| Poem: Submit | Random | Best | Worst | Recent | Comments |
|
Epistemology (2nd draft) (Lyric) by Ranger Senses tell us much, but thinking tells us more
Like the Greek philosopher sitting on the floor
Contemplating issues such as morality
And if we know anything, and what those things might be
Think of the all-seeing fly glued onto the wall
Romancing time for peace of mind before his deadly fall
When he will question knowledge and what makes it so real
Such as the sorts of qualities of his every meal
He will wait for a future to fly to him so fast
It crashed and got itself buried in the distant past
He clears his mind and considers this thing we know as life
His meditations were severed by the Idealist knife
Cutting rational views its curious nature sought
To find the heart of all of our naturally innate thoughts
Science beat it there, now the real feud can begin
In the end of the fight, though, all of us will win
Despite the vicious lure of the coffin's hole
Rene Descartes fled with his immortal soul
Along the wooden path that boasts no real end
Just a vaguely dim request for us to pretend
While the external world runs past beyond our sight
Socrates left the shadows and then he found the light
Sadly for him, his arrogance showed through
He would not run from the State and so he paid his due
In the bitter cell from which he would not flee
The ghost of Christmas Nevermore popped round for a cup of hemlock tea
It's much too much, it's far too far, Pretence gave up and screamed
Yet your brains remain plugged in to the Great Machine
The Matrix some might call it, a name that seems quite odd
But not if Descartes proved the existance of God
Take a side, consider well, you can't sit on the fence
Because there is not such a thing as normal common sense
The choice is yours to face the truth here within your head
But do you at all believe a single word I said?
Up the ladder:
Walter
Down the ladder:
la petite mort
Votes: (green: user, blue: anonymous)
Arithmetic Mean: 5.8333335
Posted: January 2, 2003 1:06 PM PST; Last modified: January 3, 2003 11:46 AM PSTWeighted score: 5.833319 Overall Rank: 1629 Comments:
[10]
horus8 @ 24.126.113.154
|
2-Jan-03/3:05 PM
|
Reply
yes. i do. this is a great and grand poem. golden que tip. 10.
and whoever gavev this a zero, shouuld immeiately go wash their mouth out with soup, that's right...i said soup. motherfucker, sorry for the french, but this poem does not deserve a zero, or anything less than a six, and i'll prove that. watch.a
Ugh, okay, but it is getting a 1 from me. Did you like read this. "Scarlet bubbles?" "cold blade sought," "Escaping from this two-bit jail we sometimes know as life". hahahahaha. It is like a heavy metal pimple poem.
You're gay. Have you any idea about Philosophy-or anything for that matter? You obviously don't understand anything I said in this-go read Descartes.
So to your vote, what is fundamentally wrong with this? Yes it's a draft, but the main part of the content is fine as far as I can see. Stop bullshitting and give me some relevant reasons for your votes. Anyway, you can't even prove that this poem exists.
I read Tim Allens' "I'm not really here". Does that count?
Relevant. Bullshitting? I am not bullshitting. Descartes is a goof. You will learn that one-day when you have enough experience to write a poem about your experience rather than the experiences you gather from trying to write poems about dead guy's and their ideas. Nothing wrong with the ideas, per say, but maybe if they were in a more applicable setting and did not sound like a thirteen year old who has ejaculated for the first time, then maybe. Maybe you would advance. But this will come in time. Simplify. Put the ideas that you glean from books into your common experience. Then maybe I will give you a 5. But get over the whole who-gave-my-poem a zero. I will keep giving your poems a zero as long as you keep letting me know it bothers you.
Its a good job you have such good basis for your insanely low votes. Even if you hate this poem it deserves more than you gave it. Open your eyes to the rest of poem ranker, there are far worse poems written by a few unthoughtful people just for a laugh. THEY deserve 0s and 1s. Ranger has speant time and effort on this poem, you should give him credit just for that.
Umm. Aren't you missing Pop Idol?
