Jump to content
The Corroboree

Recommended Posts

I don't care about your longer rant starling, not worth a response, but what's with the shameful insult directed at ethereal drifter? T

In your world, if somebody who picked up English as a second language doesn't write to your standard they are therefore incapable of deep thought?

Translation: The particular brand of voodoo to which I subscribe is nonsensical and indefensible in the court of logic, so I'm just going to reply with a flip brush-off remark followed by a strawman argument in order to avoid any kind of further rational scrutiny whatsoever. Said post will then get liked by fellow subscribers, who are fellow subscribers to said voodoo, and are opaque simpatico sycophants who have drubbed themselves into various degrees of intellectual stagnation through repeated abuse of psychotropic cactus and mushroom teas brewed in backyard basins.

And of course they might be capable of 'deep thought'. Why wouldn't they be? I can't believe you'd even as me a question as silly as that. And if you want to know why I've singled out ED, it's because he has rather irksomely in the past followed me around the boards trying to rile me up with what is, as far as I can tell, a primitive and barely decipherable form of persiflage.

Allow me to clarify my position again: I have no moral problem, no problem of any description, with any kind of drug use whatsoever. We all have the right to self determination in matters such as this.But for fuck's sake--don't pretend or assume that while you were dialing out of your skull you unlocked the secrets of the universe, or gained some mystical arcane knowledge about the order of things, because that is pure bullshit. You were just really, really fucking high.

Edited by starling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm very interested in this. please "post something that really does objectively tear all this bullshit spiritual hocus pocus ... to shreds"

It will simply get deleted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Irony is posting to complain about somebody's spelling mistake and misspelling the name of the forum yourself.

Touche'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will simply get deleted.

that's convenient,

"I know something you don't know but i won't say because of reasons,"

why would your super secret knowledge get deleted? surely you can enlighten us all on why we're wrong and you're right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that's convenient,

"I know something you don't know but i won't say because of reasons,"

why would your super secret knowledge get deleted? surely you can enlighten us all on why we're wrong and you're right?

When a mod gives me some kind of assurance that said post won't get deleted, then sure, I'll do it. Until I get that I'm not going to waste my time, sorry. And just on a point of order--I don't claim to have any super secret knowledge about the nature of life, the universe and everything. My contention is that you people don't either, and that you won't get there by glutting on psychotropics.

Keep in mind, please, that I do not care whether anyone smacks their bitch up or not. This isn't what I'm taking issue with. In fact I'm not even going to get into a morality debate about drug use, because well...I don't care.

Edited by starling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wanker

can you atelast define what "we" are wrong about? or is that totally super secret too?

Edited by DiscoStu
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wanker

can you atelast define what "we" are wrong about? or is that totally super secret too?

You're not going to get very far if you immediately resort to calling people wankers. I didn't call you a wanker.

Why don't you tell me what you believe, and I'll tell you whether or not I think it's bullshit or not. Just so we're on the same page.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

super secret starling knows why "we" are wrong but can't even elucidate what "we" are wrong about

you're a pretty boring troll man, at least subby is entertaining

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eth comes from a non English speaking background and taught himself to read & speak English Starling.

In my view that's quite commendable and shows he's not the ignoramus you depict him to be.

It's easy to read a few of posts and take things out of context and jump to conclusions, but if you'd been around a bit longer you'd realise that Eth speaks in riddles. I'd guess that there's probably less than 15 people here that realise the hidden meaning in his posts and appreciate the intelligence required to construct a cryptic observation with multiple interpretations and make it funny at the same time.

If you are studying law I hope you do your research a bit better before you present anything in court.

Edited by Sallubrious
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

super secret starling knows why "we" are wrong but can't even elucidate what "we" are wrong about

you're a pretty boring troll man, at least subby is entertaining

Since you're unwilling to elucidate, sure, I'll give the gist:

A) The idea that psychotropic compounds exist as a kind of psychopharmacological medicine chest to be dipped into by human beings as modicums for said human beings to explore spiritual dimensions is very silly shit--completely out of step with evolution.

B) Psychotropic compounds do not unlock some secret portent of consciousness, creativity, or anything else. They merely elicit delusions which are misinterpreted as spiritual experiences, or are otherwise imbued with mystical explanations/significance which are/is nonsensical.

C) Said adherents to this line of thought are probably addicted to the highs given by said compounds, and the whole spirituality thing is just a means of excusing said addiction--or perhaps legitimizing this.

D) Rather than increasing intellectual capacity, or otherwise allowing intellectual potential to be realized, said compounds actually reduce the positive intellectual outcomes of imbibers.

E) Said compounds are often inherently psychologically harmful, and pretending they aren't is dangerous, self-serving, and irresponsible.

Edited by starling
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eth comes from a non English speaking background and taught himself to read & speak English Starling.

In my view that's quite commendable and shows he's not the ignoramus you depict him to be.

It's easy to read a few of posts and take things out of context and jump to conclusions, but if you'd been around a bit longer you'd realise that Eth speaks in riddles. I'd guess that there's probably less than 15 people here that realise the hidden meaning in his posts and appreciate the intelligence required to construct a cryptic observation with multiple interpretations and make it funny at the same time.

If you are studying law I hope you do your research a bit better before you present anything in court.

I'm not on the clock, sallubrious. Ignoramus is your word, not mine. It's also unlikely I'll ever 'present anything in court'. I won't be specialized in the way you're thinking. It could happen, theoretically---but it's very unlikely in the Rumpole-of-the-bailey type way you're imagining.

Moreoever, I don't like your line of reasoning. Speaking in riddles is only interesting if said riddles are intelligible. And what is the point of speaking in riddles, anyway? Why should I be bothered to try and decrypt a riddle, the ultimate point, or humor of which might not be of interest or value to me once decypted? I'm sorry, I'm not going to take a kind of Pascal's wager on that one, I'm afraid. If I miss some comic genius or nuggets of genius along the way that's on me I suppose.

Edited by starling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not on the clock, sallubrious.

Moreoever, I don't like your line of reasoning. Speaking in riddles is only interesting if said riddles are intelligible. And what is the point of speaking in riddles, anyway?

So that the layman can't understand them or try to use them against you without looking like an idiot themselves.

Edited by Sallubrious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So that the layman can't understand them or try to use them against you without looking like an idiot themselves.

Rather paranoid, wouldn't you say?

And why is there a need for such a protocol anyway? What perversity is it that's underwriting this process that needs to be hidden? Sounds callow and cowardly to me.

And I hope you believe me when I tell you this--I do not give a single atom of fuck what this cat thinks about anything at all, certainly not enough to try and break riddles, anyway. When you talk to me, you talk plainly, and you talk honestly, or we don't talk at all. You seem to be under the delusion that I'm somehow obligated to enter the labyrinth--I'm not. What's more likely is that I'll just start knocking down the walls.

Edited by starling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^ If you're not "obligated to enter the labyrinth," then why protest so passionately? There are plenty of different opinions on here, and all are allowed. Not everyone's going to agree! As for your secret group... Pffffffffft... If you're so highly evolved, why do you care if there's some sort of perceived elite group? You can bet your ass there are people here who are trusted more than others, either because they've proven themselves worthy, or have been around for a long time; nothing to get offended about, yeesh!

Since you're unwilling to elucidate, sure, I'll give the gist:

A) The idea that psychotropic compounds exist as a kind of psychopharmacological medicine chest to be dipped into by human beings as modicums for said human beings to explore spiritual dimensions is very silly shit--completely out of step with evolution.

B) Psychotropic compounds do not unlock some secret portent of consciousness, creativity, or anything else. They merely elicit delusions which are misinterpreted as spiritual experiences, or are otherwise imbued with mystical explanations/significance which are/is nonsensical.

C) Said adherents to this line of thought are probably addicted to the highs given by said compounds, and the whole spirituality thing is just a means of excusing said addiction--or perhaps legitimizing this.

D) Rather than increasing intellectual capacity, or otherwise allowing intellectual potential to be realized, said compounds actually reduce the positive intellectual outcomes of imbibers.

My take...

A) Out of step with evolution? There are many theories on the advancement of human intellectual evolution being helped along by psychotropic substances. Also, why shouldn't psychotropic substances NOT be utilised to explore an arguably important aspect of Human Experience - ie Spirituality?

B) "Misinterpreted as spiritual experiences" Hm what is an accurate interpretation of spiritual experience? You cannot either prove or disprove that psychotropics facilitate creativity or access a non-ordinary state of consciousness. Do you dream? What if you had met a person who had never dreamt (or denied themself the memory of having dreamt) and denied that dreaming is a figment of your imagination?

C) Actually it's rare for people to become addicted to psychedelics even in a psychologically-dependant way. I think you'll find that most people on this forum have a healthier attitude toward psychotropics than the average drug user (like yourself getting drunk to be DRUNK); and considering that you've decided to pick a bone with us, I'll use us as example. Just because YOU like to shut down in YOUR way in YOUR chosen method, doesn't make YOUR way the ONLY way.

D) Your generalising is very unbecoming; and thoroughly worrisome considering your aspirations of a legal profession. But do you really need examples of people who have used psychotropics with benefit? Francis Crick? Edison? Feynman? Freud? Carl SAgan? Edgar Allen Poe? Bloke that wrote Jeckyll and Hyde? My use has inspired my wanting to move forward in my life after certain hardships, and I know of only I think three people who I've known throughout the years who haven't said that they received some sort of life changing insight or epiphany from the use of a psychedelic.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^ If you're not "obligated to enter the labyrinth," then why protest so passionately? There are plenty of different opinions on here, and all are allowed. Not everyone's going to agree! As for your secret group... Pffffffffft... If you're so highly evolved, why do you care if there's some sort of perceived elite group? You can bet your ass there are people here who are trusted more than others, either because they've proven themselves worthy, or have been around for a long time; nothing to get offended about, yeesh!

