A Bit of Crazy for Your Amusement

 Posted by on 16 March 2015 at 10:00 am  Crazy Emails
Mar 162015
 

Um, alrighty then.

Galactic Voyages on a Budget?

 Posted by on 11 March 2015 at 10:00 am  Crazy Emails
Mar 112015
 

Received via two emails from “12514586731@tmomail.net,” with the first word of each sentence in the subject:

What better way to save fuel while on light travel galactic voyages than a massive black hole’s gravity?

I am not sure what the vector or scalar phrase would be for those speeds. ‘Warp’ doesn’t seem fitting.

Well, alrighty then. I guess that’s space travel that’s easy on the wallet and environmentally friendly too… Or something.

Crazy!

 Posted by on 20 August 2014 at 2:00 pm  Crazy Emails, Funny
Aug 202014
 

I thought I’d do a roundup of crazy that I’ve seen in NoodleFood and Facebook comments, just for your amusement. Here’s a recent comment on this blog post… as if I agree with Kant?!? Or something, who knows. (I always appreciate these kinds of apologies too.)

Here’s another… and yeah, don’t let the door hit you on the way out!

And then we have these gems:

Oh, and I love how this dude goes from subjectivism to EMPHATIC DOGMATISM in a heartbeat:

Don’t ever change, crazy people of the internet!

 

This delightful gem of a comment was offered on my blog post, Asking for Rape?, presumably because I dared to criticize Leonard Peikoff’s view that a woman cannot withdraw consent for sex after penetration.

I feel sorry for these haters of mine, in a way. I was supposed to wither away into obscurity after they’d exposed my treacherous ways — particularly, my failure to properly respect every last one of Leonard Peikoff’s opinions. Surely, I couldn’t possibly succeed after that!

BWHAHAHAHAHA!

Instead, my influence has continued to spread, as evidenced by an over 50% increase in downloads and listens to Philosophy in Action Radio in 2013. I published my first book, Responsibility & Luck: A Defense of Praise and Blame too. That’s not a bad bit of work for the year after my intended demise!

So… go home, dogmatic Objectivists, you’re drunk!

Jan 092014
 

Lately, I’ve gotten a slew of hits to this video from Philosophy in Action: Should a man unwilling to be a father have to pay child support? It’s now gotten nearly 5,000 views. Nice!

That’s awesome. Alas, awesome often comes paired with crazy, such as this comment:

Let’s think about this bit — “If a woman steals a mans seed without his consent, does she have a right to live?” — for a moment.

First, I’m pretty sure that a man voluntarily gives his “seed” to a woman in having sex with her. That’s rather the point, in fact.

Second, are we talking death penalty?!? Um, wow.

Finally, here’s a pro-tip: Don’t ever suggest up-front that your audience might think you a sociopath after reading your opinion. It might just prejudice them against you… just a bit.

Crazy Sauce: Little Souls

 Posted by on 2 January 2014 at 2:00 pm  Crazy Emails, Metaphysics
Jan 022014
 

I don’t just receive crazy emails… I get crazy tweets too!

Um, okay. If you dare, go read his article: The Crown of Christ.

An Awesome Spam Comment

 Posted by on 5 December 2013 at 2:00 pm  Crazy Emails, Funny
Dec 052013
 

I received this particularly awesome comment on my recently posted podcast question on Mercenary Essay Contest Writing:

Competitions in writing like this one is a good practice for those students who already show their skills when it comes in writing. A good experience for them to gain some new tactics in making their essays and other types of writing even better.

Here’s why that mess of English is so awesome: the poster is advertising some essay-writing site. Heck, you can see a bunch of similarly grammatical comments by clicking on the person’s handle “custom essay” on the comment.

Bless his heart.

Jews, Jesus, and God… WUT?

 Posted by on 11 November 2013 at 2:00 pm  Crazy Emails, WTF
Nov 112013
 

I received the following message — with the subject of “comment on responsibility and luck, praise and blame” — via email a bit ago. Thinking that it referred to my new book — Responsibility & Luck: A Defense of Praise and Blame — I tried to read it.

Honestly, I didn’t get very far. By all means, try for yourself… perhaps you’ll do better than me.