Was that an attempt to be witty?
Aha, some help! Thank you, sir. Two questions:
1-How should I put the ideas from books into common experience? and 2-Surely that would just make me sound like every other poet who considers themselves 'professional'. What good would that do me? I personally prefer to try something different. And finally, yes it does bother me that you are going to keep giving my poems a zero just because it bothers me. You're supposed to be one of the proper poets on this site. You're not. A proper poet would give helpful advice and not try to ground young writers into the dirt. Get a better attitude, for chrissakes, the way you are right now benefits nobody. It's a shame that you will repeatedly vote zeros, I don't vote zeros on yours because that would be unethical.
You are so freaked out by votes that are missing my point completely, which shows nothing but your age. God fobid you ever get a rejection letter in the mail.
Okay then, fuck the votes. Pretend they don't exist. That still won't help me make this a better poem. I really want people to help me with this because it could potentially be good. If we forget the voting saga, will that encourage you to give me some suggestions?
good one, fits right in!!!
well he made you say scarlet bubbles and shake your fist at the sky and so no lord, not the scarlet bubbles, and that my friend is a funny site, and deserves merit. and a heavy metal pimple poem would not include christmas, ever. because megadeath broke up last year, so... there. also i have a soft spot for socrates because he had an imp.
Megadeath broke up. Noooooooooooooooooooooo. Is Dave going solo?
Killer draft,man. Sorry, I have no clue what epi.... what the hell was that again?
Epistemology is the theory of knowledge, a section of the Philosophy A level course. Such thinkers as Descartes and Socrates figure highly, as does Bishop Berkeley, the founder of recent Idealism, just in case poetandknowit thinks I'm bluffing knowledge.
hahahahahahahhahahahaha
Yes Craig dear, AS level, and its confusing, Descartes was a NOB, and dont get me started on socrates, although our lessons are quite good, when we can all have a laugh
To poetandknowit, craigy is NOT bluffing knowledge, he really does know all this stuff, and very well he knows it too, along with myself and the stamp we can talk b*llocks for ages.
Which sad buggers gave you the 0's? Even the 9 is too low. Nice one Craigus.
This is way too over the top. You turn me off from reading the rest pretty much immediately. "Escaping from this..." sounds like a sentence that escaped from a -=Dark_Angel=-'s lastest entry. This poem lacks a seriousness. 'phosphorescent sizzling metaphor'!? That's just ugly.
This is supposed to be a poem to show that we don't really know a thing...what better way than confusion? If you don't understand a poem, it doesn't mean it's bad.
Are you seriously saying that there is nothing in here worthy of praise? If so, I would ask you to stop voting from the head and start voting from the heart-just because something doesn't conform to all the rules is no reason to instantly dismiss it. Did this poem not conjure up images in your head? I tried to write it that way so it would. If I failed, then either this needs to be reworked (it is only a draft, after all), or you have no imagination at all. How many people here know anything about epistemology? It's fascinating, but confusing. It's exactly the same with this poem.
Rangers young for fucks sake but his work whatever you say has gotta Be respected, i couldnt write as a teen like this. I didnt understand all of this poemranker is not a hyperdermic shot of poetry some of it craves to be studied, votes can be postponed as intransit often does out of respect and i like that attitude, give the dude a break - hey ranger temporarily delete this do another version (if you can be arsed and compare the one you did for your palate and one for others) on 2nd thoughts go out tonight, seduce a woman, kick her out after, fill a pint glass full of bourbon and drink yourself in to a coma !
Is that a bad philosophy?
yes.
"Scarlet bubbles floating in the patterned air Dancing their woven path without a single care" this screams his age; one does not need to look at his profile to confirm it. as for what he was trying to do, well, this stepping stone is not so wobbly as some that i have broached, and my jeans are no stranger to cold, mucky waters. keep at it ranger. listen to the ones who say you fail--they are the ones who will get your ire to where it needs to be to make yourself leaner, better, stronger. as for this poem: you knew what you meant; say it with half the words; make ME, the reader, question its existence. k?
