Here are some tips to help you get started:
- To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
- Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
- If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
- Follow the Wikipedia:Simplified Ruleset
- Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
- Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
- Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!
Another radical from IL
I'm from St. Clair County, IL and I only know one other radical, so I'm curious to where you're from.
--Anþóný Björne 23:45, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I'm from the Kankakee area. In other words, many miles away from you. Which sucks.
--Arocoun 02:10, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Small group of radicals in AL
Here at Spring Hill College, we have a group of friends (who work on wiki more than we should) which tends to be radical in some stuff. I like to say we're "thinking", not "radical" but for all practical purposes, it's the same. Feel free to contact us. Look for Eric Herboso on edits page for Spring Hill and here's my info. Im me if ya want at mendoek (AIM). See ya! DavidMendoza 14:38, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
regarding your philosophical quiz
Nirvana's famous line from Smells like Teen Spirit "Whatever...never mind" would be very appropriate for the apathetic result.
I really enjoyed the philosophical quiz and related to much in your user page including the philosophy and the martial arts. Are you up for Aussie penpals? I'm always interested in others that I can really talk to, and you sound like you fit the bill. Feel free to email me at firstname.lastname@example.org if you feel so inclined!
In a matter of fifteen minutes you managed to impress me greatly. And I haven't met you. If your travels ever lead you to New York, you should contact me. You sound like my friends. aim: jessasaurus said e-mail: email@example.com I don't know, but I feel I should talk to you.
Re: Your unique views.
1) I sincerely doubt that the sudden anagnorisis of any animistic nature in ourselves would lead to a spontaneous volte-farce in our ways and if it did happen - would it be necessarily for the better?
Being human is a unique concept because by distinguishing ourselves from other organisms, we give ourselves unto digression and that results in art and mental fabrications. Rabbits don't have ethics and I have yet to see a rabbit experience an existentialist dilemma. Peculiarity is what makes humans so interesting.
2) Self-acceptance is another mental sedative to allow us to accept mediocrity. I believe contentment is fine, but acknowledging the existence of room for improvement is necessary. Too much self-loathing never gets anything accomplished, but fatalism isn't the answer either. It is not in Man's nature to fly - yet we can dream and thereby dreams are realized. Shame or guilt is also sometimes a useful emotion - call it a mental checks and balances system that makes us question ourselves.
3) You can't own anything you can't defend. That being said, you must realize that true oppression in the sense of unilateral action occurs when people are unitarian. This usually stems from a desire for stability or personal well-being, as opposed to self-defence. You should read discordian philosophy once in a while. Your point of view would support the view that Hitler was only bad because the Jews couldn't defend themselves. Whereas the real problem was that enough people could be persuaded into following his beliefs. Beware of large crowds of people.
4) "The best" is an illusion. Unarmed martial arts assume that your opponent hasn't spent thirty minutes with a semiautomatic and is unable to simply fork out the cash to buy a new one. It is certainly useful, but the inability to be flexible is more of a weakness than any lack of physical training. You focus too much on the physical. Self-defense is at its most powerful when you can bypass the need for guns or a fist completely. There are many ways to accomplish this, none of which involve physical threats.
5) I believe every society should be questioned. That saves you several sentences. Beware of anything you can accept unconditionally and unquestioningly - it makes you no better than the religion that you detest.
6) I'd like to point out biological differences make it impossible for an orang-utan to mimic a cheetah - and at the end of the day, both of them get shot by poachers anyway. That being said, I applaud your creative efforts because it shows you can Dream.
7) A name has as much power as you put into it. A cow doesn't care if it's called Buttercup - it knows what it is. The instant you accept a name as a mere label for your human shell, it will lose all the power it holds over you. This is hard for people because we are not rational beings. Calling your son "Buttercup" will certainly emotionally scar him if he values the opinions of others or has self-hubris. We all have our illusions and that is an aspect of what makes us human.
That being said - should you decide what you name yourself? Certainly, if you detest your own name so, but it also exposes a personal weakness and makes you more vulnerable to mocking.
Much love, Dar (Say Ciao to Auby for me~!)
Found your page through your philosophy quiz, which is probably the best of that type I've seen. I'd say I fit my assigned Utilitarianism well. Sent it to my lady who is a professed Kantian...wonder how she'll do.
Not all that strange, but still somewhat alarming when I came upon your page: I'm also a male born August of 1985 in continual and fervent study of martial arts who will be living In IL next year. Small world?
