > > > > > like a metaphor for pain... Do I want to know what it means and the
> > > > > > answer is not at all. The notion that my Aunt Ruth carried the crown
> > > > > > that no man can lift is simply a thought that occured to me and I have
> > > > > > no intention of pursuing the depth of it's meaning. The issue is a non-
> > > > > > sequitor... until the gun obsessed schizo comes along and he
> > > > > > apparently wants a chunk of that crown (or maybe he wants the whole
> > > > > > damn pie just for the sake of the asking.) The gun obsessed schizo is
> > > > > > maybe just a teensy bit smarter than the average bear... but his
> > > > > > perspective is that being the boss entitles him to believe that he is
> > > > > > the smartest man who ever lived in the history of mankind and so that
> > > > > > isn't the thing that he is hiding... The thing that he is hiding is
> > > > > > his belief in his own clairvoyance... The consequence of that is that
> > > > > > my Aunt Ruth is a source of pain due to the fact that she is hiding
> > > > > > the same thing. The gun obsessed schizo cannot make me think under any
> > > > > > circumstance whatsoever. The guy with an IQ of 80 can make me think
> > > > > > and my Aunt Ruth can make me think but never the gun obsessed schizo.
> > > > > > I have a fault given that I am in the habit of believing myself to be
> > > > > > indominable. It seems that the Britian's royal family has some odd
> > > > > > ways of dealing with pain (given that I should happen to find myself
> > > > > > married to the lovely and charming Princess Eugenie.) What would be
> > > > > > the big deal of my marrying into the royal family? The question on my
> > > > > > mind is: Since we live in a modern 'scientific' age, what benefit does
> > > > > > the royal family derive from 'science'? If I'm the 'scientific' choice
> > > > > > for marriage into royalty, then I don't see the difficulty. Delusions
> > > > > > of grandeur don't exist in psychiatry anymore since flattery readily
> > > > > > arrests anyone who mocks it but... every once in a blue moon I think I
> > > > > > can still get one over on flattery.

>
> > > > > Trying to find the point or the topic of your presentation. Can you
> > > > > say it in a sentence or two?

>
> > > > > Pie Holehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FWEXRBjZYshttps://www.youtube.com/wa...-
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > Yes, the point is that since I'm getting to old for schizo gauntlets,
> > > > could you please find the courtesy and the grace to expedite the
> > > > remaining gauntlets that I am required to run through... In reality,
> > > > the first and only schizo gauntlet I needed to survive was the
> > > > Marines. Psychiatry doesn't even think they need to ask or find out if
> > > > I was in the Marines before putting me through their schizo
> > > > gauntlet... Some pretentious shrink thinks she has some brilliant
> > > > thesis that nobody has ever thought of before.

>
> > > Things are getting scary with the public and mental illness. It is one
> > > of the last allowable prejudiced groups that can be discriminated
> > > against without consequences.

>
> > > Especially now with Hollywood finally learning how to portray the
> > > depth of the illness experience which was once so secret. For an
> > > example consider Bipolar disease; the movie Silver Linings got it too
> > > right and the tv show Homeland figured out psychosis intoxication to a
> > > tee.

>
> > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lj5_FhLaaQQhttp://www.sho.com/sho/hom...quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Part of the problem is the extremely graphic nature of the horror
> > genre... Scary movies are great if they are campy but what does it
> > mean when Hollywood pulls out all the stops to put creativity and
> > artistic expression into a horror flick?

>
> It means Adam Smith's invisible hand has been fondling our private
> parts. Come too think of it, Capitalism & Art do seem a bit perverted
> as bedfellows along with fondlers.
>
> -------------/-----------
>
> This reminds me of the defense of capitalisms' weakest part;
>
> It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except
> all the others that have been tried. --Sir Winston Churchill British
> politician (1874 - 1965) ...
>
> Many economists present a similar argument form in their seeming
> ironclad defense of one economic method - capitalism, but with
> slightly different subjects, predicates and other terms.
>
> The Irrational Capitalist claims; Oh the socialists and their top down
> management style cannot anticipate nor predict what or how a
> particular market can distribute the goods and services of society
> much more efficiently than free markets and invisible hands can.
>
> But what if the socialists came up with a top down computer system
> that made society work a bit better than capitalism, the free market
> and invisible hands feeling the goods? Wouldn't the capitalist have to
> accept it since the only reason they accept capitalism is because it
> does a better job currently than other systems do?
>
> Not to make it look like the invisible hand is molesting the people or
> feeling them up without being seen, but if the reason for adjusting
> tax rates is only consequential rates of revenue, then the ideology is
> vulnerable to any system that seems efficient.
>
> This argument form will backfire.


I'm nonplussed by capitalism's claim of efficiency. The hierarchy of
necessary goods being produced addresses the needs of the wealthy.
Goods which have planned absolescence just means that if you're under
the gun to keep working to beat the expiration date for getting new
stuff. Down time could potentially mean that you lose everything and
all of your stuff breaks and you're living on the street.



Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.