Thank you for the advice, it's nice to have some useful help!
I've changed it a bit, does it work now? I don't really want to reduce it because it doesn't make sense when read, however if you or anyone else can see a way to shorten it, please let me know. (Please don't put 'Delete it all', that's just not original now, is it!)
Nice one. Don't be put off by the 'experianced' poets. I mean, sure, they know everything about the world and if they don't like it, it's crap. Well, thats bullshit. If you like a poem, it's good for you. All that matters is, do you like it? If so, you've done a good job. And remember my motto:- ' Fuck 'em if they don't like it, 'cause they're all bastards anyway'. 10, Because I liked it. Anyone who wants to rip it to pieces, Sod off and get a life you low-life sadist piece of crap. Crawl off back to your hole and die. It's people like you that ruin life for the rest of us. Sad Fucks.
so, if i try to help him, as he has asked, i'm ruining his life?
my hole is quite comfortably furnished, thank you, and i have no intentions of dying in it just yet. ranger? would you like me to comment on your revision? mikius, you have a lot of balls speaking for someone else. i'm glad you like it the way it is NOW. did you see it before? how do you know which comments apply to which versions?
I would love to have some comments regarding the revised work, because it's not the finished article as I'm sure many people will tell you. That's fair enough, and I have no argument with it. However I do have an argument with the people who give poems zeros just because they don't like the idea of someone being good at poetry. I think that that is what Mikius was talking about, he wasn't actually referring to you, because you do give help to less experienced poets.
I have to question how 'experienced' poetandknowit is at writing poetry, because he never really seems to know how to criticise a poem-"It sounds like a 13-year old who's just ejaculated for the first time", what the fuck is he talking about? That doesn't help me in any way, shape or form. There are plenty of great poets on this site, but none will get the recognition they deserve because the 'big names' seem to just vote them out of contention. So much for the poemranker hierarchy. Anyway, thanks for the help, if you have any more advice, please let me know.
zzinnia, I don't care about helpful comments. Thats great. If you think you can help thats fine. What I said was that people like D.A. and PAKI are being all high and mighty and saying it's shit without even reading it sometimes, and not leaving suggestions. The fact remains, they try to show they are great by screwing other people around.
I agree.
I'm giving you a zero because you're avering 3 dicks before lunchtime you're causing some tension in the gay mafia.??
9
loved it
He is just an old bastard. Oh nevermind he is actually only 34. That's what too much pigeon watching will do to you. Don't mind him. For every 0 he gives you, let me know and I will give you a 10 to balance it out. Sometimes you can't fight the world, you just have to go with the flow and learn how to abuse it...quietly.
Thank you
Have a ten duewD!
just keep working on it
I mean, unless you're like me, you have to really think about your poems. The freshness and spontegayity of my work comes with lots experience and hard work.
And a paper cut on your fist full of aids, and disco balls for i balls. wearing of course magnum pi shorts with a lap snorkel.
Dude don't listen to assholes on here that don't know a damn thing about good poetry. I feel that if you feel good about what you wrote, it is good work. I honestly don't know why people put zero's for this. Hell, i could write up something on the life of a fucking mayfly and it would get better than that. Keep up the good work, check out some of my older and newer works.
hey maybe you'll see this....I like your style..maybe you should take a look at mine....feel free to send an email to me...you'll find it in my profile
HAIL SATAN HAIL SATAN
#47 salutes you on yet another worthless rant on society the flock of sheep that calls itself sane HAHAHahahaha........
Um...
Excellent, as a fellow pilosophy student it is sad to see rationalsit thinkers hard work undone by modern imperialists.
Excellent, as a fellow pilosophy student it is sad to see rationalsit thinkers hard work undone by modern empiricists.
Ranger I liked the 1st draft too but this is equal to it heres the 8 vote i originally cast. I wanted to send you an e mail so I will display mine until the 12th Jan please send me it if you want, I may have something of interest for you.