I'd argue against your claim that humans should aim to be independant/self-reliant in all aspects of their lives...I don't think true independence is a realistic ideal given all the inherent intertwinings of any society. I mean, call it Buddhist bubblings, but it seems like no matter what we do, think, or feel, no matter how we live, we're always connected to someone/thing else...why not embrace that and use it to develop a deeper connection?
I'm interested to learn more about your self-developed martial art style...it sounds from the quick description like an innovative system.
PS: Author of Re: Your unique views. seems like a condescending and elitist wet blanket. ;-)
we were born in the same month and in the same year and i agree with nearly everything you have posted on your user page... thing. I'm a neurotic painter from ohio, and i guess if you consider your views radical, then I'm a radical, too. So... we should be friends.
wombat 2: the reckoning
I'm also an idiot, because I forgot to include any contact information...
actually, I reread some of the things you said, and I'm no longer sure if we jive that well. My deepest apologies.
Kate here, again, and if whoever wrote the comment entitled "Re: Your Unique Views" ever reads this, e-mail me...
I must confess, I am extremely impresed by your page. I couldn't agree with you more on the unarmed martial arts issue, (I have studied shotokan karate for several years, but I hope to eventually learn many styles, and then just use what works in a Bruce Lee/Musashi Miyamoto kind of way) and your philosophical information is very well put. I fully support your statements about questioning societies, as well as the judgement of righteousness. To summarize your page, I can only say Bravo: Some people seem to go through life not caring what they learn or what they leave behind, and other have the ambition to change the world ot live a full life. You most defenitly seem to be in the latter catagory.
I am all the way up in MN, and will only graduate from high school in 2006, but if you are ever in the area, let me know. My main email is firstname.lastname@example.org
- Looked at your user page. You and I seem to agree on many points, you have a sprit of independence and self-determination, and you seem to have a strong mind for someone your age. I think you and I would get along very well. Arocoun 23:22, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
Just a general warning...
I'm not much for e-mailing, making new friends, being on the computer, etc. Please don't be insulted if I don't e-mail you back, I'm just hate using e-mail. And sadly, my hushmail account doesn't seem to be working ATM.
_________________________________ It is interesting that you used a quote from Nietzsche to exemplify Nihilism, when one of Nietzsche's main arguments was against Nihilism (The Gay Science)
- Nietzsche meant Nihilism as in Fatalism. Nietzsche was very much a moral nihilist. After all, Nihilism denies objective morality.
There are two articles to be disagreed or agreed with in this question in the quiz, 'What animal best respresents your personality?': "You're a relatively small person, but that's fine."
1) You're small. Agree/Disagree 2) If small: That's fine. Agree/Disagree.
There are three answers:
You're small, but that's fine. You're small, but it's not fine. You're not small.
Also, you over-use the word relative. Relative to what? "Relatively speaking." What are you speaking relatively to?
On yourself... word to the wise. Sometimes staying fit means fitting in. The concealed threat is most dangerous. Exclusion from the world makes the entire world a threat which you cannot observe.
126.96.36.199 01:14, 5 December 2005 (UTC)Raeth ( TheFennec@gmail.com )
User:sendai2ci I find it amusing that someone complained about not being able to sit the fence. Not taking a stance is I think one of the reasons why society is where it currently is. People avoiding to take responsibility for their thoughts and actions and preffering to avoid the issue instead.
Your views on life...
are extremely similar to mine, as are the simple facets you described of your life. Please look at the book The Secret Art of Seamm-Jasani, as those philosophies are embodied in its movements. Feel free to contact me via email at email@example.com.
Your attempt to make your test apolitical, well intentioned or not, leads to your test being very narrow minded. I mean, you divorce political and philosophical points. Why are there no questions about what I think of social welfare systems? Your tendencies towards a very individualist stance show through in the way you phrase the questions.
Still, far from the worst one of these quizes I've done.
-Yeah, I guess my individualism does show. And, I guess if I wanted to spend about 2 days to create a quiz about three times as big, I could include politics in the quiz. Unfortunately, it would be a quiz too big for most people to take; and even if it seemed doable, I just don't have that kind of enthusiasm for quiz making at the moment. Regardless, thanks for the input. If I ever get the desire to do more with the quiz, I'll consider including politics in it. Arocoun 19:43, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Quiz Results Link To A Page About Them
I went through and linked all the quiz results to the Wikipedia page that talks about them. I hope you don't mind that I did this, but you can change it back if you do. I did this because I came to your Wikipedia page for more information on my result, and thought that other people might like to read the page that relates to their result. I couldn't find a good page for Divine Command; Egoism and Justice are both linked to fairly vauge pages, but they give a general idea of the concepts. You have some very interesting veiws. The idea that the world would be a better place if people accepted that they're animals and the idea that people should be able to name themselves were both things I'd never thought about before, but after thinking about it for a few minutes they both seemed to hold a lot of reason behind them. Thanks for making a quiz that is actually thought provoking.
