h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Typolifi: Thanks! Now we must wait for E, T and Eae!

Purple Frog: No! we must first wait for the spectators...

*E enters through the cupboard on the left of the armchair. A fire is cracling on the hearth and a good many old books are having a little chat on the shelf. There is a sneeking out through the door at the far end and you can FEEL Aristotle wishing he was alive and kicking...*

E: Hallo! Typo! Purple Frogger! Nice place for an metaphysical discussion! Reminds me a little of Spitzweg´s Bookworm! I told the other two to come, but I don´t know when they´ll make it.

*E has a look around and decides to sit himself on the red brockat chaise longue. You can see Engländer trying to adapt an Oscar Wilde mode, but you never realy know if he´ll succeed...*

*E´s alter Ego[EaE] comes stroling over an antic Marketplace. He is waring his (Thanks to the donation of the Mushome) gooblue toga. The time is just before noon. Thinking of nothing in perticular (moral beeing nothing particularly important to him) he strides to the tavern "Taverna Epikuriensis", where he orders a light wine and some cheese. As he has to go to the you know where to do you know what a change comes about the place and a comes in through a door he hasn´t seen before*

[Enter EaE]

*Same room as in the above posting*

Oh, Engländer, you dumb old binsh*t! You realy got me there! Sending me into the depths of stoic thought and letting me come out in this place! I just want to tell you, that I am in no mood for a lot of rubish about the ontology of your friend Hanses Mum, I tell you. Talk something sensible if you have to...

*EaE sits himself on a small statue next to the fireplace and plays at Rodins "Thinker"...*

*T takes the shortcut. He comes in through the regular door. No dilly dallying about. Just pure rationalism. I think, therefore I feel guilty, like all the postWW2 people cherishing the schooleducation of the 70ies and 80ies *

T: So! Here I äm, Jawohl, änd I äm very willing to bicker äbout änything you like. Engländer my old Tommy, the first thing I have to ask you is to go änd get bäck your old password für your homepäge! You just kind of Took over my space änd now I häve to cope with you täking the leed in our combined nick! Thät is a catastrophe! JA!

*T goes and looks into the fridge for a nice cool Weißbier!*

::makes a spectacle of herself::

::joins in the spectacular::

* lurks to see if Dragonfly will let Princess Sugarfoot come here *

::Royal Trumpets Blare to announce the arrival of the Royal Fishy Princess Sugarfoot::

* he he he... *

Hah! I knew that true Philosophy is more of a party! And well, isn´t it an honour to be able to utter ones ontological perceptions under the ears of such "royal highness as thyselves?"

INDEED!!!

::delicately sets the Royal Fishbowl on a freshly polished table::

::Waits royally for something exciting to happen::

Ladies, Your royal highness, Gentlemen!

Let me start by pointing out, that the past philosophies are on the main part male dominated. The fact, that most men seem to think there is a necessity for a rational and logical concept of an ontology, has led most females to neglecting typical feminine aproaches to their ontology. No acount has been made, that intuition may not be prooven in the same way as male concepts of the body and soul.

Most men only seem to know the functions of their lower half anyway, but that doesn´t seem to leed to any apropriate conclusions in any of their philosophical writing. Ask Plato if his parabel of the cave (sorry, it´s "Höhlengleichnis" in German, and I am not yet as fit in talking Philosophy in english) was actually linked to his personal machismo?

E-Lizzy, thät is ä very typical wäy of your´s to try änd impress your femäle readers. You, äs ä part of our entity mäy häve ä certäin femäle quolity, but you still häve to äcnoledge, thät your are träpped inside ä mäle body. Now don´t get me wrong *Pretenders start playing in the background* The three oh us are verry häppy of the intuitious input thät you give, but thät is not enough to form ä whole new Ontology...

Tschörmen, why do you say this, TRAPPED IN A MALE BODY? Just because of [would be moderated] you cannot say, there isn´t a whole world of ontological posibilities if you take female socio-psychological facts about the lives of women here? The whole concept of birth, firtility-cults in the beginning of cultural development, the matriarchic structuers of the past - all blown away by some greek males who didn´t evan stop with whatever they wanted, evan if children were concerned?

It´s like you wanted to say, 'because Napoleon is history you are not allowed to think he did a lot of b******t.' But he DID. (And he was male, and I bet he never listend to anything female inside himself~~~)

E: Oh , I would never say that there isn´t a chance that what you said was right, but you know that the question if we are is a matter of a number of facts: It might be, that you percieve yourself as some inner entitiy of the RL Engländer(T EaE and EL), but aren´´t we all just his fiction, taking our ways in ASCII across the proxys of the world?

...Ontology!??

::blinks royally::

Your highness, Archangeless D,

Let me just tell you that an Ontology is the subject of Philosphie that centers it´s thinking about "being" as such. There are a number of Ontologies about, so what I am basicly trying to do is just "BE in this cave" (to quote Mr. Beeblebrox from the Secondary Phase of the HHGTTG)

OH. Thank you....