You people

Post Reply New Topic

Again, you are incorrect. I laugh at myself all of the time actually. But again you assume, in typical Shiggily fashion, that if someone doesn't get your "jokes" (although I don't know in what universe you could REALLY consider what you said to be a 'joke'), or disagrees or doesn't understand your (cold, logical) point of view, that it points to some sort of flaw in that person. Really all it boils down to, is some people (and I know for fact that i'm not the only one) find your style of "debate" and "humour" to be particularly abrasive. Just because people don't think this same as you doesn't mean there is something wrong with them. On the contrary, if everyone was the same as you and thought the same as you, the world would be a cold and scary place

IMO, starting a thread like this in the first place is kind of like openly inviting people to ridicule you, so if it is indeed these kinds of conversations you are trying to avoid, my advice to you would be to stick to your debate threads!

Maybe I missunderstood this, and if not, I don't think exactly being right or wrong to have something to do with how hard winning an argument would be, I mean, someone who wins an argument could be wrong, and the opponent who could be right may lack debating skills which that would make him lose the argument and give up, for the fact that the other is better at it, in this case, who is right and who is wrong would not be the factor.

You can also write a bunch of words and chop and paste until the other person just gives up reading your pontifical argument.
It may seem like you won the argument because you bored everyone off the thread.

no just wondering why the topic was brought up. It seemed rather random.

so you keep insisting. yet my world is neither cold nor scary to the people in it.... so it must be an issue of perception.

meh, existing is inviting people to ridicule you if ridicule is their way of dealing with people.

You sicken me with your turtle porn.

it does produce a rather disturbing mental picture. But maybe not as disturbing as Japanese tentacle porn.

Not exactly, but the issue is that in the long-run, if debating skills are necessary, then people develop them, and also if people are exposed as using bad logic or premises, their argument becomes more difficult. There is a limit on how much make-up you can put on a pig. I mean, I do recognize that wrong people win arguments, however, it also must be recognized that who is "wrong" is often a very very difficult thing to determine in real discussions.

Disgraceful!!

I don't know anything about Japanese tentacle porn is there no limit to your depravity.

One might even say that she is totally depraved.

Her favorite restaurant

I know it's hard to interpret inflection online, but most of the cold scary world understood that this was a cold scary joke. I myself grappled with indecision once, but I now know which way is forward thinking. One thing I've learned is never to look for an emotional handout. Nurturing doesn't come around quite so often to anyone who really needs it. I think by now everyone on here has to know that they set themselves up for dramatic disappointment in the argument department by getting over emotional about silly postings.

I think people do need a little nurturing... just not in the form of being allowed to throw fits, call names, etc. Healthy nurturing... which I think you can do without allowing emotion to cloud over your reasoning to the point that you no longer care about the truth (and whether or not you believe the truth) you merely care about being right. I think that's why I am always on the fence. I am always open to the other side of an argument when it is presented intelligently because I might be wrong. And I want to hear what people who think I am wrong actually believe. But not in a way that it seems like they believe what they want dogmatically. It is very important to me that they present it rationally so that I can consider the facts (and not the driving emotions that one person might experience, but would be different for me). Then I can make my decisions, either by altering my views or by explaining why I disagree.

I guess I am an adherent to the whole "gentleman's discussion" approach. where everyone sits down and discusses things quietly and calmly and while they might be passionate about what they believe, it is never to the point that they are overcome. I think discussions should transcend who is right and wrong. Mostly because much of what we believe is not a case of right or wrong but of interpretation and opinion derived from facts we encounter. Who is to insist that your interpretation must be wrong and mine must be right. In reality it is more likely that we are both partially right and partially wrong, and the truth is somewhere in between both sides.

Which is why I tend to pick a little on both sides. To find that spot in the middle that maximizes reliability, effectiveness, and "correctness" while minimizing flaws, fallacies, and "incorrectness". In almost every argument both sides have compelling arguments, I fail to see why the optimal belief isn't a combination of the two arguments... since most arguments only have small aspects that are mutually exclusive.

Take abortion for an example. Anti-abortion wants no abortion for interesting reasons, and Pro-abortion wants abortion for interesting reasons. The only mutually exclusive aspect is in the actual act of abortion (allowing it or not). So I think an optimal solution is to examine the facts and institute regulated abortion with mandatory counseling to prevent rash decision-making that could lead to depression or repeat abortions by teenagers. Decision-making like this at least considers both sides and their arguments... instead of dismissing them entirely because you feel you are right 100% therefore they must be wrong 100%. Other people have some good and valid views, they should be allowed to express those views and have them seriously considered. You never know... you might be the one who is wrong and they could be the one who is right. If you are a true seeker of the truth you will never know unless you listen to them. And I don't mean pay them lip service and the beat them with the proverbial mallet of your awesome truth or attack them like the aforementioned nuclear badger. I mean actually listen to them.

Haha, no one will ever take me seriously here again. Seriously though, the boy turtle bonks her with his head when he wants sex- how is that not funny?

You mean humans are supposed to do it differently? No wonder I've had problems!