Us government's trick to violate civil liberties - Page 14 - Fandom Forums
Fandom Forums



Go Back   Fandom Forums > Indepth Interests > Debates Section > Conspiracy Theories

Conspiracy Theories Talk about your theories here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-20-2012, 07:51 AM   #196
ACt
Heart Wizard
 
ACt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Halls of Irreverence
Posts: 3,237
Thanks: 5,289
Thanked 18,597 Times in 4,839 Posts
ACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really nice
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Quote:
Originally Posted by almightywood View Post
What a load of shit that is.
An opinion never beats another opinion, only facts do, and the only facts that can disprove it are ones that make it impossible.

...

So quit trying to tell me this lame-ass bs about an opinion disproving an opinion. It's impossible.
So, what you are saying is that opinions are mutually exclusive from facts. Well, I reject that opinion of yours with the simple, oft repeated opinion of mine that opinions are formed when a person takes in information from the world around them (most of it can be taken as facts) and if the opinion is valid, it will have supporting evidence, hold up to scrutiny and at any time can be subjected to modification and mutation when new information/facts appear that conflict with it.

If an opinion does not do these things, it is either a baseless, weak flight of fancy or a religion.

Put that opinion of mine up against yours, I think we can safely say my opinion (on opinions) > your opinion (on opinions).
__________________
I've become
A simple souvenir of someone's kill
And like the sea
I'm constantly changing from calm to ill
Madness fills my heart and soul as if the great divide could swallow me whole
oh, how I'm breaking down
ACt is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ACt For This Useful Post:
kael03 (01-20-2012), Mal (01-20-2012), Miburo (01-20-2012), Numinous (01-20-2012)


Old 01-20-2012, 08:45 AM   #197
Mal
Scotch
 
Mal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,090
Thanks: 12,722
Thanked 10,818 Times in 3,844 Posts
Mal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

By this point I have ceased actually reading this thread, and instead simply thank every red name post.
Mal is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Mal For This Useful Post:
ACt (01-20-2012), kael03 (01-20-2012), Miburo (01-20-2012), Numinous (01-20-2012)
Old 01-20-2012, 10:16 AM   #198
Numinous
Writing speed: snail
 
Numinous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Porto, Portugal
Posts: 4,783
Thanks: 8,386
Thanked 11,563 Times in 3,932 Posts
Numinous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Sorry for double-post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by almightywood View Post
I don't know what thread you have been reading, but I was asked to explain my viewpoint and I did. Explaining a personal viewpoint never requires outside documentation.
Young-Earth Believer: I believe the world is 6000 years old!
Normal Person: What? Why do you believe that if it's so obvious it's much older?
Young-Earth Believer: IT'S MY PERSONAL VIEWPOINT, I DON'T NEED TO PROVE IT WITH OUTSIDE DOCUMENTATION!!!

Quote:
And someone else producing outside documentation (even though it's from the internet and everything on the internet is suspect)
Hey gramps, this kooky Internet business sure is suspect, it's like you can't filter the information or confront two versions of the same information and see which is the more appropriate, it's all suspect!

Which leaves a question unanswered: why the hell are you using the Internet if you don't trust it in the first place?

Quote:
doesn't change anything whatsoever about my viewpoint.
Logic determines your philosophy is completely stupid. You can check logic books and guidelines on the Internet. Oh wait, you don't trust the Internet... oh, I know, a library. They usually have something on the matter. Just go there and educate yourself.

Quote:
So unsupported hogwash is a term that isn't even applicable to the point of this discussion.
Let me guess, the applicable term is "opinion", right? What a wuss.

Quote:
Funny how people keep bringing up this very insignificant point that i have invalidated several times.
These subforums are the only forums on this entire site that have rules that state "no debates here"
And you keep bringing that insignificant point that people keep invalidating several times. You were the one who turned this into the debate because you brought bullocks for ammunition when trying to disprove my refutations. Also the mods can redirect the location of this thread, so instead of pointing out rules that aren't being applied by yourself and might change, why don't you focus on the matter being discussed?

Quote:
I have come up with my philosophy over the last 25 years, not in five minutes unlike EVERY ONE of the responses to it.
Wow, this might be a case of special pleading that needs a category of its own. You think that just because you claim to have a philosophy, others don't have? My philosophy of logic, skepticism and empiricism (which are actual philosophical disciplines, unlike your circular reasoning) pretty much started roughly 17 years ago, when I became an atheist, so it's not like I'm magically skeptical towards you every time you post and the rest of the time I'm not.

Also, 34-25=9... if you started with a philosophy where you can't be wrong because opinions can't be wrong in elementary school, how the hell did you survive middle & high school and college (that is, assuming you did). Or did that component only came into fruition after education? Or maybe you just invented on the fly because that philosophy has no purpose outside saving your ass in debates.

Quote:
I never lay things out completely for anyone ever. (except the disable people that I take care of, they have a good excuse to need it) It's the same concept as giving a man a fish, or teaching him to fish. I put out the gist of it, and let interested parties work more out from there on their own. There's a reason there are so many tales with morals to them: Anything you learn because someone just told it to you ends up getting thrown by the wayside, but the things you figure out on your own stick with you.
Confucius must be rolling on his grave.