So you do philosophy gAy-Level. What do you want? A medal? You shall have no such medal! Unless you can answer me this...
What is the meaning of the following sentence: The shoehorn the parson's nose the pirate procured lubricated glistened. (3 marks) (NB The sentence is grammatically correct)
to stymie the fluke with the armpit platform. naturally.
No it's not.
Perhaps "TO shoehorn the parson's nose, the pirate procured lubricated...whatever". It shouldn't finish with a verb.
It's not gramatically correct, that is.
Maybe in your world, Dark Angel.
Then I would urge you to consider the following: What if there were a pirate who procured a parson's nose? That would be the parson's nose the pirate procured. And what if the pirate caused the parson's nose to lubricate a shoehorn? That shoehorn would be the shoehorn the parson's nose the pirate procured lubricated. And then if the shoehorn were to glisten after being belubricated with the Shoe-horne, one might say that the shoehorn the parson's nose the pirate procured lubricated glistened.
Checkmate, I believe.
Moreover, it is not only grammatically correct, it is factually correct.
And I was that shoehorn.
You were indeede.
Good sir, I came onto this site to learn. You have obviously had what is known as a Classical Education. I have obviously not. Please accept my most Humble Apologies for doubting you, sir, I have been subjected to Excessive Stupidity in my lifetime. Will you aid me on the path to Poetic Enlightenment?
And yes, you win this game of chess. I am far too confused to carry on, good sir!
It is far too late for Humble Apologies, old horse!
The Ranger the Riddle the Wise Man enweaved dumbfounded shall be slain.
Precisely.
Why can't it end with a verb? "The dog ran." Grammatically correct and complete, isn't it? "The shoehorn--the parson's nose the pirate procured lubricated--glistened" would work if the shoehorn is indeed the parson's nose and if the one that the pirate procured is lubricated. Otherwise? Not so much.
I'm afraid you don't get it, hatters hare. Consider the following sentence:
"The parson's nose the pirate procured ate some honey." Clearly, it is grammatically correct. Another way of putting it would be "The parson's nose, that was procured by the pirate, ate some honey". Now consider "The shoehorn the parson's nose the pirate procured lubricated glistened." Another way of putting this would be "The shoehorn (that was lubricated by the parson's nose (which the pirate procured)) glistened." So, a pirate procured a parson's nose, which in turn lubricated an shoehorn, which in turn glistened. Do you see?
Oh--yes, now I see. You're omitting the subordinating conjuctions (that) to two restrictive clauses [i.e, "(that) the parsons nose [lubricated]" and "(that) the pirate procured"]. I can't tell from your example above whether you are using "which" to introduce a restrictive or nonrestrictive clause ("that was lubricated by the parson's nose (which the pirate procured)"--if the former, fine; if, however, it's a nonrestrictive clause (i.e., "that was lubricated by the parson's nose, which the pirate procured"), you can't arbitrarily omit both the comma that would indicate that it is a nonrestrictive clause and the "which." (Anyway, because of the ambiguity resulting from your sentence construction, your omission of the subordinating conjuctions, while acceptable in many cases, would be considered unacceptable usage by certain grammarians--see, for example, Theodore Bernstein's _The Careful Writer_).
In order to omit the subordinating conjunctions ("that" or the restrictive usage of "which, which is still acceptable usage, particularly in Europe), I believe the clauses must be restrictive. To be considered restrictive, those clauses must be essential to the meaning of the sentence. If you mean "The shoehorn that the parsons nose that the pirate procured lubricated glistened," you seem to be implying that there is more than one parson's nose and you specifically mean the one that the pirate procured and that there was more than one shoehorn and you specifically mean the one that the parson's nose lubricated. Is that the case? I'd like it better if you changed it to "The shoehorn the parson's nose, the pirate, procured lubricated glistened" but then we'd be back to procuring a lubricated shoehorn, which is against the law in any number of locales.