-Thanks for adding in links, it's something I should have done to begin with! I appreciate it. Arocoun 19:43, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
re: Quiz statement #24
--Jblotto 01:16, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
"The world would be best if everyone would just take care of themselves."
I might be alone, but this statement gave me the most difficulty. The "just" here, in my opinion, could be interpreted as "simply" (Just let it go!) or "actually" (Would you just get a job?), which would seem to make the statement either individualist or pessimist driven. Perhaps I didn't read the philosophical write-ups closely enough to see whether both of these then fall under a single philosophy from that perspective as to whether it would matter. Just thought I'd throw it out there.
Hi. nice quiz
New Yorker mention
- KNOW IT ALL - Can Wikipedia conquer expertise? KillerChihuahua?!? 16:42, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hey, I was just reading the New Yorker article and saw your name. Congrats! --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:52, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- Wow...crazy...I don't even do that much here. Though last time I checked, my user page was one of the most popular, only because the popular quiz I wrote years ago linked here.Arocoun 00:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hey, I was just reading the New Yorker article and saw your name. Congrats! --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:52, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- I used to be apathetic, but now I just don't care.
I almost didn't bother making this edit :-)
Your quiz is the best on that website--Seadog--fly on....littlewing 00:03, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Quiz? What quiz?
Hey I enjoyed reading your User Page, came up randomly when I googled a Kant quotation, but where is this quiz that everybody's raving about? I couldn't find the link,
GeorginaMarie 09:29, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
The fool that I am
Found! It was linked about two comments above my own. Apparently I'm hedonistic. That doesn't really surprise me at all. I do rather enjoy being hedonistic though. And hedonists can be very nice people when hedonists in moderation. I didn't really understand some of the phrases you used like 'Gods laws' - I thought that was a bit vague. Which God do you mean? And if you don't believe in God that question is meaningless because there was never a God who made laws - unless you mean the laws religions made up for people to follow ('made up' being strictly from the atheist's point of view). Eck, I'm blathering a bit now and probably not making any sense. Right. Ta ra.
GeorginaMarie 09:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
A thought to ponder about quizzes
This notion may have occurred to you already, but I thought I'd mention it on the off chance that it may help you in refining your quiz, should you choose to do so. My thought is this: The quiz format is not amenable to semantic precision. In only being able to stipulate the degree to which we agree or disagree with a statement, we are unable to stipulate why we disagree with it. For instance, consider #13 - "Pleasure should play a central role in our lives". In one sense, I agree strongly. I am of the view that the bounty of Creation is a gift to humanity and should be accepted graciously, and that the enjoyment of that bounty is conducive to, and perhaps even indispensable for, the strengthening of the bonds of family and friendship and community which allow life to be more than simply a quest for warmth and protein, and become instead the good life. Yet I disagree in the sense that there are pursuits still more ennobling and civilizing than pleasure - justice, say, or truth, or goodness, and allowing the pursuit of pleasure to overshadow these (in other words, for the pursuit of pleasure to play the central role in our lives) is to embrace baseness. It is difficult to express this nuance (if nuance it is, and not nit-picking) in shades of agreement, and this troubled me as I took the quiz. Should I rank my level of disagreement or agreement, I wondered, according to how strongly I think pleasure should play a central role, or according to how central a role I think pleasure should play? Or split the difference? It becomes a difficult calculus.
While I have no specific suggestions, nor the time to formulate them, perhaps the wording of your statements might be refined to address this issue. Not to complain - I found the quiz most enjoyable and stimulating (although the site didn't appear to be fully functional and I received no final score, and remain on the edge of my seat wondering whether I am apathetic or Aristotelian).
Two more remarks: One is that I am new to Wikipedia, and if this is an inappropriate venue for me to communicate my musings, please forgive me. Lastly, the typo far up the page - "volte-farce" - is farcical indeed.
John W Wright 02:36, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
No quotes for Nihilism?
A little disappointing. --NEMT 06:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)