My take...

A) Out of step with evolution? There are many theories on the advancement of human intellectual evolution being helped along by psychotropic substances. Also, why shouldn't psychotropic substances NOT be utilised to explore an arguably important aspect of Human Experience - ie Spirituality?

B) "Misinterpreted as spiritual experiences" Hm what is an accurate interpretation of spiritual experience? You cannot either prove or disprove that psychotropics facilitate creativity or access a non-ordinary state of consciousness. Do you dream? What if you had met a person who had never dreamt (or denied themself the memory of having dreamt) and denied that dreaming is a figment of your imagination?

C) Actually it's rare for people to become addicted to psychedelics even in a psychologically-dependant way. I think you'll find that most people on this forum have a healthier attitude toward psychotropics than the average drug user (like yourself getting drunk to be DRUNK); and considering that you've decided to pick a bone with us, I'll use us as example. Just because YOU like to shut down in YOUR way in YOUR chosen method, doesn't make YOUR way the ONLY way.

D) Your generalising is very unbecoming; and thoroughly worrisome considering your aspirations of a legal profession. But do you really need examples of people who have used psychotropics with benefit? Francis Crick? Edison? Feynman? Freud? Carl SAgan? Edgar Allen Poe? Bloke that wrote Jeckyll and Hyde? My use has inspired my wanting to move forward in my life after certain hardships, and I know of only I think three people who I've known throughout the years who haven't said that they received some sort of life changing insight or epiphany from the use of a psychedelic.

Firstly, thankyou for responding in a way unlike some of the addled troglodytes in this forum, it is appreciated, and now we have something of substance to discuss--but again, I'm not on the clock. I do wish people would stop referring to my legal studies. They have no bearing on or relation to what's happening here. I'll give you my thoughts on your points in a few hours, I have to see a man about a dog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that you spell bane with an I, I don't imagine that's a major problem for you, really.

The turn of phrase is 'bane of (your) existence', BTW.

just quietly starling, and we can keep this on the down-low between you and I if you are

I promise my lips will stay sealed........

are you batman?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just quietly starling, and we can keep this on the down-low between you and I if you are

I promise my lips will stay sealed........

are you batman?

If I get to be anybody...can it be deadpool? ok, I really have to do some work.

post-16542-0-91858100-1454642005_thumb.j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather paranoid, wouldn't you say?

And why is there a need for such a protocol anyway? What perversity is it that's underwriting this process that needs to be hidden? Sounds callow and cowardly to me.

And I hope you believe me when I tell you this--I do not give a single atom of fuck what this cat thinks about anything at all, certainly not enough to try and break riddles, anyway. When you talk to me, you talk plainly, and you talk honestly, or we don't talk at all. You seem to be under the delusion that I'm somehow obligated to enter the labyrinth--I'm not. What's more likely is that I'll just start knocking down the walls.

Paranoid - no I definitely wouldn't say that.

And why is there a need for such a protocol anyway - to punctuate the opinions offered by judgmental, slanderous people like you with a comedic break so we can all have a reality check.

I do not give a single atom of fuck what this cat thinks about anything at all - yet you take it upon yourself to attack him with insults.

Sounds callow and cowardly to me - you're the one hurling insults from behind a computer screen to someone you've never met.

What's more likely is that I'll just start knocking down the walls - there are no walls starling, except the ones you are creating for yourself with your attitude.

Edited by Sallubrious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guilty! guilty!

Of intellectual snobbery that is.

I also don't quite understand why starling is frequenting this board, given the evident disdain for the use of psychotropics for recreational and spiritual purposes.

I was under the impression this was SHAMAN Australis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guilty! guilty!

Of intellectual snobbery that is.

I also don't quite understand why starling is frequenting this board, given the evident disdain for the use of psychotropics for recreational and spiritual purposes.

I was under the impression this was SHAMAN Australis.

Yeah, fuck starling man. Total snoot. He can fuck right off to his ha ha's, pinot noirs and painting romantic oils from his terraced villa.

Ban! Ban! Ban!

Edited by starling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paranoid - no I definitely wouldn't say that.

And why is there a need for such a protocol anyway - to punctuate the opinions offered by judgmental, slanderous people like you with a comedic break so we can all have a reality check.

I do not give a single atom of fuck what this cat thinks about anything at all - yet you take it upon yourself to attack him with insults.

Sounds callow and cowardly to me - you're the one hurling insults from behind a computer screen to someone you've never met.

What's more likely is that I'll just start knocking down the walls - there are no walls starling, except the ones you are creating for yourself with your attitude.

Well, as long as they keep out the riff raff, that's the main thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant help but think back to the earliest troll from my time on the forum. Went on about the state of jnana and put too much dmt in his ass. Exact same attitude: Thinking he knows exactly what every member of the forum thinks, and of course, certain that his Buddhism gives him superiority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×