There aren’t too many people I let into my life these days, but when we met I knew you were one of the few I wanted to make room for. I enjoy our connection very much, and I am happy to be there for you. Always. I really miss hanging out with you. I even miss just dropping in–other spaces seem to lack so much lately. Love you and miss you tons already! Can’t wait for your VISIT. My turn to pay for sure! —Girl Friday
This article appears in Sep 1-7, 2011.
I don’t want to assume anything here, but I think you might have meant to put this on the Love board not the Bitch one.
Ya, I have a bitch, about this bitch writing a love on our bitch board.
I could bitch about the title of her bitch too. But she should just move on.
well girl friday, i think you must be still hung over from your last tie together. because this the bitch board, not the gushy fucking love one.wake the fuck up, already.
It’s on the love board too!
hey rosie me love me turtle dove. how goes the battle?
No wheelie.. no one’s said a thing 😉
The battle, oy, she goes PG
we all waited for you paul.
Let’s break it to them then:
(all together now)
Hey sweetie! Wrong board, mmmkay?
Hey, I love it when we’re nice to the Wrong-Posters!
*sunshine and kittens*
Where’s Moleman?
Giving WineClub Handjobs at the LC.
“Where’s Moleman?” – critiquing the latest vintage of ripple.
http://www.magicalrabbit.com/ebay/Wino_Bum…
“Where’s Moleman?
Giving WineClub Handjobs at the LC.”
*SAQ
Though that shit closes at 5 so he’s probably offering wine tips in exchange for blow jobs outside le metro (plus!).
pretty kitty – “wine tips in exchange for blow jobs”, don’t you mean it the other way around?
http://images.cheezburger.com/completestor…
this is either the nicest, or the most sarcastic, bitch in the history of time.
RRSPs
: The Scholar (Sept. 2, 7:19PM) “Though (sic) that shit closes at 5 so he’s probably offering wine tips in exchange for blow jobs outside le metro (plus!)”.
Good morning Sweetness! Please help me to help you heal, to help me feel your pain. My psychiatric couch (see “Tolerate This,” I think) still has a reservation for you and, no, you will not have to take off your clothes. Sweetness, I’m interested only in your mind, not your gall bladder. Write back soon.
(“plus?”)
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
A Philosophical Question:
CAN BAD MEN MAKE GOOD BRAINS DO BAD THINGS?
Michael F. Patton, Jr. – Syracuse University
Consider the following case:
On Twin Earth, a brain in a vat is at the wheel of a runaway trolley. There are only two options that the brain can take: the right side of the fork in the track or the left side of the fork. There is no way in sight of derailing or stopping the trolley and the brain is aware of this, for the brain knows trolleys. The brain is causally hooked up to the trolley such that the brain can determine the course which the trolley will take.
On the right side of the track there is a single railroad worker, Jones, who will definitely be killed if the brain steers the trolley to the right. If the railman on the right lives, he will go on to kill five men for the sake of killing them, but in doing so will inadvertently save the lives of thirty orphans (one of the five men he will kill is planning to destroy a bridge that the orphans’ bus will be crossing later that night). One of the orphans that will be killed would have grown up to become a tyrant who would make good utilitarian men do bad things. Another of the orphans would grow up to become G.E.M. Anscombe, while a third would invent the pop-top can.
If the brain in the vat chooses the left side of the track, the trolley will definitely hit and kill a railman on the left side of the track, “Leftie” and will hit and destroy ten beating hearts on the track that could (and would) have been transplanted into ten patients in the local hospital that will die without donor hearts. These are the only hearts available, and the brain is aware of this, for the brain knows hearts. If the railman on the left side of the track lives, he too will kill five men, in fact the same five that the railman on the right would kill. However, “Leftie” will kill the five as an unintended consequence of saving ten men: he will inadvertently kill the five men rushing the ten hearts to the local hospital for transplantation. A further result of “Leftie’s” act would be that the busload of orphans will be spared. Among the five men killed by “Leftie” are both the man responsible for putting the brain at the controls of the trolley, and the author of this example. If the ten hearts and “Leftie” are killed by the trolley, the ten prospective heart-transplant patients will die and their kidneys will be used to save the lives of twenty kidney-transplant patients, one of whom will grow up to cure cancer, and one of whom will grow up to be Hitler. There are other kidneys and dialysis machines available, however the brain does not know kidneys, and this is not a factor.
Assume that the brain’s choice, whatever it turns out to be, will serve as an example to other brains-in-vats and so the effects of his decision will be amplified. Also assume that if the brain chooses the right side of the fork, an unjust war free of war crimes will ensue, while if the brain chooses the left fork, a just war fraught with war crimes will result. Furthermore, there is an intermittently active Cartesian demon deceiving the brain in such a manner that the brain is never sure if it is being deceived.
QUESTION: What should the brain do?
[ALTERNATIVE EXAMPLE: Same as above, except the brain has had a commisurotomy, and the left half of the brain is a consequentialist and the right side is an absolutist.]
Go left and this story never gets told. Works for me.
P.S. I hate those Cartesian demons!
——- no, you will not have to take off your clothes——-
Is Sebastian in your wine club?
And Hugo- nice brain story.
Of course, the brain would go wine shopping with its friends, and get its O-ring blown.
Weetabix!
RSVPs
“A PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTION”
: The Turd (Sept. 3, 10:40AM) – Against my better judgement I’ve decided to respond to The Turd’s “A Philosophical Question” if only because of his effort in copying it out.
The first thing I would do, if I were the President of Syracuse University, is to fire Patton if he actually a member of the Philosphy Department since his “question” is not philosophical at all. Rather, it is in the disredited tradition of “brain science” which, self-contradictingly, purports to lay bare the grounds of the activity of the human mind without reference to … are you ready? – the human being himself!
There is a considerable literature on “brain science.” The names of David Chalmers and Daniel Dennett come immediately to mind – but they have one thing in common – the attempt to reduce the activity of cognition to a series of empirically measurable “brain states.” It could be termed a “cybernetic conception of consciousness” or a version of mechanical “choice theory.” Of course, the works of Chalmers and Dennett themselves are inexplicable in terms of their own theory since those works are not an outcome of their “brain states” but rather their minds which, in some misconceived idea of “science,” they seek to suppress.
There is an old saying to the effect that “There is nothing in the mind that is not first in the senses.” This is not to reduce cogniton to perception as the empiricists purport to do but rather to point out that cognition is necessarily an “embodied” activity. To speak of a disembodied consciousness – whether in the form of the old “brain-in-the vat” variety or in the “thought experiment” involving a “zombie” (a humanoid identical in every physical respect to an ordinary human being except that he had no “inner life” or no mind, and then how would you know the difference?) is incoherent. There is, and can be, no such “human.” Yet, this is what any such “brain science” purports to study. (Do not confuse the study of conscious thought with neurophysiology. The first is philosophy which involves the appeal to reasons. The second is legitimate science, but it is a “category mistake” to speak of “reasons” in connection with neurophysiology. It has only “activity.”)
The consequence is that the “Philosophical Question” is a charade. It insinuates a “moral choice” (Hitler and all that) into an empirical framework (seen, per impossible, from some unannounced future vantage point) which, because of that framework, is unable to coherently engage that moral choice. In other words, the “Philosophical Question” is deeply incoherent.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
Annie Kleinmen, Ph-Duh.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?…
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?…
troodon4 and wheeliep both got it :), while you didn’t (I’m not supprised, just disappointed….again).
It’s a JOKE!!! Seriously, can’t you, with that fat fancy PhDuh education, make the distinction between a joke and a real question?
Montremoleman said – “Intelligence resides in the ability to make distinctions.”
Montremoleman is incapable of making a simple distinction.
Therefore Montremoleman, has no resident intelligence.
Since you lack the comprehension and intelligence to understand the joke, here’s an explaination.
http://www.mindspring.com/~mfpatton/binvat…
Which are you anyway, a narcissist, or a megalomaniac with delusions of adequacy?
http://images.cheezburger.com/completestor…
Faithful Girl Friday, once known to me as Mary Magdalene, who remained at my side on that day when all others fled, I want you to know that you have never been far from my thoughts.
I miss hanging out with you, too. A poor choice of words some might say, considering our history, but there it is.
I promise that I will soon set the record straight about you. Paul didn’t really know what he was talking about all those years ago and it is time that the world should know the truth.
Peace.
Dude, I only said *nice stuff* about Mags! Even after she borrowed and KEPT my Belle Biv Devoe CD, I only said Mary Mags was a good chick.
You’re the dick who disappeared on us for the long weekend and woke up in a fucking cave!
FFS, Jesus!
(wheelie)Paul
fuck hugo, i think you have just gone over to the montrealman side of the dark side. holy shit dude, my brain is numb after reading that, and finding out there really is no way to win.
RRSPs
: The Turd (Sept. 3, 5:46PM) – You must return immediately to your village.
: Life Sucks (Sept. 4, 12:34AM) – “the montrealman side of the darkside?” That sounds pretty dark to me, Sucks. But don’t let The Turd baffle you with his “Philosophical Problem” since he is without intellectual resources. His only escape was to pretend that the whole thing was a “joke” which would come as news to Chalmers and Dennett. Read my post over again, Sucks, and everything will be clear.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
Sméagol – You couldn’t afford my village.
Go to the bottom of the page.
http://www.mindspring.com/~mfpatton/Tissue…
I posted this joke to get you to laugh, and to judge your level of humour.
You’ve confirmed my suspicions, you’re limited to Grade 8 locker room, potty humour, and limericks (not even original, at that).
LIFE SUCKS – I shall never surcome to the dark side, especially since I follow the greatest philosophy of all times. – “Fuck it”
http://www.forevergeek.com/wp-content/medi…
By the way, Sméagol. I have Dr. Patton’s e-mail address, is there anything that you’ld like to add to your critique, before I send it?
I think she’s talking about her period.
RRSPs
: The Turd (Sept. 4, 10:24AM & 11;13AM) – If you hurry there may still be room on the top of the bus.
Tell Dr. Patton that you could not answer the “Philosophical Question” because you did not understand it. Tell him you did not understand it because you are without intellectual resources.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
Oh, I understood perfectly – IT’S A JOKE, and I do have a valid answer. Bet you can’t figure it out.
Seems that my “intellectual resources” are consistently superior to yours.
I lift things up, I put them dooownnnn:)