Fandom Forums - View Single Post - Us government's trick to violate civil liberties
View Single Post
Old 02-09-2012, 11:44 AM   #550
Demi-God's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,327
Thanks: 2,762
Thanked 6,491 Times in 2,312 Posts
Demi-God is a name known to allDemi-God is a name known to allDemi-God is a name known to allDemi-God is a name known to allDemi-God is a name known to allDemi-God is a name known to allDemi-God is a name known to allDemi-God is a name known to allDemi-God is a name known to allDemi-God is a name known to all
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Originally Posted by almightywood View Post
I didn't necessarily want people who agreed with me, I more or less wanted people who knew what I was talking about. I don't care to have to find proof that I don't consider proof to justify my wanting to find knowledgeable people to discuss with. I didn't really wish to become anything approaching anyone's teacher, the most I want to do about anything is introduce someone to the most basic part of a concept. While I realize that the likelihood that someone will come along and begin to discuss in the fashion that I desire is minimal at this point, I still am standing my ground because I have integrity.
That doesn't show integrity. That shows stubbornness and an inability to adapt to a situation when faced with a hardship that you're not suited to.

We would all love to have discussions with people who know exactly what we're talking about but more often than not that's not the case. Then we have to explain to them and offer the evidence or reasoning as to why. If you're not willing to do that then it would have shown more integrity for you to say "I'm sorry guys, this isn't what I wanted, I'll be leaving now."

I understand that a lot of people like to debate here, but I do not like to debate, I would prefer not to. I dislike the idea that since there is only one right answer for most things, we eliminate all but the most likely possibility, thereby making the process of debating pure tedium for me. I believe that taking shelter inside probability is the same thing as letting everyone else live your life for you, it's the dumbest thing you can do. I only have one life, I want to experience as much of what it has to offer as possible, and that'll never happen just following the herd.
So let me get this right, you came into a forum that has a general like for debating? Then decided to go against those unwritten rules and create your own rules for a conversation and expect people to stick to them?

They don't always eliminate all but the most likely possibility, they eliminate implausible things that don't have a shred of evidence backing them up and/or a logical line of reasoning behind it (evidence and reasoning are coming up a lot here).

You do have one life to live and in this life you can't always explore every single possibility unless there's a valid reason for doing so and trial and error has shown that that's a pretty good method for working things out. People aren't taking shelter inside probability, they're using it as a proven method. If all of the most likely possibilities end up being wrong then the others are considered, but usually that's not the case.

We also want to experience life as much as we can, and that's why we talk about our ideas and explore them even if it means viewing other peoples opinions when they offer us a valid reason to do so.

I realize the rules aren't being enforced, and have adapted. I am merely using them as an indicator of exactly how against debating I am.
Then you're honestly in the wrong place mate, it would be best to perhaps not reply any more in this thread and back away because this won't stop anytime soon. If you're so against debating then that would be the smartest thing to do in this situation.
Demi-God is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Demi-God For This Useful Post:
ACt (02-09-2012), ask me anything (02-09-2012), kael03 (02-09-2012), Mal (02-09-2012), Miburo (02-09-2012), xxMESTxx (02-09-2012)