Welcome a new blogger

by Guts

Welcome Nullasalus, a new contributor to Telic Thoughts, drinks are on me.

This entry was posted on Friday, November 21st, 2008 at 12:03 am and is filed under Metatalk. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

24 Responses to “Welcome a new blogger”

Rob R. Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 12:55 am
Great choice! Nice to have a philosopher around here again. Sort of a stunney-lite (lite on the, uh, um…. tenacity? Yeah, tenacity, that's what I'll call it.) I miss me some stunney, no doubt raevmo still cries himself to sleep since his ouster. ~~I still say you guys bring him and keiths back, this place aint the same without them!~~ Doesn't bother me, of course, as I'm not one to bitch, what with me having no say what-so-ever on anything around here.

Anywho, again, great choice. I look forward to his contributions.

Comment by Rob R. — November 21, 2008 @ 12:55 am

Guts Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 1:02 am
ehhhh Raevmo hasn't been ousted

Comment by Guts — November 21, 2008 @ 1:02 am

Pez Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 1:07 am
Excellent. Looking forward to Nullasalus' contributions.

Comment by Pez — November 21, 2008 @ 1:07 am

Rob R. Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 1:15 am
Guts: ehhhh Raevmo hasn't been ousted

Errrr, I was talkin' 'bout stunney (and keiths.) Raevmo and stunney were the best of friends… I assumed he was devastated.

Comment by Rob R. — November 21, 2008 @ 1:15 am

Guts Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 1:18 am
Stunny was ousted? thats news to me

Comment by Guts — November 21, 2008 @ 1:18 am

nullasalus Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 1:33 am
Thank you for the invitation and welcome both. Much appreciated.

I'm not a philosopher, though, anymore than anyone else (and since I was compared to him, I think stunney is out of my league both in rhetoric and resource). I'm just a person with a keen interest in ID and philosophy that tends to be related to it. Hopefully I'll be able to provide some interesting topics on these subjects.

Comment by nullasalus — November 21, 2008 @ 1:33 am

Bradford Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 6:17 am
Welcome Nullsalus. I'm glad you've joined us.

Comment by Bradford — November 21, 2008 @ 6:17 am

fifth monarchy man Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 8:15 am
Nullsalus,

Glad you are here. I hope you’ll post some theistic evolution verses ID stuff from a theological/Philosophical perspective.

I'm very intrested in the worldview implications of the two views. and I think you are just the guy to explore them fairly.

Peace

Comment by fifth monarchy man — November 21, 2008 @ 8:15 am

Raevmo Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Yes, welcome Nullasalus. Not that I expect to agree much with you, but still (or perhaps hence) looking forward to your first post. Could you please tell us a little bit more about your background? Not being a philosopher doesn't narrow it down much.

Comment by Raevmo — November 21, 2008 @ 12:49 pm

nullasalus Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Some background information on myself has been included in my contributors' profile on the main page.

Long story short: I have no background worth mentioning or particularly relevant. It'd be pointless to talk about even if I did – pseudonym types don't (or shouldn't) cite such things. Call it the Mike Gene rule.

Comment by nullasalus — November 21, 2008 @ 1:18 pm

Raevmo Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Fair enough. Hadn't checked the profile yet. Where I noticed this gem:

Further, I have a strong dislike of universities and colleges for much the same reason, and view the knee-jerk obsession with said institutes – as if they are the only, or even preferred path towards deep knowledge and education – to be fundamentally flawed. I support autodidact endeavors across the board, and view the university model to be the last scope of public life in severe need of a revolution.

Back to the lonely monk in his cell. I'm afraid that kind of revolution wouldn't pan out very well for the sciences, where students have to spend time in (expensive) labs to learn scientific techniques, to collect data and stuff.

Comment by Raevmo — November 21, 2008 @ 1:40 pm

nullasalus Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Back to the lonely monk in his cell. I'm afraid that kind of revolution wouldn't pan out very well for the sciences, where students have to spend time in (expensive) labs to learn scientific techniques, to collect data and stuff.

What 'kind of revolution'? Aside from promoting autodidactism (are you against this?) I didn't get into any detail about what I'd like to see done insofar as colleges and universities go. A revolution doesn't necessitate or even imply the utter destruction of the system in question. Just major changes.

Comment by nullasalus — November 21, 2008 @ 2:24 pm

don provan Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Aside from promoting autodidactism (are you against this?)…

Being self-taught is fine. Thinking that being self-taught automatically makes you a qualified expert is not. Like it or not, our civilization has established a system for confirming expertise that depends primarily on institutions of higher learning. I hope you're not the kind that declares this system invalid or non-existent, thereby concluding that everyone can be considered equally expert. We've spent thousands of years developing this system, and we need it more than ever because of the huge body of knowledge our civilization has amassed.

This is not a "knee-jerk obsession", but a simple observation that the existing system performs this critical function very well for very specific and well understood reasons. So don't expect to get away with declaring it "flawed" without providing specific functional reasons and suggesting an alternative that's logically more interesting than democracy or theocracy. If your proposed alternative doesn't reliably build safe bridges, we have a problem.