Do you even know what's the moral of the fish story? It's not about patronizing people to the answer vs letting them figure out by themselves, it's rather about how worthwhile the help is. Sure giving a fish helps a poor person, but only for a day. Teaching them how to fish helps them for life.

Also, giving away the answer only gets it thrown by the wayside if the person getting it is stupid. Try telling a kid how rainbows are formed with a complete answer and ask them sometime after if they know. I'm sure the kid might flunk on some details but will still comprehend most of it. Don't get me wrong, figuring the answer by yourself is much better, but giving away the answer is NOT a bad thing.

Quote:
I was and never will be trying to convince anyone of anything I have ever stated. I was merely stating what I believe, if you thought I was trying to convince you of it, well that just shows that you don't grasp what I am saying.
Oh, we get what you're saying, it doesn't make it less stupidly contrived.

Quote:
Derderder no opinion ever beats another opinion ever.
Person A has the opinion that liquid water isn't wet. Person B has the opinion that liquid water is wet. They have contradictory opinions, so you think none of them beats the other?

Quote:
Once again, this is my thread, this DISCUSSION is about my words, my definitions are the ONLY ones that apply. Why don't you get with the program?
Way to sound like a whiny little child. "IT'S MAH THREAD, MAH WORD IS CANON!". Bitch, please, you are still defending your ass using a definition of debate that nobody else is using. It does not matter if you were the thread creator or not, you're the one that is not getting what everybody else is saying.

Quote:
Your lack of ability to comprehend words other than in your own words is why you are the biggest piece of shit on these forums.
Projection much?

Quote:
And (since you can't read) I didn't use the word discussion, I used the phrase "a discussion that is not a debate" and no, that never happens in a discussion that is not a debate, because at that point it would be a debate.
O'rly?
Quote:
dis·cus·sion

n.1. Consideration of a subject by a group; an earnest conversation.
2. A formal discourse on a topic; an exposition.
Quote:
de·bate v. de·bat·ed, de·bat·ing, de·bates
1. A discussion involving opposing points; an argument.
2. Deliberation; consideration: passed the motion with little debate.
3. A formal contest of argumentation in which two opposing teams defend and attack a given proposition.
4. Obsolete Conflict; strife.
And, as a bonus, the academic definition of argument.

Quote:
ar·gu·ment n.
2.
a. A course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating truth or falsehood: presented a careful argument for extraterrestrial life.
b. A fact or statement put forth as proof or evidence; a reason: The current low mortgage rates are an argument for buying a house now.
c. A set of statements in which one follows logically as a conclusion from the others.
The moment two opposing points of view surface in a discussion, it becomes a debate, which pretty much happens in very worthwhile discussion. So you expecting to have a discussion that is not a debate is the same as saying "I don't want anyone to have a point of view that conflicts with my own".

Quote:
I didn't say shit about originality, I said diversity.
No, you didn't say neither of them.

Quote:
I like to think about and consider all possibilities and what they entail since you can not come up with new and interesting concepts without stepping outside the standard thought process.
But see the highlighted portions? Let's see the definition of originality:

Quote:
o·rig·i·nal·i·ty . pl. o·rig·i·nal·i·ties
1. The quality of being original.
2. The capacity to act or think independently.
3. Something original.
And of original:

Quote:
o·rig·i·nal
adj.1. Preceding all others in time; first.
2. a. Not derived from something else; fresh and unusual: an original play, not an adaptation.
b. Showing a marked departure from previous practice; new: a truly original approach. See Synonyms at new.

3. Productive of new things or new ideas; inventive: an original mind.
4. Being the source from which a copy, reproduction, or translation is made.
Yeah, you were talking about originality, sir, not diversity.
__________________
My writings and ramblings:

Water of Ocean Darkest Chapters: 1 - 2
Weaver Chapters: 0 - 1 - 2 - 3







Numinous is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Numinous For This Useful Post:
kael03 (01-20-2012), Mal (01-20-2012), Miburo (01-20-2012), Vishnu (01-21-2012)
Old 01-20-2012, 10:17 AM   #199
Numinous
Writing speed: snail
 
Numinous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Porto, Portugal
Posts: 4,783
Thanks: 8,386
Thanked 11,563 Times in 3,932 Posts
Numinous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Quote:
Diversity is much more likely to exist with the less you know.
Pardon? I think that makes no sense whatsoever.

Quote:
If everyone knows the same shit, how fucking diverse could you be.
Another nonsensical statement. Diversity isn't exclusively about what you know, but also about what you (want to) do with it. You can have a couple of twins with the exact same education and they still have different careers. Preferences, aptitude and even resources have as much weigh in diversity of thought as knowledge.

Quote:
Either way I never said anything was dependent upon the extent of your knowledge, so what the fuck are you even talking about you incapable of grasping an idea know-it-all?
@ bolded: Look who's talking.

At the rest, you said that one can't have new, interesting ideas if it sticks with the standard thought process. That is entirely dependent on the extent of knowledge of a person, because they might think they're doing something revolutionary when they aren't.

For example, that recent viral video about hating religion and loving Jesus that everyone loves to copy-paste into their Facebook is nothing but a rehash of tactics used by Christian movements of the 70's (perhaps even earlier), but since the creator of the video was born in 89, it seems he wasn't acquainted with the fact he just copied somebody else and just gave it a new wrapping.

Quote:
I have no idea, you brought them up, therefore you are making a positive claim and I will ask you to produce documentation to support them, or admit you are wrong.
Nice try to shift the burden of proof unto me, but no. You made a positive claim ("I like to think about and consider all possibilities"). Flat Earth, Creationism and fairy farts are considered possibilities. I questioned their potential of creating new, interesting ideas, therefore making it a negative claim. Now YOU, being the one making a positive claim thus having the burden of proof, have to produce documentation to ME, who is refuting said positive claim, to support them or admit you are wrong.

Quote:
Who gives a fuck if you throw the keys out? it's archived and is therefore not readily accessible, you fucking dumbshit!
For someone who censured me for having "attitude", you don't hold back your tongue, do you?! And what's with this "it's not readily accessible" bullshit? It's as if you're saying people can't think for a second to recollect their thoughts. Yet another analogy fail by you, it seems.

Quote:
You won't reconsider it when related topics come up, only the topic itself. One day, when you get out into the real world instead of the twisted inane version of reality that exists in these forums, you may begin to grasp that you don't know everything, until then, don't bother talking to me again until you are ready to admit you are an idiot. Because you will have nothing worthwhile to say until then.
I'm not an idiot, so why would I admit that?

I know don't know everything, but I know that I know more than some people (that, by the looks of it, includes you) and I know that I know less than some other people. The only way I'd be an idiot would be if most of what I know wasn't valid, which fortunately isn't true because I've challenged my knowledge and most of it was validated and what wasn't was modified/updated to be validated.

The same I can't say about you and your silly philosophy, though.

Quote:
Everytime I have ever been wrong on this forum I have admitted it. Something that has happened only rarely.
And I'm Santa. Want to share more lies?

Quote:
Everytime you all have claimed I was wrong without actually addressing what I was saying, I told you to shove it.
The thing, we addressed it every time. Sometimes we just used mockery, sarcasm and ridicule, something you don't seem to comprehend the intention of.

Quote:
No and wrong have the POTENTIAL to be good tools, but their overuse makes them purely bad, much like hdl cholesterol.
By god, you're stupid as fuck.

My father once told me a story that illustrates my point: a friend of his that happened to be filthy rich wanted to be that kind of parent that never says no. He had two kids and they every time they wanted something, he gave them. Then they went to a cruise and the kids begged him to buy the cruise ship and he said no, because he pretty much couldn't keep it. The kids almost committed suicide over it.

Moral of the story: it wasn't the fact he said "no" that drove them into a self-destructive act, it was the fact he said "yes" too many times. Yes, saying No and Wrong are very bad when taken into exaggeration, but so are Yes and Right. You have to acknowledge both sides of the spectrum are vital and create a balance between them.

Quote:
Why the fuck should I bother even telling you?
Because I can't find a definition AT ALL? Google says "do you mean ideias?", all the online dictionary I consult says it isn't defined, the only thing I can do is deconstruct the word to see if it has any roots that might hint to its meaning. And since you said:

Quote:
You would just come up with your own definition for it and ignore it anyway.
Well, if I've the fame of such (even if it's false, since I actually link you the damn definition that people other than you use), might be better take it as it comes.

Id means "it" in Latin and gias can come from geas ("curse" in Gaelic). So considering the etymology, perhaps it means "cursed one" (if you convert the "it" into something that works as a proper definition). Well, actually like that, can I use it in the future?

And I see you avoided when I mentioned we have fictions of our own. I was expecting you to say something on the matter, considering what you said previously about originality. Oh wait, it was diversity...
__________________
My writings and ramblings:

Water of Ocean Darkest Chapters: 1 - 2
Weaver Chapters: 0 - 1 - 2 - 3







Numinous is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Numinous For This Useful Post:
kael03 (01-20-2012), Mal (01-20-2012), Miburo (01-20-2012), Vishnu (01-21-2012)
Old 01-20-2012, 10:42 AM   #200
ACt
Heart Wizard
 
ACt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Halls of Irreverence
Posts: 3,237
Thanks: 5,289
Thanked 18,597 Times in 4,839 Posts
ACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really nice
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mal View Post
By this point I have ceased actually reading this thread, and instead simply thank every red name post.
Yeah, probably best. I was going to continue to schoolyard taunts, but the latest "opinion piece" by him was just to hilarious not to go ahead and spend the minute to rewrite once more the most simplistic argument that no one who holds the "it's my opinion and you can't prove me wrong" has never been able to counter with anything more than "it's my opinion and i refuse to believe i am wrong" just to see if the answer is any different.

At this point, it is just baiting to see how far down the path we can lead the poor fellow. Entertaining, but a bit sad. I promise to use "My dad can beat your dad" next time.
__________________
I've become
A simple souvenir of someone's kill
And like the sea
I'm constantly changing from calm to ill
Madness fills my heart and soul as if the great divide could swallow me whole
oh, how I'm breaking down
ACt is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ACt For This Useful Post:
kael03 (01-20-2012), Mal (01-20-2012), Miburo (01-20-2012), Numinous (01-20-2012)
Old 01-20-2012, 05:24 PM   #201
almightywood
Missing-Nin
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 275
Thanks: 37
Thanked 97 Times in 90 Posts
almightywood is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Quote:
Originally Posted by Numinous View Post
Also, 34-25=9... if you started with a philosophy where you can't be wrong because opinions can't be wrong in elementary school, how the hell did you survive middle & high school and college (that is, assuming you did). Or did that component only came into fruition after education? Or maybe you just invented on the fly because that philosophy has no purpose outside saving your ass in debates.
Whatever man, I was suicidal from the ages of 8-12 because death and the lack of a meaning to life were too much for me to cope with at that age. Not that I should really have to explain it to the most uncomprehending son of a bitch I have ever met.

Quote:
Do you even know what's the moral of the fish story? It's not about patronizing people to the answer vs letting them figure out by themselves, it's rather about how worthwhile the help is. Sure giving a fish helps a poor person, but only for a day. Teaching them how to fish helps them for life.
Right, and I don't give a fuck if you begin to understand the deeper meanings behind what I said, as long as you actually understand what it is I DID say.

Quote:
Also, giving away the answer only gets it thrown by the wayside if the person getting it is stupid. Try telling a kid how rainbows are formed with a complete answer and ask them sometime after if they know. I'm sure the kid might flunk on some details but will still comprehend most of it. Don't get me wrong, figuring the answer by yourself is much better, but giving away the answer is NOT a bad thing.
Bullshit, no matter what, an answer you came up with on your own will stick with you longer than an answer that someone else told you.

Quote:
Oh, we get what you're saying, it doesn't make it less stupidly contrived.
The hell you do, if you understood what I was saying, I never would have bothered to continue the conversation at all.

Quote:
Person A has the opinion that liquid water isn't wet. Person B has the opinion that liquid water is wet. They have contradictory opinions, so you think none of them beats the other?
There you go confusing facts and opinions again.

Quote:
Way to sound like a whiny little child. "IT'S MAH THREAD, MAH WORD IS CANON!". Bitch, please, you are still defending your ass using a definition of debate that nobody else is using. It does not matter if you were the thread creator or not, you're the one that is not getting what everybody else is saying.

Projection much?

O'rly?dis·cus·sion

n.1. Consideration of a subject by a group; an earnest conversation.
2. A formal discourse on a topic; an exposition.
Quote:
de·bate v. de·bat·ed, de·bat·ing, de·bates
1. A discussion involving opposing points; an argument.
2. Deliberation; consideration: passed the motion with little debate.
3. A formal contest of argumentation in which two opposing teams defend and attack a given proposition.
4. Obsolete Conflict; strife.
And, as a bonus, the academic definition of argument.

Quote:
ar·gu·ment n.
2.
a. A course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating truth or falsehood: presented a careful argument for extraterrestrial life.
b. A fact or statement put forth as proof or evidence; a reason: The current low mortgage rates are an argument for buying a house now.
c. A set of statements in which one follows logically as a conclusion from the others.
Interesting, I notice the word OPPOSING is in ALL those possible definitions of debate which use the word discussion. As for argument: demonstrating truth or falsehood, opposing teams. Again exactly the kind of conversation I find extremely dull and completely unenlightening so avoid like the plague. Which PERFECTLY FITS with my whole problem with you trying to start a DEBATE with me when all I want is a discussion that is not a debate. So now by virtue of your proof, whether by your definition or mine, all I want is a discussion, not a debate. While a debate may be a discussion, my statement precludes a debate from being eligible for discussion as it was used per your definitions and mine.

Quote:
The moment two opposing points of view surface in a discussion, it becomes a debate, which pretty much happens in very worthwhile discussion. So you expecting to have a discussion that is not a debate is the same as saying "I don't want anyone to have a point of view that conflicts with my own".
I don't want to be any part of any discussion that involves who or what is right and wrong (in the logical sense) ever. The more you try and turn it into that kind of discussion, the less and less clear I will become since avoiding that kind of discussion is my life's goal. Telling someone right and wrong (in any sense) is the same as telling someone what to believe and I find that to be the biggest wrong any man can ever do to another. If you hurt me physically, I heal, if you fuck my stuff up, there's a lot of stuff out there, if you try and control my thinking, gtfo here you fucking Nazi. If you really want to have an intelligent discussion with me about anything ever, it will only ever occur when you discuss with me in the fashion that I prefer. If not, well then both of us are just here to troll.
Quote:
Nice try to shift the burden of proof unto me, but no. You made a positive claim ("I like to think about and consider all possibilities"). Flat Earth, Creationism and fairy farts are considered possibilities. I questioned their potential of creating new, interesting ideas, therefore making it a negative claim. Now YOU, being the one making a positive claim thus having the burden of proof, have to produce documentation to ME, who is refuting said positive claim, to support them or admit you are wrong.
Whatever you are the one that brought them up so by your way of thinking (from my first encounter with you) claiming that something is possible means that you are claiming it is so. I claimed I like to consider all POSSIBILITIES. Flat earth theory has been proved IMPOSSIBLE, so I don't even have to consider it. To uphold that claim I have to think about fairy farts and creationism for five seconds ..... done. Ok, now uphold yours, egomaniac: prove to me they are all real.