———- Forwarded message ———- From: Jay Chawla Date: Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 8:20 PM Subject: comment on responsibility and luck, praise and blame

whenever a person sins, god punishes them. intellectually, men tend to respond to prompt and clear punishments, and to severe punishments. sometimes, god punishes promptly and severely. that is up to god, not man. jesus said that the victims of the random tragedy/disaster were no worse than other men; but do not sin so that the same does not happen to you. the wages of sin is death, and life is purchased by jesus on the cross.

if a person shoplifts and is very careful and clever, then in most contexts the person will not be caught. but sometimes the person will be ‘unlucky’ and be caught, be reported, be prosecuted, and be punished under criminal law. that is bad luck. but just because it usually takes bad luck to suffer tragedy from shoplifting does not mean one should do it. god punishes all theft.

if you get really drunk and drive at twice the speed limit past intersections where cars might come out in front of you, then you have sinned. if you suffer the tragedy of killing someone, that is bad luck. but god punishes all sin; and sometimes he inflicts tragedy, even if not outwardly connected to any particular sin, as in the case of a collapse of a tower people happen to be in at the time. (but the engineers sinned!)

the hebrews do not assign themselves any responsibility towards gentiles except through false laws constantly rewritten and bypassed and ignored by themselves (and they selectively enforce those laws.) but god requires love of man from all those who he will not destroy in hell. and even the jews who do not constantly work to make their actions good for all men cannot be protected by law — they will go to hell. however, god generally does not inflict prompt tragedy on them, just as he does not inflict prompt tragedy on satan. but god does punish satan (cursing him to lick the dust, promising to cast him down to earth, into a pit, into hell, to make him beneath even those he abused) and god does punish the jews occasionally, even severely, and even the jews fear those mysterious forces that seem to be jealous of the lives of gentiles, those inexplicable forces, those forces which cannot be understood by reasonable jews.

god is no respecter of persons, and god gives heaven to those who bear fruit for him, who trade for his gain, who have oil for their lamp, who have faith to make his seed grow, who love him. and god punishes all, and god pays the price on the cross for those who take up their cross and follow him. jesus does not violate the law, the whole law, but he offends the jews.

the jews know that there are some things that must result in death. they include gathering firewood on saturday, usurping the priesthood, being a gentile, and worshipping any god other than the physical jewflesh (as jesus did). every man has an understanding of law, and only those who follow jesus understand the whole law, and they know that all praise is for jesus, that all things god does are just, that all harms that befall man are his own responsibility, and that there is no such thing as luck — only the will of god. the christian takes responsibility to bear his cross and do the will of god, and is given greater responsibility. all others take responsibility for themself, and they go down to hell. luck cannot deliver, nor can it deny.

Um… WUT?!?

Wacky Stuff from Facebook

 Posted by on 25 June 2013 at 2:00 pm  Crazy Emails, Funny
Jun 252013
 

As y’all know, I see some amazingly wacky stuff posted to Philosophy in Action’s Facebook page. Here are a few recent gems for your amusement:

Again, that just goes to show… I get the best crazy!

Pimp Fascist Philosopher

 Posted by on 26 April 2013 at 10:00 am  Crazy Emails, Funny
Apr 262013
 

On Tuesday, I posted this question to Philosophy in Action’s Queue:

Do unfit parents have a right to procreate? Courts today seem to hold the view that people have a right to procreate. As a result, wholly unfit parents can produce child after child. Even if the court removes the latest child from the home when very young, some abuse or neglect must have already occurred. In fact, the child might have health problems at birth due to drug abuse, alcohol consumption, or lack of proper medical care by the mother during pregnancy. Does the current system respect the rights of unfit parents at the expense of their kids? Instead, should unfit parents be required to adopt out any new children they bear? Should serial abusers be forced to take birth control or even sterilized?

The posting of it to Facebook spawned a highly entertaining thread… entertaining, mostly thanks to the repeated crazy-hostile comments of someone by the name of “Stephen Cole.” It began as barely coherent bashing of Ayn Rand:

Then he went in an entirely wacky direction:

Yipee! Now I can check get yourself called a “pimp fascist philosopher” by some random jackass on Facebook off my bucket list!

Of course, I posted a screenshot of that to Facebook, because it was just too funny not to share. Even better, I asked Rory Hodgson to make a video of a dramatic reading, as we’d just been talking about that this morning. (I was inspired by this: Michael Shannon Reads the Insane Delta Gamma Sorority Letter.) He did it, and it’s awesome!

Also, Tori Press altered my business cards in a fabulous way:

I tell ya, I get THE BEST CRAZY… and I’m so glad, because laughing at it with friends is so much fun!

Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha