A living neologist.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity

I want to see you recreate this discovery with at least 15 other words, to prove this example is not a fluke. The results will be posted to the forum for peer review. I will take any refusal to do so as an admission of defeat. You made the claim, so the burden of proof lies with you.

lol

gawd.

" yesssss masstah..."

pffffffffft


Nothing is attacking..nothing needs defending. Grow up. Think for a second.
Something is being shared here and you are free to accept or reject it as you choose.
It only takes one example..the perspective finds itself.

Good luck OP...yer gunna need it!


Ro

reply to post by Wifibrains


Neology and Neo. How soon before the two will be inextricably entwined and a new religion/philosophy is formed?

reply to post by Rosha


What good is making a discovery if you never recognize the flaws of your discovery? You will enter a state of perpetual failure, having never made the effort to compensate for the mistakes you have already made.

This is a very critical lesson to learn.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


I won't take up your challenge as I do not need to, I have done this with other words already in recent threads, showing hidden truths in definitions and the structure of certain words.

Here is one www.abovetopsecret.com...
Think you seen it before though.

I don't want to chase it after it either, these expeiriences are illusive like the butterfly, to chase it would be to chase it away, to wait patiently for, would be to let it come on its own, and it does.

I don't read the dictionary looking for these, I hear a word that "rings a bell" and look it up and it never failed me yet.

reply to post by Wifibrains

I won't take up your challenge as I do not need to, I have done this with other words already in recent threads, showing hidden truths in definitions and the structure of certain words.

That thread was no more informative or concrete than this one. Why do you think my solitary post was an inspiration rather than a conclusion? Because your thoughts evoked a thought of my own, not an answer but a musing. You insist it is an answer, but it is no more than answer than seeing shapes in the clouds.

Originally posted by swordwords
reply to post by Wifibrains

 

Neology and Neo. How soon before the two will be inextricably entwined and a new religion/philosophy is formed?

Neology exsisted before...

Neology ("study of new [things]"), the name given to the rationalist theology of Germany or the rationalisation of the Christian religion. It was preceded by slightly less radical Wolffism.

It has already been resurrected as a philosiphy. Words control us. Neology is the philosiphy of thinking for our selves and using neology to interpret the words our own way, a new way.

NEO means new and is a anagram of one.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


You got it wrong.

It's a interpretation left open to interpretation by others. Not a answer. You make your own answer or interpretation to it. You made yours clear.

Everything I post is this way, I don't pretent to know it all. Lol.

reply to post by Wifibrains


And how does that help us?

reply to post by AfterInfinity


To find your own truth and path and not be led, blindly. To think about what we say, to gain greater understanding, to open the mind and allow for creativeness to flourish instead of minds being put in boxes.

reply to post by Wifibrains

To find your own truth and path and not be led, blindly. To think about what we say, to gain greater understanding, to open the mind and allow for creativeness to flourish instead of minds being put in boxes.

"To find your own truth" should not constitute redefining language in order to suit your warped interpretation of what it ought to mean. Just because you would prefer a word to be understood in a certain context, does not mean that context is universal to all given instances of that word. Words should be as flexible in application as the mind that uses them. Otherwise, how do you innovate? How do you adapt? How do you appropriately adjust to a situation that throws you a curve ball? Language must evolve with comprehension, and this includes discerning between realistic application and whimsical notion.

What you have demonstrated is far more whimsical than practical, even down to you taking a hodgepodge of cobbled definitions and hammering them into a grammatical Frankenstein before chewing them into something somewhat meaningful and shouting "EUREKA!!" just because your mind is crazy enough to juggle reality to the extent necessary to make fantasy look convincing.

And that's my original review of your pet project here. While exploration is an admirable pursuit, the inability to discern between the practical and the impractical is a crippling flaw that could render any intellectual expedition just short of utterly pointless. To that end, you have provided a marvelous demonstration, and I commend you for this fantastic reminder of what to avoid while engaging in such adventures.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Aaaah, and I was going to ask you for some advice on time loops, and see if you wanted to go to the future. Have you ever put a square peg in a round hole?

See ya.

Peace.

reply to post by Wifibrains

Aaaah, and I was going to ask you for some advice on time loops, and see if you wanted to go to the future. Have you ever put a square peg in a round hole?