Quote:
For someone who censured me for having "attitude", you don't hold back your tongue, do you?! And what's with this "it's not readily accessible" bullshit? It's as if you're saying people can't think for a second to recollect their thoughts. Yet another analogy fail by you, it seems.
I have already deemed a few of you as nothing but attitude and trolling, and I have no problem giving attitude to those types of people.
Whatever man, you can't tell me that things that you feel are resolved are farther from the top of your mind than things that you feel aren't. The fact that they are farther from the top of your mind means that you are less likely to ever end up knowing as much as if you hadn't archived them. since the closer it is to the top of your mind the more tenuous a relation it will pop into mind for.

Quote:
And I'm Santa. Want to share more lies?
The only people I ever lie to are cops and employers. Telling the truth to anyone else can't fuck up my lifestyle so I always do.


The rest of your posts was just nonsense addressing your interpretations of my words instead of my words themselves so is not worth addressing.

I could care less if your opinion is pc as long as you present it in a pc fashion, you are the exact opposite. The facts that you are insistent upon your viewpoint being better than mine, and that I refuse to back mine up doesn't make you smarter than me, it just makes you more of an asshole.

Last edited by almightywood; 01-20-2012 at 07:55 PM.
almightywood is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to almightywood For This Useful Post:
matta (01-23-2012)
Old 01-20-2012, 08:38 PM   #202
Numinous
Writing speed: snail
 
Numinous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Porto, Portugal
Posts: 4,783
Thanks: 8,386
Thanked 11,563 Times in 3,932 Posts
Numinous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Quote:
Originally Posted by almightywood View Post
Whatever man, I was suicidal from the ages of 8-12 because death and the lack of a meaning to life were too much for me to cope with at that age. Not that I should really have to explain it to the most uncomprehending son of a bitch I have ever met.
Actually you had to because it's a bizarre concept to come up with that kind of philosophy while still getting the bulk of education, seems kind of conflicting. And even with the angst you mentioned, it doesn't quite follow logically. Maybe there's some emotional link that I'm missing or there's more to your philosophy than what you told.

Nihilist here, btw.

Quote:
Right, and I don't give a fuck if you begin to understand the deeper meanings behind what I said, as long as you actually understand what it is I DID say.
I understood perfectly what you said in English, I don't know about if you were using another language that has the same words, grammar and syntax as English but isn't English. In that case, no.

Seriously, this "if only you knew what I'm REALLY saying" bullshit again? Everybody comprehends you, you just don't like what you read and try to evade it.

Quote:
Bullshit, no matter what, an answer you came up with on your own will stick with you longer than an answer that someone else told you.
And I agreed with you on that part of an earned answer being better than a given one, I just don't agree with your true bullshit about given answers meaning nothing.

Quote:
The hell you do, if you understood what I was saying, I never would have bothered to continue the conversation at all.
/facepalm

Such intellectual dishonesty. I'm not like those dumb narutards you're used to debate on Mangafox or shitty forums like that, I see clearly what you're saying. If somehow I'm not addressing what you really mean for some silly reason, that's YOUR fault for not communicating your thoughts clearly. So, either admit you're just BS'ing about that shit or clarify me (and I mean clarify, not backpedaling like you love to mix it with).

Quote:
There you go confusing facts and opinions again.
Wow, you're stupid to say that when you're the one making the confusion.

Fact: liquid water is wet.

Opinion: thinking that liquid water is or isn't wet.

See how opinions are based on facts, only some are more accurate than others? That's what everybody is trying to tell you, but you just put your hands in your ears and go "la la la, opinions can't be wrong, la la la!"

I just made it annoyingly easier to see if it entered that god-damned thick skull of yours, but it still flied way over your head.

Quote:
Interesting, I notice the word OPPOSING is in ALL those possible definitions of discussion which could also mean a debate. As for argument: demonstrating truth or falsehood, opposing teams. Again exactly the kind of conversation I find extremely dull and completely unenlightening so avoid like the plague.
So what you find extremely exciting and completely enlightening, a discussion where everybody agrees with each other? Please, you're just a pussy who can't handle a debate because of lack of proper argumentation skills.

Quote:
Which PERFECTLY FITS with my whole problem with you trying to start a DEBATE with me when all I want is a discussion that is not a debate. So now by virtue of your proof, whether by your definition or mine, all I want is a discussion that is not a debate.
If you want that truly dull type of discussion, be my guest. I pretty much most people here won't give a shit if you're disabling the possibility of refuting your points (even in the shocking chance of you actually posting something we all agree on).

Quote:
I don't want to be any part of any discussion that involves who or what is right and wrong ever. The more you try and turn it into that kind of discussion, the less and less clear I will become since avoiding that kind of discussion is my life's goal.
Wow, that's just boring and pussy-like. What if Obama suddenly has a flu of launching national polls about gay marriage and adoption, induced abortion, euthanasia, legalizing marijuana and makes the results law nationwide? Are you seriously telling me you'll be avoiding all that and give up your right to vote? The only way you'd avoid the debates would be if you closed yourself in the house, shut off the TV and Internet, grab your year-long supplies and wait for it to go away.

