AEVASIVE - an absolute self contradiction

Discussion in 'Health and medical' started by John Edser, Mar 4, 2004.

  1. John Edser

    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]
     
    Tags:


  2. Peter F.

    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
     
  3. John Edser

    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]
     
  4. Peter F.

    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
     
  5. John Edser

    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]
     
  6. Peter F.

    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
     
Loading...