I would love to figure that out. I'm sure there's a way.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Rosha

 

What good is making a discovery if you never recognize the flaws of your discovery? You will enter a state of perpetual failure, having never made the effort to compensate for the mistakes you have already made.

This is a very critical lesson to learn.

What consensus are you following may I ask. Are you part of a hive mind that can only think along with the rest of its self?

I'm not.

Maybe that's the difference between me and you?

If you are not part of a hive mind, and you do think for yourself, what part of yourself is doing the thinking? Only smarties have the answer.

reply to post by Wifibrains

What consensus are you following may I ask. Are you part of a hive mind that can only think along with the rest of its self?

I am providing constructive criticism. You are doing everything you can to avoid recognizing the points I am making.

If you are not part of a hive mind, and you do think for yourself, what part of yourself is doing the thinking? Only smarties have the answer.

You are insisting this technique you have employed to reveal a "hidden message" lending an additional layer of significance to an everyday word is flawless and and foolproof. I am insisting the exact opposite - it is a foolhardy fluke that barely classifies as far-fetched. I am not the only one who has made this argument, and many reasons have been provided for our cases. You, on the other hand, are essentially telling us that we don't get it because we're still applying logic and maybe if we stopped, we'd begin to understand more.

I'm not interested in grasping anything other than a strictly logical approach that provides consistent and reliable results. So far, you haven't shown me any of that.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


"I" can not show you anything that will give you results. You know this. Or so your signature would suggest.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


I know that, for the past few pages at least, I've been relatively quiet on this debate. Not for lack of interest though, but because you, A.I., are so perfectly expressing my own opinions, and your replies are here already, making any additions by me redundant and repetitive.

Very well written and concise explanations. I'd applaud you were I capable of giving them. Perhaps you'll accept an emoticon?


~ Wandering Scribe

reply to post by Wifibrains

"I" can not show you anything that will give you results

Actually you can. At the very top of this page A.I. sets a standard:

Originally posted by AfterInfinity

I want to see you recreate this discovery with at least 15 other words, to prove this example is not a fluke. The results will be posted to the forum for peer review. I will take any refusal to do so as an admission of defeat. You made the claim, so the burden of proof lies with you.

Show him (us) 15 other words that your method applies to, and then we'll have some stable ground to stand on.

~ Wandering Scribe

reply to post by Wandering Scribe


I appreciate the support. It is a wearying struggle; I truly am attempting to be constructive with my criticism, but some people will accept nothing other than, "Oh, wow, you're so right!"

reply to post by Wifibrains

Originally posted by Wifibrains

Originally posted by swordwords
reply to post by Wifibrains

 

Neology and Neo. How soon before the two will be inextricably entwined and a new religion/philosophy is formed?

Neology exsisted before...

Neology ("study of new [things]"), the name given to the rationalist theology of Germany or the rationalisation of the Christian religion. It was preceded by slightly less radical Wolffism.

It has already been resurrected as a philosiphy. Words control us. Neology is the philosiphy of thinking for our selves and using neology to interpret the words our own way, a new way.

NEO means new and is a anagram of one.

edit on 12-8-2013 by Wifibrains because: (no reason given)

I can see that Neology is not new, but I was just commenting on the possibility that it might be reborn as a sort of philosophy linked to ideas presented in the Matrix movies. My view is that Christianity began as Gnosticism and the addition of the Christ metaphor made it more acceptable, so I can see Neology perhaps following a similar course, particularly since Neo was introduced into the discussion here. Neology certainly does not seem very exciting in its current form.

I also look at things from a different perspective than most, but I do not feel that what I see is in any way new. I am concerned with the original meanings intended by writers. Attempting to find meanings that were never intended by the writer seems likely only to confuse things. Much of my perspective on interpretations of written works comes from Plato’s Cratylus . If you have not read Cratylus, you should. The “experts” dismiss it as “satire”, but I take it very seriously and it has helped me to see a great deal. (You can cast a “spell” on “Cratylus” and get “cratalis”, which is very significant if you accept the ideas presented in Cratylus.)

reply to post by swordwords

Neology certainly does not seem very exciting in its current form.

I agree, and disagree. Seeing someone else do it is boring and never hits the spot. The response to my thread is testimony to this. But to me it's is exciting, cool, and revealing. Maybe that's how it is supposed to be. Personal.

It could be the scroll in your signature if you wanted it to be.