Or maybe you should, you know, grow a pair and deba... err-discuss like a man.

Quote:
If you really want to have an intelligent discussion with me about anything ever, it will only ever occur when you discuss with me in the fashion that I prefer. If not, well then both of us are just here to troll.
And who the fuck are you to set the rules of a discussion between us? Either of us are biased on terms of rules by participating in the discussion itself, so it's obvious I won't accept your rules as you won't accept mine.

Now stop being a pussy and debate with the rules the moderators seem fit.

Quote:
Whatever you are the one that brought them up so by your way of thinking (from my first encounter with you) that means that you are claiming they are so.
As you are. That makes the nature of them mute to the statement. So I'm still making a negative claim ("I do not consider Flat Earth Theory, Creationism and fairy farts as valid possibilities") while you are still making a positive claim ("I consider all possibilities to be valid").

Quote:
I claimed I like to consider all possibilities. To uphold that claim I have to think about it for five seconds ..... done. Ok, now uphold yours egomaniac.
... done? How about actually typing what you thought about the new, interesting ideas that come from those possibilities, in other words, the fucking proof I've been asking for?

Quote:
I have already deemed a few of you as nothing but attitude and trolling, and I have no problem giving attitude to those types of people.
The very fact you think we're trolling says you're not getting us in the first place. Mal pretty much gave up on you and ACt is morbidly curious about what ends do your reasoning goes to.

Quote:
Whatever man, you can't tell me that things that you feel are resolved are farther from the top of your mind than things that you feel aren't. The fact that they are farther from the top of your mind means that you are less likely to ever end up knowing as much as if you hadn't archived them.
Your analogy of a working mind really fails because what you described only really makes sense when people stop acknowledging new information. Other than that, this whole quote is a big pile of nothing.

Quote:
The only people I ever lie to are cops and employers. Telling the truth to anyone else can't fuck up my lifestyle so I always do.
So you lie to people you shouldn't be lying to and telling the truth to everybody else? Was this an attempt to show me your integrity or to baffle me with inanity?

Quote:
The rest of your posts was just nonsense addressing your interpretations of my words instead of my words themselves so is not worth addressing.
Still trying that defense, it seems. Why do you think it still works when I already told you several times it doesn't? I'm not dumb, so don't try to downplay my understanding of your bullshit in a vain try to save your ass. Assume what you do like a man and stop with the shenanigans.

Quote:
I could care less if your opinion is pc as long as you present it in a pc fashion, you are the exact opposite.
As I said, being PC is completely optional in discussion, even in presentation, so I couldn't care less too.

Quote:
The facts that you are insistent upon your viewpoint being better than mine, and that I refuse to back mine up doesn't make you smarter than me, it just makes you more of an asshole.
And the fact that you refuse to back up your viewpoints and you easily crack under proper argumentation doesn't make you a proper debater, it makes you a complete pussy.

So what if you think I'm an asshole? That doesn't invalidate any of my arguments.
__________________
My writings and ramblings:

Water of Ocean Darkest Chapters: 1 - 2
Weaver Chapters: 0 - 1 - 2 - 3







Numinous is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Numinous For This Useful Post:
kael03 (01-20-2012), Mal (01-20-2012), Miburo (01-21-2012)
Old 01-20-2012, 10:27 PM   #203
almightywood
Missing-Nin
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 275
Thanks: 37
Thanked 97 Times in 90 Posts
almightywood is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Quote:
Originally Posted by Numinous View Post
And the fact that you refuse to back up your viewpoints and you easily crack under proper argumentation doesn't make you a proper debater, it makes you a complete pussy.

So what if you think I'm an asshole? That doesn't invalidate any of my arguments.
Proper debater?
How many times have I said that I don't debate?
Your argumentation is invalidated by the fact that you called it argumentation.

That kind of language isn't allowed in the type of discussion you are barging your way into.

I have explained (in different words) that I find it immoral to tell people the answers. I will do no more than what amounts to the sypnosis on the back of the book cover, if you want a full review, read the book yourself and come up with it on your own. My being 100% against ever proclaiming or backing things up in the fashion that you continuously insist I am constantly doing, or demanding that I do is the most concrete thing you will probably ever encounter in your life. The very idea that you could possibly convince me out of it is the most asinine thing I have ever heard in MY life. The only reason I bring something like this up is in the hopes that I might find someone who knows what I am talking about and have a discussion about various differences. I could give a shit less how valid it is for any other motherfucker out there, or if they've ever heard of it. I want an AB conversation more or less and you are the letter F. You fail at grasping my content, that's fine, please exit. I am not here to educate, I am here to be educated about the topic I brought up. You all are adressing related topics in an attempt to disprove it as opposed to discussing what it entails - which is the only thing that has ever or will ever interest me about the topic, and the only thing that will elicit more of a response out of me than adages or parables.
almightywood is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to almightywood For This Useful Post:
matta (01-23-2012)
Old 01-20-2012, 10:47 PM   #204
ACt
Heart Wizard
 
ACt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Halls of Irreverence
Posts: 3,237
Thanks: 5,289
Thanked 18,597 Times in 4,839 Posts
ACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really nice
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Quote:
Originally Posted by almightywood View Post
Whatever man, I was suicidal from the ages of 8-12 because death and the lack of a meaning to life were too much for me to cope with at that age. Not that I should really have to explain it to the most uncomprehending son of a bitch I have ever met.
Whoa, here's an eye-opener. Just tossing out some crazy back story in hopes it proves your point? What were the circumstances? Why does it justify your want to not have anything proven wrong?

