AEVASIVE - an absolute self contradiction



J

John Edser

Guest
PF:- What does Darwinism (Charles's by now basically 'largely deemed almost divine' theoretical
thinking) and Edserianism (our own John Edser's the-more-deeply-looked-into-the-more-dubious
denouncements of DNA-centered scholarly pursuits, and some professors' perhaps somewhat narrow views
or philosophical outlooks or opinions (intellectual views and opinions implicitly of/on our own and
fellow organisms' origin in the necessarily slightly uneven interplay within the Evolutionary
Pressure Totality) have in common?

Answer: Both are based on kinds of thinking that: works, were arrived at, and are generated by
"brain functionalities" that evolved, in a manner explained by AEVASIVE (and just a few auxilliary
other concEPTS).

JE:- Of course the view that everybody is being AEVASIVE except PF is simply not _self_ consistent
with PF's AEVASIVE theory. PF has to prove he is not just suffering from paranoid self delusion by
proving that he and his AEVASIVE theory is not just being AEVASIVE, also.

Welcome to Epimenides Paradox the epistemological black hole out of which nothing emerges....

Best Wishes,

John Edser Independent Researcher

PO Box 266 Church Pt NSW 2105 Australia

[email protected]
 
P

Peter F.

Guest
"John Edser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> PF:- What does Darwinism (Charles's by now basically 'largely deemed almost divine' theoretical
> thinking) and Edserianism (our own John Edser's the-more-deeply-looked-into-the-more-dubious
> denouncements of DNA-centered scholarly pursuits, and some professors' perhaps somewhat narrow
> views or philosophical outlooks or opinions (intellectual views and opinions implicitly of/on our
> own and fellow organisms' origin in the necessarily slightly uneven interplay within the
> Evolutionary Pressure Totality) have
in
> common?
>
> Answer: Both are based on kinds of thinking that: works, were arrived at, and are generated by
> "brain functionalities" that evolved, in a manner explained
by
> AEVASIVE (and just a few auxilliary other concEPTS).
>
> JE:- Of course the view that everybody is being AEVASIVE except PF is simply not _self_ consistent
> with PF's AEVASIVE theory. PF has to prove he is not just suffering from paranoid self delusion by
> proving that he and his AEVASIVE theory is not just being AEVASIVE, also.
>
> Welcome to Epimenides Paradox the epistemological black hole out of which nothing emerges....

Where did you get the idea from that I think I am not AEVASIVE?

My only self-confessed absolute position of opinion (which I can only apologize for, if it gets up
your olfactories) is that I am the most ideologically EPT person that ever lived. %-}}}

Consider this: Some of the things that this World deserves, are more perversely unrelenting unifying
anthropobiological analyses; attempts at promoting the far and wide formation of science-aligned
Philanthropically Oriented Opinions, and for these pursuits to be accompanied by - thereby made more
fun and bearable by - (implicitly AEVASIVE) humour.

I personally (at least *try* to) offer - over and over again - SEPTIC such (light-making, and with
Science aligned) stuff. %->

Best Wishes

P
 
J

John Edser

Guest
> PF:- What does Darwinism (Charles's by now basically 'largely deemed almost
> divine' theoretical thinking) and Edserianism (our own John Edser's the-more-deeply-looked-into-the-more-
> dubious denouncements of DNA-centered scholarly pursuits, and some professors'
> perhaps somewhat narrow views or philosophical outlooks or opinions
> (intellectual views and opinions implicitly of/on our own and fellow organisms'
> origin in the necessarily slightly uneven interplay within the Evolutionary
> Pressure Totality) have in common? Answer: Both are based on kinds of thinking
> that: works, were arrived at, and are generated by "brain functionalities" that
> evolved, in a manner explained by AEVASIVE (and just a few auxilliary other
> concEPTS).

> JE:- Of course the view that everybody is being AEVASIVE except PF is simply
> not _self_ consistent with PF's AEVASIVE theory. PF has to prove he is not just
> suffering from paranoid self delusion by proving that he and his AEVASIVE
> theory is not just being AEVASIVE, also. Welcome to Epimenides Paradox the
> epistemological black hole out of which nothing emerges....

PF:- Where did you get the idea from that I think I am not AEVASIVE?

JE:- Then you are just another Cretan that has been telling us for nearly 2000
years that all Cretans are lairs. Can we believe you or not?

PF:- My only self-confessed absolute position of opinion (which I can only
apologize for, if it gets up your olfactories) is that I am the most
ideologically EPT person that ever lived. %-}}} Consider this: Some of the things
that this World deserves, are more perversely unrelenting unifying
anthropobiological analyses; attempts at promoting the far and wide formation of
science-aligned Philanthropically Oriented Opinions, and for these pursuits to be
accompanied by - thereby made more fun and bearable by - (implicitly AEVASIVE)
humour. I personally (at least *try* to) offer - over and over again - SEPTIC
such (light-making, and with Science aligned) stuff. %->

JE:- OK, I am sure we all agree that you are funny.

