Beyond Energy, Matter, Time And Space

[brandonk]

I seemed it would be impossible to get a Gilbert Ling entry in wikipedia, although we did after quite a few attempts. I think it will prove to be impossible to get a Ray Peat entry, no matter how many times we may try.

I believe it is accurately described here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Asmodeus; the APEs are predominant. Asmodeus, whoever he is, could very well be slandered by the APEs.

 

[Such_Saturation]

I think the style is just too perfect and adamantine for it not to be Mr. Langan.

 

[jaa]

post 118661 I don't know but https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Asmodeus is it. There are a couple more blog comment sections where he appears with his real name.

Thanks such!

 

[Such_Saturation]

post 118690

post 118661 I don't know but https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Asmodeus is it. There are a couple more blog comment sections where he appears with his real name.

Thanks such!

No problem!

post 118672 I seemed it would be impossible to get a Gilbert Ling entry in wikipedia, although we did after quite a few attempts. I think it will prove to be impossible to get a Ray Peat entry, no matter how many times we may try.

I believe it is accurately described here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Asmodeus; the APEs are predominant. Asmodeus, whoever he is, could very well be slandered by the APEs.

What is an APE?

 

[brandonk]

post 118690

post 118661 I don't know but https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Asmodeus is it. There are a couple more blog comment sections where he appears with his real name.

Thanks such!

No problem!

post 118672 I seemed it would be impossible to get a Gilbert Ling entry in wikipedia, although we did after quite a few attempts. I think it will prove to be impossible to get a Ray Peat entry, no matter how many times we may try.

I believe it is accurately described here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Asmodeus; the APEs are predominant. Asmodeus, whoever he is, could very well be slandered by the APEs.

What is an APE?

From the page of Asmodeus:

Obviously, Wikipedia cannot afford to let purblind, torch-bearing anti-pseudoscience fanatics establish constraints which automatically exclude legitimate, notable currents of thought and inquiry in favor of their own more orthodox, more limited viewpoints. It is not up to any encyclopedia to promulgate majority opinions at the total expense of opinions which are notable, but espoused by only a minority (no matter how small that minority may be). While no serious encyclopedia should throw open its doors to crankery, neither should it slam them on unpopular or unorthodox ideas already notable in their own right.

This applies to Wikipedia just as it applies to any other encyclopedia. The current problem, as I see it, is twofold:

(1) The Unofficial Anti-Pseudoscience Executive (U-APE) has demonstrated that it will not, or perhaps merely cannot, recognize any problems in connection with its unbridled anti-pseudoscience zealotry. Unfortunately, Wikipedia as a whole cannot afford to ignore such problems. Building a Better Britannica is an admirable goal, but letting myopic "anti-pseudoscience" pogroms and witch-hunts run wild is not. In fact, when one looks carefully at what goes into a good encyclopedia, conceptual and ideological witch-hunting and associated forms of censorship are seen to be antithetical to encyclopedic accuracy and comprehensiveness.

(2) Although U-APEs are as driven as a gasoline fire in a hurricane, there is no one to oppose or police them...nothing analogous to an APE-house supervisor, or to the IAD within a police force. Thus, nothing prevents APEs from becoming abusive, swarming the objects of their sometimes irrational hatred, and manipulatively raping the editorial and administrative procedures of Wikipedia in order to satisfy their ravenous appetite for deletion.

 

[Such_Saturation]

post 118694
From the page of Asmodeus:

Obviously, Wikipedia cannot afford to let purblind, torch-bearing anti-pseudoscience fanatics establish constraints which automatically exclude legitimate, notable currents of thought and inquiry in favor of their own more orthodox, more limited viewpoints. It is not up to any encyclopedia to promulgate majority opinions at the total expense of opinions which are notable, but espoused by only a minority (no matter how small that minority may be). While no serious encyclopedia should throw open its doors to crankery, neither should it slam them on unpopular or unorthodox ideas already notable in their own right.

This applies to Wikipedia just as it applies to any other encyclopedia. The current problem, as I see it, is twofold:

(1) The Unofficial Anti-Pseudoscience Executive (U-APE) has demonstrated that it will not, or perhaps merely cannot, recognize any problems in connection with its unbridled anti-pseudoscience zealotry. Unfortunately, Wikipedia as a whole cannot afford to ignore such problems. Building a Better Britannica is an admirable goal, but letting myopic "anti-pseudoscience" pogroms and witch-hunts run wild is not. In fact, when one looks carefully at what goes into a good encyclopedia, conceptual and ideological witch-hunting and associated forms of censorship are seen to be antithetical to encyclopedic accuracy and comprehensiveness.

(2) Although U-APEs are as driven as a gasoline fire in a hurricane, there is no one to oppose or police them...nothing analogous to an APE-house supervisor, or to the IAD within a police force. Thus, nothing prevents APEs from becoming abusive, swarming the objects of their sometimes irrational hatred, and manipulatively raping the editorial and administrative procedures of Wikipedia in order to satisfy their ravenous appetite for deletion.

This is what happens on Reddit:

Downvote Arrow and Upvote Arrow are Hidden
Downvote brigades are immediately downvoting posts to zero. Hiding the down vote arrow in CSS did not prevent downvote brigades from downvoting the posts on their home page, the OPs' submission history and using mobile apps. Therefore, mods hid the up vote arrow in CSS. The upvote arrow is still available for comments.

 

[Hugh Johnson]

post 53479 Actually I find the philosophy of the Jedi is almost completely diametric to Daoism. The Jedi creed is a repressive philosophy, it's about subjugating impulses. But Daoism talks a lot about 'te' which can loosely translated as integrity or being true to one's essential nature. They're all about accepting and embracing our natures. In weird way, it has more in common with Star Wars's 'dark side' than the Jedi. Even Zen is ultimately about this type of acceptance, though it takes a different route and often get's encumbered with painful disciplines.

You are not the only one:

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/12/star ... rge-lucas/

I'm pretty sure they stole it from KotOR 2, where Kreia tried to destroy the Force, as it was the thing causing pendulum swings between horrific destruction of the Dark Side and the repressive totalitarianism of the Jedi.

The whole Star Wars thing represents a simplistic authoritarian and Manichean worldview. Probably a part of the reason it is so popular.