In essense, you at one point in your life wanted to kill yourself - what's that have to do with the price of butter?

Even in a discussion, this point makes no sense - were you using it to PROVE a point (something you are against), PROVE us WRONG or INSENSITIVE (something you are against) or WIN a discussion (something you are completely against... because you can't win a discussion because it is is not a debate which is something you don't do)?

When I was 8-12, I got the top marks in my school, was a pretty decent athlete, despite being an uncomprimsing nerd, and really really really enjoyed Inspector Gadget. Which, when you add it all, means that opinions need to justified for validity even in a causual converstaion.

Because honestly, you are having a discussion with a buddy and he says "Black people are genetically inferior to white people and should return to their rightful place as our servants" you aren't going to respond "gee, what a nice opinion you have that I can't even begin to convince you of is wrongheaded, not supported by facts and definitely not evil in any way."

Also, I always wanted a computer book like Penny... now we have them. What a world.
__________________
I've become
A simple souvenir of someone's kill
And like the sea
I'm constantly changing from calm to ill
Madness fills my heart and soul as if the great divide could swallow me whole
oh, how I'm breaking down
ACt is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to ACt For This Useful Post:
Axiom (01-21-2012), kael03 (01-21-2012), Mal (01-20-2012), Miburo (01-21-2012), Numinous (01-21-2012)
Old 01-21-2012, 04:36 AM   #205
almightywood
Missing-Nin
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 275
Thanks: 37
Thanked 97 Times in 90 Posts
almightywood is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Quote:
Originally Posted by ACt View Post
Whoa, here's an eye-opener. Just tossing out some crazy back story in hopes it proves your point? What were the circumstances? Why does it justify your want to not have anything proven wrong?

In essense, you at one point in your life wanted to kill yourself - what's that have to do with the price of butter?

Even in a discussion, this point makes no sense - were you using it to PROVE a point (something you are against), PROVE us WRONG or INSENSITIVE (something you are against) or WIN a discussion (something you are completely against... because you can't win a discussion because it is is not a debate which is something you don't do)?

When I was 8-12, I got the top marks in my school, was a pretty decent athlete, despite being an uncomprimsing nerd, and really really really enjoyed Inspector Gadget. Which, when you add it all, means that opinions need to justified for validity even in a causual converstaion.

Because honestly, you are having a discussion with a buddy and he says "Black people are genetically inferior to white people and should return to their rightful place as our servants" you aren't going to respond "gee, what a nice opinion you have that I can't even begin to convince you of is wrongheaded, not supported by facts and definitely not evil in any way."

Also, I always wanted a computer book like Penny... now we have them. What a world.
The guy scoffs when I tell him how long I have been working on my philosophy stating that I would have been too young to come up with my theory, I merely pointed out why it was that I started it at such a young age.

Absolutely correct, no opinion is evil, only how people choose to apply their opinions to the world is evil (looks scathingly around the crowd of evil people scattered in front of him).
almightywood is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to almightywood For This Useful Post:
matta (01-23-2012)
Old 01-21-2012, 07:54 AM   #206
ACt
Heart Wizard
 
ACt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Halls of Irreverence
Posts: 3,237
Thanks: 5,289
Thanked 18,597 Times in 4,839 Posts
ACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really niceACt is just really nice
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

So you are completely OK with a good friend of yours believing black people are subhuman?

OK, next question: How do you even begin to separate opinions from behaviour and actions? We move through the world acting on various belief systems, facts and laws which we use to make decisions and interact with others. Are you saying that so long as I only think evil things, I can't be wrong?

EDIT: And I've just realized we've suddenly become to equate "evil" with "wrong"... which is wrong. Forget evil (my bad word choice). Do you at all tell your friend that he is wrong, because evidence pretty much points to the opposite of his opinion?
__________________
I've become
A simple souvenir of someone's kill
And like the sea
I'm constantly changing from calm to ill
Madness fills my heart and soul as if the great divide could swallow me whole
oh, how I'm breaking down

Last edited by ACt; 01-21-2012 at 08:18 AM.
ACt is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ACt For This Useful Post:
kael03 (01-21-2012), Mal (01-21-2012), Miburo (01-21-2012), Numinous (01-21-2012)
Old 01-21-2012, 08:11 AM   #207
Numinous
Writing speed: snail
 
Numinous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Porto, Portugal
Posts: 4,783
Thanks: 8,386
Thanked 11,563 Times in 3,932 Posts
Numinous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of lightNuminous is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Quote:
Originally Posted by almightywood View Post
Proper debater?
How many times have I said that I don't debate?
Keep thinking that, it might be true someday.