Best Wishes,

John Edser Independent Researcher

PO Box 266 Church Pt NSW 2105 Australia

[email protected]
 
P

Peter F.

Guest
"John Edser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]... ....
>
> PF:- Where did you get the idea from that I think I am not
> AEVASIVE?
>
> JE:- Then you are just another Cretan that has been
> telling us for nearly 2000 years that all Cretans are
> lairs. Can we believe you or not?
>

Show me an example of were I wrote/inferred something to the
effect of that I am "not AEVASIVE"!

P
 
J

John Edser

Guest
> PF:- Where did you get the idea from that I think I am not
> AEVASIVE?

> JE:- Then you are just another Cretan that has been
> telling us for nearly 2000 years that all Cretans are
> lairs. Can we believe you or not?

PF:- Show me an example of were I wrote/inferred something
to the effect of that I am "not AEVASIVE"!

JE:- Can't you see that if you say "All Cretans are Liars
(i.e. are AEVASIVE) and YOU are a Cretan
(i.e. you are being AEVASIVE by just suggesting
if) that just _zero_ content is contained within such
nonsense?

An AEVASIVE person cannot claim they know that they and
everybody else is being AEVASIVE, only a TESTED to be NON
AEVASIVE person can validly claim such a thing.

THUS:- Either: YOU claim to be a TESTED NON AEVASIVE person
allowing a "holier than thou" attitude, or you include
yourself (as you have done) and just end up absolutely
contradicting yourself,
i.g. you and your AEVASIVE theory both enter Epimenides
Paradox and-just-never-come-out.

Regards,

John Edser Independent Researcher

PO Box 266 Church Pt NSW 2105 Australia

[email protected]
 
P

Peter F.

Guest
"John Edser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> > PF:- Where did you get the idea from that I think I am
> > not AEVASIVE?
>
> > JE:- Then you are just another Cretan that has been
> > telling us for nearly 2000 years that all Cretans are
> > lairs. Can we believe you or not?
>
> PF:- Show me an example of were I wrote/inferred something
> to the effect of
that
> I am "not AEVASIVE"!
>
> JE:- Can't you see that if you say "All Cretans are Liars
> (i.e. are AEVASIVE) and YOU are a Cretan
> (i.e. you are being AEVASIVE by just suggesting
> it) that just _zero_ content is contained within such
> nonsense?
>
> An AEVASIVE person cannot claim they know that they and
> everybody else is being AEVASIVE, only a TESTED to be NON
> AEVASIVE person can validly claim such a thing.
>
> THUS:- Either: YOU claim to be a TESTED NON AEVASIVE
> person allowing a "holier than thou" attitude, or you
> include yourself (as you have done) and just end up
> absolutely contradicting yourself,
> i.e. you and your AEVASIVE theory both enter Epimenides
> Paradox and-just-never-come-out.

EPT (~ the sum total of often embarrassing textual tracks
left by me that show how I have perversely selectively
Hibernated by explaining AEVASIVE) does conceptually
crystalize the reasons for, and uncover the specific
categories (easily exemplifiable and in general logically
definable such) of the natural causes behind why always
being (or becoming) 'visceromotorially' and emotionally
reactive and cognitively "realistically pessimistic" (a
pessimism/hopelessness based on the totality of available
sensory clues - past as well as present) has at least up
till now (in our phylogeny) BEEN MALADAPTIVE.

The concept AEVASIVE refers to the evolutionary and
functional principles that normally prevent a completely
realistic (or philosophically over-the-top open-eyedness ;-)
pessimism.

AEVASIVE is AS PARTLY EVIDENCED by e.g. many decades of
clinical NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL observations of the
specialization of the dominant and subdominant hemispheres
(their frontal cortices especially) at, in respect of the
former, representing positive, optimistic, humorous, and
labyrinthine lingual means of leading (shunting) and
explaining away and putting "a lid" on potential largely non-
AEVASIVE 'sad' psychoemotional and visceromotor reactions
(or focuses of actention) of the latter.

Beyond perfectly workable functions by which we habituate to
repeated *insignificant* (or neither potentially sooner nor
later distressing) stimuli, a consistently "non-AEVASIVE"
overall motivation and omni-directional cognitive conscious
awareness (including introverted insights that results from
fluent functional integration of neurons at different
phylogenetically evolved, and, ideally, fully
ontogenetically developed, *levels of consciousness* -
thereby forging what may be called a "feeling
consciousness") HAS NEVER - in our phylogeny - BEEN and
ADAPTIVE 'attitude' (so to speak).
----------

You could of course always argue that I should be more
merciful to you (and others) and refrain for poiniting this
aspect of our phylogeny out. You could rightly so, since it
is as I just boldly wrote without shouting.

I know that the existence of a percEPTively spotted and
aptly concEPTualized view of the AEVASIVE aspect of human
evolution and our genophenotype is utterly impossible
according to Edserian dogma.

But it is a knowledge I - and I hope you - can easily learn
to live with.
%-]

On that invitation to an upbeat and not too discordant last
note, I hereby end this retort!

P