But welcome! We can discuss this further when you start something on the subject.

Comment by don provan — November 21, 2008 @ 4:10 pm

Bradford Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 5:07 pm
Hi Nullasalus. Are institutions of higher learning sacred cows? One might think so based on responses.

Comment by Bradford — November 21, 2008 @ 5:07 pm

GringoRoyale Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 6:20 pm
Nice to see Nullasalus as a contributor.

Also, I'm a fan of Stunney.
I remember the debate with Stunney, Keiths, Zoskie, Raevmo, and Nullasalus…. that was a good one.

Comment by GringoRoyale — November 21, 2008 @ 6:20 pm

GringoRoyale Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Here's the link if anyone's interested:

There Will be Repercussions

Comment by GringoRoyale — November 21, 2008 @ 6:21 pm

chunkdz Says:
November 21st, 2008 at 11:53 pm
Provan,

Being self-taught is fine. Thinking that being self-taught automatically makes you a qualified expert is not.

Umm, he didn't say it did.

I hope you're not the kind that declares this system invalid or non-existent, thereby concluding that everyone can be considered equally expert.

Ummm, he didn't say that either.

This is not a "knee-jerk obsession"…

LOL! Your response is about as knee-jerky as a jerk-kneed jerk can get, Provan.

Welcome nullasulas. If simply introducing yourself causes this much consternation among the faithful, your real posts should be very entertaining. Looking forward to it.

Comment by chunkdz — November 21, 2008 @ 11:53 pm

nullasalus Says:
November 22nd, 2008 at 12:19 am
Don,

Being self-taught is fine. Thinking that being self-taught automatically makes you a qualified expert is not. Like it or not, our civilization has established a system for confirming expertise that depends primarily on institutions of higher learning. I hope you're not the kind that declares this system invalid or non-existent, thereby concluding that everyone can be considered equally expert. We've spent thousands of years developing this system, and we need it more than ever because of the huge body of knowledge our civilization has amassed.

No, I don't think that being self-taught makes a person a 'qualified expert', or that 'everyone can be considered equally expert'. On the other hand, obviously I think the system is deeply flawed on a number of levels. Maybe I'll get into those reasons in a thread sometime.

This is not a "knee-jerk obsession", but a simple observation that the existing system performs this critical function very well for very specific and well understood reasons. So don't expect to get away with declaring it "flawed" without providing specific functional reasons and suggesting an alternative that's logically more interesting than democracy or theocracy. If your proposed alternative doesn't reliably build safe bridges, we have a problem.

'Get away with'? It was a passing mention in my bio, with no specifics offered. Hell, I didn't even explain what parts of the system I think are broken. As Bradford has noticed, people are having a somewhat tense reaction to a mere POV statement that had zero detail attached to it other than 'I strongly encourage people to educate themselves on their own'.

The first thread I offer here is going to be on intelligent design – my personal complaints about the modern university system can wait.

Comment by nullasalus — November 22, 2008 @ 12:19 am

don provan Says:
November 22nd, 2008 at 1:22 am
Maybe I'll get into those reasons in a thread sometime.

Excellent. I look forward to it.

'Get away with'? It was a passing mention in my bio, with no specifics offered. Hell, I didn't even explain what parts of the system I think are broken.

Exactly why I called it "get away with".

There was nothing tense about my reaction. Did I say something unreasonable? Like say your position was a "knee-jerk obsession"?

The first thread I offer here is going to be on intelligent design – my personal complaints about the modern university system can wait.

OK. I think this issue of competing experts is behind most all of the ID arguments, so I was encouraged by the interest in it you showed in your bio.

Comment by don provan — November 22, 2008 @ 1:22 am

don provan Says:
November 22nd, 2008 at 1:31 am
Umm, he didn't say it did.

I didn't say he said that.

Ummm, he didn't say that either.

I didn't say he said that, either.

Your response is about as knee-jerky as a jerk-kneed jerk can get, Provan.

Please explain.

Comment by don provan — November 22, 2008 @ 1:31 am

don provan Says:
November 22nd, 2008 at 1:32 am
Are institutions of higher learning sacred cows?

Are institutions of higher learning demonized?

Comment by don provan — November 22, 2008 @ 1:32 am

chunkdz Says:
November 22nd, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Provan,

I didn't say he said that.

I didn't say that you said that he said that.

I didn't say he said that, either.

I didn't say that you said that he said that either.

Please explain.

Explain what? The meaning of "knee-jerk"?

Comment by chunkdz — November 22, 2008 @ 12:23 pm

Thought Provoker Says:
November 22nd, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Congratulations Nullasalus.

I very much look forward to seeing your posts.

Comment by Thought Provoker — November 22, 2008 @ 2:42 pm

Jack Says:
November 23rd, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Welcome Nullasalus. By the way, anyone know why Stunney left? I miss him. Is he posting somewhere else?

Comment by Jack — November 23, 2008 @ 1:27 pm

Welcome a new blogger

24 Responses to “Welcome a new blogger”

Featured Books