PDA

View Full Version : Samuel Johnson is god.


Piscivore
7th October 2004, 03:35 PM
Well, not really, but he's as good a candidate as any.

Consider that the sole source of Iacchus' "mystic wisdom", BeholdtheTruth's "'coming from coming from x' revelation", and lifegazer's "reasoned philosophy" is simple equivocation. They learned that words can be defined to mean whatever they want. Now we have 1inChrist, who hasn't even learned that much English, and is still bedazzled by oxymorons.

It also seems to me that these same individuals are fiction-impaired. especially 1inC. Is this a common trait amongst "prophets"? Are these two characteristics related, or am I cherry-picking?

Marquis de Carabas
7th October 2004, 03:39 PM
So, what you're trying to say is...you believe in vampires?

The GM
7th October 2004, 03:41 PM
Originally posted by Piscivore
Well, not really, but he's as good a candidate as any.


No.

Samuel Jackson is god. He'll get ya drunk. :D

Piscivore
7th October 2004, 03:43 PM
Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
So, what you're trying to say is...you believe in vampires?

Absolutely. Where else would Anne Rice have gotten all those books from?

Nyarlathotep
7th October 2004, 03:44 PM
Originally posted by Piscivore
Well, not really, but he's as good a candidate as any.

Consider that the sole source of Iacchus' "mystic wisdom", BeholdtheTruth's "'coming from coming from x' revelation", and lifegazer's "reasoned philosophy" is simple equivocation. They learned that words can be defined to mean whatever they want. Now we have 1inChrist, who hasn't even learned that much English, and is still bedazzled by oxymorons.

It also seems to me that these same individuals are fiction-impaired. especially 1inC. Is this a common trait amongst "prophets"? Are these two characteristics related, or am I cherry-picking?

I don't know if you're cherry picking, but I have also noticed that redifining words to more convenient definitions is a common trait among those who claim to have some sort of insight into mystic truth.

Whether this is cause, effect, or completely irrelevant, I cannot say.

Marquis de Carabas
7th October 2004, 03:49 PM
Originally posted by Piscivore
Well, not really, but he's as good a candidate as any.

Consider that the sole source of Iacchus' "mystic wisdom", BeholdtheTruth's "'coming from coming from x' revelation", and lifegazer's "reasoned philosophy" is simple equivocation. They learned that words can be defined to mean whatever they want. Now we have 1inChrist, who hasn't even learned that much English, and is still bedazzled by oxymorons.

It also seems to me that these same individuals are fiction-impaired. especially 1inC. Is this a common trait amongst "prophets"? Are these two characteristics related, or am I cherry-picking?
Puss: Well, since the good Marquis can't be buggered for a serious reply, I'll take this one.

Fancy wordplay and redefinition are effective debate tactics among a generally unreasoning audience. It is possible that if the members of your rogue's gallery first developed their ideas in such an environment, it is likely they stumbled upon the technique and were impressed by its efficacy.

Reason and logic, properly applied, generally tear through this pretty quickly, however. So in a reasoning crowd, which it is our claim to be, the style doesn't possess much allure. However, the style can never be conclusively demolished (for its adherents) because they can always just redefine again.

Piscivore
7th October 2004, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by The GM
No.

Samuel Jackson is god. He'll get ya drunk. :D

Sam Adams (http://www.samueladams.com/) can get me drunk. Sam Jackson (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000168/) would probably kick the crap outta me. Especially if I called him "Sam". :D

Nyarlathotep
7th October 2004, 03:52 PM
Originally posted by Piscivore
Sam Adams (http://www.samueladams.com/) can get me drunk. Sam Jackson (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000168/) would probably kick the crap outta me. Especially if I called him "Sam". :D

Howard Johnson, on the other hand, will give me a comfortable palce to sleep.

Anathema
7th October 2004, 03:57 PM
I vote for Samuel L for God:

Maybe it means: you're the evil man, and I'm the righteous man, and Mr. 9mm here, he's the Shepard protecting my righteous a$$ in the Valley of Darkness. Or, it could mean: you're the righteous man, and I'm the Shepard, and it's the world that's evil and selfish. I'd like that, but that sh** ain't the truth. The truth is: you're the weak, and I am the tyranny of evil men. But, I'm tryin', Ringo, I'm trying real hard to be the Shepard.

The GM
7th October 2004, 04:04 PM
Originally posted by Piscivore
Sam Adams (http://www.samueladams.com/) can get me drunk. Sam Jackson (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000168/) would probably kick the crap outta me. Especially if I called him "Sam". :D

Aw, now don't tell me you've never seen the Samuel L. Jackson beer commercial...."Handcrafted by MEEEEEE! Samuel L. Jackson."

Although I'd vote for Sam Adams too!

Piscivore
7th October 2004, 04:06 PM
Originally posted by Anathema
I vote for Samuel L for God:

Me too: :D
Jules Winnfield: What ain't no country I ever heard of! They speak English in What?
Brett: What?
Jules Winnfield: English, mother-fu**er! Do you speak it?!

Piscivore
7th October 2004, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
Puss: Well, since the good Marquis can't be buggered for a serious reply, I'll take this one.

Fancy wordplay and redefinition are effective debate tactics among a generally unreasoning audience. It is possible that if the members of your rogue's gallery first developed their ideas in such an environment, it is likely they stumbled upon the technique and were impressed by its efficacy.

Reason and logic, properly applied, generally tear through this pretty quickly, however. So in a reasoning crowd, which it is our claim to be, the style doesn't possess much allure. However, the style can never be conclusively demolished (for its adherents) because they can always just redefine again.

True that. So I think what I'm seeing here then is that it is the fiction-impairment that makes them wannabe prophets, not the capacity for equivocation. If they understood the concept of "making **** up" they might be authors, if they never got to equivocation they'd just be slave-minded like 1inC. It might be interesting to learn if they had "imaginary freinds" they really believed in, or if like me the "friend" was just a convenient scapegoat.

Piscivore
7th October 2004, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by Nyarlathotep
Howard Johnson, on the other hand, will give me a comfortable palce to sleep.

After you get drunk and Samuel L Jackson kicks the crap out of you? :D

Nyarlathotep
7th October 2004, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by Piscivore
After you get drunk and Samuel L Jackson kicks the crap out of you? :D

Is there any time you are more in need of a comfortable place to sleep? I don't think so.

c4ts
8th October 2004, 09:20 AM
Originally posted by Marquis de Carabas
So, what you're trying to say is...you believe in vampires?

Ha! Ha ha! What a silly notion! Now take my V8 out of the microwave, I'm going to bed in the basement.