Tuesday, October 19, 2010

To the Incorrigible Primates at Triablogue

At variegated times, when apposite, I deign to lower my standards sufficiently to mingle with lesser-minded plebes, such as the denizens that constitute the lesser hoi poi currently inhabiting Harvard, and periodically even those of the diminutive statute bestowed by Princeton’s inferior scholarship--who it must be admitted are generally the most pitiable of the upper class. Professor Robert Weinhart and Dr. Michele Hardins, both of whom I permitted to instruct me for a few semesters at Yale, were keen observers of the paucity of education in the other so-called Ivy League institutions that, since I had not seen fit to step foot in their halls, were of obvious insignificance in the grand scheme of universal acumen; yet despite their counsel to the contrary, I occasionally must exercise a particularly masochistic bent in my own philosophy, which compels me to point out the errors and flaws of such insane individuals such as these dupes from the inferior neighborhoods of Cambridge or Princeton, whereupon it becomes incumbent upon me to take up my keyboard and troll blogs looking for people with whom an honest disagreement can be fanned into an ego-stroking self-aggrandizing love affair with my id.

This brings me to the current subject of my discourse, viz. you. Despite not having attained even a lesser Ivy League status, though doubtless you yet believe yourself to be highly educated, such a delusion cannot go unchallenged, for it is obvious to all that you are not only wrong, but, to stoop to such a low level as to quote such a lesser human being as Alexander Pope, you know not enough even to “act well your part.” You believe yourself capable of rising up the academic ladder by a sheer sense of intellectual fortitude, as if academia was interested in knowledge! I would pity you, but such a waste of emotions on a cretin such as yourself would only leave me vacuous and empty, like a corpuscle drained of pus after a sunny afternoon’s stroll. But since Lord Byron advised in Don Juan to “Begin with the beginning” I feel the subject has necessitated a response which, though it be wasted upon the likes of you, may yet serve some purpose in the nihilistic void of eternity.

Though I labor long, arduous hours with little reward, I shall put up with you a trifle more and allow you to bask in the glory that is my wisdom yet a little while longer. Though it pains me to reduce myself to such a level, I will humbly do so in the vain hope that you will inevitably fall to your knees before me, bow down and worship Zod. This hope need not be in vain—you merely need acknowledge your superior, kneel and kiss the hand of friendship I extend so mercifully toward you. Though you earned not my consideration, I will yet give you of the excess bounty of my intellect.

I know you have these feeble theories based on these so-called scholars whom I never studied under (how, then, could they be true “scholars”?). You claim these fools are wise when all they do is spout what you want them to say. Have you so little knowledge that you do not understand? If I do not say it, it must not be true. For Dr. Walter Schriekenhöser gave an assembly I had the fortune and good breeding to have attended, in Yale’s prestigious Kauff A. Teria Hall, where the honorable doctor of metaphysics informed us via his customary wit and charisma that a little knowledge need not be a dangerous thing at all, unless such little knowledge is bound—and here I quote him directly—“in the sulci of a true believer’s parasitic mental paradigm.”

Since I grasp intuitively that you are too obtuse to attain proper enlightenment of this statement, bozo, it means that since you’re a Christian you’re incapable of rational thought. Therefore, let your betters do the thinking and keep your mouth shut. It is unbecoming of you to question royalty.

Sincerely,

Richard

10 comments:

  1. Someone said "... it means that since you’re a Christian you’re incapable of rational thought."

    I would argue when it comes to rational thought, ONLY the Christian has the advantage.

    A Christian does not believe:
    *Non-being produces being
    *From nothing comes something
    *Life springs from non-life
    *Order arises from chaos
    *The rational stems from the irrational

    Clearly, none of these presuppositions are reasonable (or rational .. or observable).

    Though science has never once witnessed any of the above presuppositions to be true, nor is able to reproduce evidence any of the above are true, still many non-Christians believe all of the above to be true.

    A Christian's reason starts with the presuppositions:
    *Only Eternal being produces being
    *Only Eternal Creatures create something
    *Life springs from Eternal life
    *Order is imposed on chaos
    *Reason arises only from the rational

    These presuppositions are clearly the more reasonable (the more rational, and readily more observable).

    Scientifically we have only ever see life beget life, being arise from being, order imposed on chaos and reason arise from reason.

    Clearly, when it comes to rational thought, the Christian has the advantage.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks Peter.. This is actually quite funny. :-)

    I shall leave you hoi polloi not further molested by my superior presence. *smile* Back to business as you usual.

    R

    ReplyDelete
  3. This interaction with Richard and the times that I've personally spent interacting with professors of biology who've shown great ignorance of philosophy of science and, really, of logic in general, have gone a long way toward disabusing me of any awe I might have otherwise had of academicians qua academicians. Respect is earned, not granted along with a degree.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "I shall leave you hoi polloi not further molested by my superior presence."

    The incorrigible primates at Triablogue are grateful that the molestation by superior Richard is ceasing.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I have not followed the whole thing but I don't know whether to laugh or cry at the verbal antics and pretensions to wisdom of this Richard.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Does this guy Richard have a Blog where he defends his statements and invites dialogue?

    Would love to give him a chance to defend his statements. And acknowledge that maybe he does not know all that there is too know on Biblical literature matters despite his education.

    ReplyDelete
  7. GREV wrote:

    "Does this guy Richard have a Blog where he defends his statements and invites dialogue?"

    He's been asked to identify himself, but refuses to do so. Meanwhile, he keeps making claims about his alleged background, academic credentials, religious beliefs, etc., without offering us any further support than his claim that it's so. He also accuses me of being "cowardly", even though he's the one who won't identify himself and keeps ignoring arguments and leaving discussions so frequently.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thanks for the clarification on what the mysterious Richard has done or not done. Said or left unsaid.

    ReplyDelete
  9. incorrigible primates at Triablogue

    Well, if you were asking me, I would have to agree! You guys here who produce all this incorrigible stuff is quite simply because you really truly are incorrigible primates! Your judgments will be Just! :)

    The problem with this revelation of Truth about His Good News in the world today, is this. You hold to the Revelation of Truth, Christ, and that Christ came and not only suffered and died and rose again to justify the ungodly and to save such as you incorrigible primate Triabloguers. He doesn't not use your incorrigibleness to incite incorrigibles to His advantage in saving more and more incorrigible primates like you!

    That makes incorrigibles angry because He isn't using their incorrigibilities like He is yours!

    "Hey, what about me and mine?"

    The only other good news about this truth, besides the great depth of wisdom, knowledge and understanding that Christ deposits at Triablogue through you incorrigible primates, is the God of Hope saves other selected wretched sinners, good ones or incorrigible ones, too!

    It is kind of like the point Ezekiel made, here:

    Eze 3:7 But the house of Israel will not be willing to listen to you, for they are not willing to listen to me: because all the house of Israel have a hard forehead and a stubborn heart.
    Eze 3:8 Behold, I have made your face as hard as their faces, and your forehead as hard as their foreheads.


    Oh what joy comes upon my soul that the manifold Grace of God that He sent, Christ, is the One True Hope who died for sinners like you which is quite evident here!

    Thanks be to God for more of the unsearchable nature of Christ being manifest through Triablogue.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Incorrigibility to one who knows the truth is the vehement defense of a controvertible lie. Incorrigibility to one who denies the truth is the illumination of the incontrovertible truth on their denial.

    ReplyDelete