This is great! I can't believe we're having a serious conversation about the lubrication of a shoehorn by a procured parson's nose! It was complete genius of me to use that sentence as the example!!
As for your reply, by the sentence "The shoehorn the parson's nose the pirate procured lubricated glistened." I mean that of all the parsons' noses, I am specifically talking about the one that was procured by the pirate. And of all the shoehorns, I specifically mean the one that was lubricated by the aforementioned parson's nose. Moreover, that shoehorn glistened. This is the only possible interpretation of the sentence that makes sense. It is grammatically correct. If you doubt me, Sir, then we shall duel! Or are you a coward?
So you are saying that it is okay to leave out "that"? Wow. By the way, which parson are we talking about here? Or is there not one particular? Also, who is this pirate? I didn't realise they existed anymore except in fairytales and Gilded Stumpes of Olde.
It's fine to leave out "that".
Which helmet should I rub? The helmet the fireman wears. (equivalent to "the helmet that the fireman wears", not "the helmet, which the fireman wears".) There is no parson. There is only his nose. And if you had read Gilded Stumps of Olde, you would know perfectly well who the pirate was.
Parsons? Firemen? Pirates? What is this, a 'Village People' reunion?!?!?
What is the sentence with commas supposed to mean? That there was a parson's nose, who was a pirate, who procured a pre-lubricated shoehorn, and the shoehorn glistened? Parson's noses cannot be pirates. Indeede, they may not be pirates.
ok here goes...
The first line is half good, the first half. try to come up with a more interestng way of saying the rest. Is it important for the Greek to be sitting? If not just say the Greek.. Contemplating-- morality... Why do you put 'issues such as' in there? These are the things you need to eliminate, these terrible unnecessaries. They work for creating a character's personality, but since this is you talking, and your subject is complicated enough as it is, not to mention you're writing poetry, brevity is your friend. ...and what makes it do real... ...such as the sorts of... ...onto-should be 'to'... ...and what makes it so real(how about and it's reality')... Oh well got to go libraries closing. I'll get back to it later tonight. The point is you are learning to crawl, and that's ok. Pay attention to those writers you admire, copy their style for a while, your's will emerge.
Well now, food for thought indeed! First and foremost, this was written as a lyric because that's what I am best at (although I've just written a free verse which I will submit soon for you lot to read). That is why I a) rhyme and b) use 'fillers'. I personally prefer to have a set rhythm and therefore I attempt to fill it to the best degree possible don't know if that makes any sense, but hey). I agree that in some cases the information is unnecessary, however it tends to be that I'm writing this online and think hmm, that doesn't fit-what can I put in? That is part of the reason why it's not wholly useful.
Anyway, thanks for your help-hope to hear from you a bit later-and I'll submit this other one that I'd like you to read.
looking good, can we look forward to a poem on the Moral Philosophy section any time soon?
Yourr poems are too good for me to understand im afraid im not into all this gramatically correct rhythem stuff - all your stuff is good and very well written you would find them in a book of poetry which is why i dont relate to them! X 8 tho
Favorite lines and/or good rythm:
Romancing time for peace of mind before his deadly fall to him so fast It crashed and got itself buried in the distant past He clears his mind and considers this Despite the vicious lure of the coffin's hole Rene Descartes fled with his immortal soul Sadly for him, his arrogance showed through He would not run from the State(,) so he paid his due In the bitter cell from which he would not flee The ghost of Christmas Nevermore popped round/ for a cup of hemlock tea It's much too much, it's far too far, Pretence gave up and screamed Take a side, consider well, you can't sit on the fence Because there(')s no(t) such a thing as normal common sense The choice is yours to face the truth/ here within your head But do you at all believe/ a single word I said?
overall i like this.
Thanks, but in hindsight this poem, and virtually everything I said in the comments, is a monstrous embarassment for me. It wasn't particularly bright, and neither was I :-( I only keep it as a record of how I've improved.
428 view(s)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