Quote:
Your argumentation is invalidated by the fact that you called it argumentation.
Definition of argumentation:

Quote:
1. The presentation and elaboration of an argument or arguments.
2. Deductive reasoning in debate.
3. A debate.
I still use proper English, thank you very much. It's not my fault you fail at it.

Quote:
That kind of language isn't allowed in the type of discussion you are barging your way into.
What kind of language, "pussy"? If it's the latter, then consider the following list of synonyms in context:
  • caitiff
  • coward
  • craven
  • dastard
  • faintheart
  • funk
  • gutless
  • poltroon
  • recreant
  • shirk
  • skulker
  • weakling
  • wimp
Is that better? Or do you mean my need to cal you a pussy? If you didn't evade the shit out of my refutations with weak excuses, I wouldn't say anything of the sort in the first place.


Quote:
I have explained (in different words) that I find it immoral to tell people the answers. I will do no more than what amounts to the sypnosis on the back of the book cover, if you want a full review, read the book yourself and come up with it on your own.
I don't see how is it immoral. Is it detrimental to anyone? No, it's just easier, like taking the lift instead of the stairs. Taking the stairs/earning the answer is always better, but there's no harm in taking the lift/getting the answer.

Quote:
Me being 100% against ever proclaiming or backing things up in the fashion that you continuously insist I am constantly doing, or demanding that I do is the most concrete thing you will probably ever encounter in your life from me.
Fixed for accuracy and I agree. The very fact you admit your denial of back your shit up when people ask you to only further poves my point that you're a shameless coward (which would be an oxymoron if I didn't know you).

Quote:
The very idea that you could possibly convince me out of it is the most asinine thing I have ever heard in MY life.
Good, because knowing someone actually having your kind of philosophy is also one of the most asinine things I ever heard in my life. It's just not THE most because I heard a lot of asinine things and I don't really want to evoke them all to see which is the worst.

Quote:
The only reason I bring something like this up is in the hopes that I might find someone who knows what I am talking about and have a discussion about various differences.
In other words, someone who buys your bullshit, because we know what you're talking about and we are discussing the differences of opinion, you're just a wuss who can't admit defeat.

Quote:
I could give a shit less how valid it is for any other motherfucker out there, or if they've ever heard of it. I want an AB conversation more or less and you are the letter F.
No, you want an AA discussion, where everybody agrees with you in some way or the other. An AB discussion is.... A DEBATE!

Quote:
You fail at grasping my content, that's fine, please exit.
I grasp your content, you just don't like that I'm grasping it in its full extent and see how shitty it is. Also, this is an open forum, so who the fuck are you to tell me to leave?

Quote:
I am not here to educate, I am here to be educated about the topic I brought up.
And you were educated on the silly scam thing of the US government, you just pissed your pants and whined all the way through.

Quote:
You all are adressing related topics in an attempt to disprove it as opposed to discussing what it entails - which is the only thing that has ever or will ever interest me about the topic, and the only thing that will elicit more of a response out of me than adages or parables.
There's no projection whatsoever in this quote, amirite? We're all dancing around the issue when you are the one being concrete and denying that is just foolish, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by almightywood View Post
The guy scoffs when I tell him how long I have been working on my philosophy stating that I would have been too young to come up with my theory, I merely pointed out why it was that I started it at such a young age.
The irony of you not getting what I was saying at all, how delicious. I NEVER made an issue out of it because you were young (that would be hypocritical of me, since my personal philosophy is being developed since I was 7), but because your philosophy and education conflict with each other. So either that part of wrong and right developed later, or the kind of education you got has absolutely nothing to do with mine.

Quote:
Absolutely correct, no opinion is evil, only how people choose to apply their opinions to the world is evil (looks scathingly around the crowd of evil people scattered in front of him).
For someone who is "more concerned with ethically right or wrong", you sure don't give a shit about opinions being ethically wrong. You don't seem to realize that the path from opinion to action is rather short for people with opportunity. So when someone has the opinion that everyone in the LGBT community needs to die and gains the power to do so but still hasn't decided to exercise or not such power, you'll only reprehend them after the genocide?

You're so wrapped up in your web of delusion that you don't even realize how brain-dead you're sounding right now.

Edit: I agree, ACt, let's not confuse evil with ethically wrong.
__________________
My writings and ramblings:

Water of Ocean Darkest Chapters: 1 - 2
Weaver Chapters: 0 - 1 - 2 - 3








Last edited by Numinous; 01-21-2012 at 08:38 AM.
Numinous is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Numinous For This Useful Post:
Axiom (01-21-2012), kael03 (01-21-2012), Mal (01-21-2012), Miburo (01-21-2012)
Old 01-21-2012, 01:23 PM   #208
Axiom
[something clever]
 
Axiom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 74
Thanks: 487
Thanked 824 Times in 305 Posts
Axiom is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Quote:
Originally Posted by ACt
Also, I always wanted a computer book like Penny... now we have them. What a world.
Yeah but, Act. It's not like that fancy computer book of yours was concieved of, and constructed by scientists and engineers. After endless bouts of research, experimentation, and trial and error. All while utillizing several formal systems of symbolic logic to solve intense algorithmic processes..... Oh wait.

AW-I'm going to quote something I said in another thread, as I think it applies.

Quote:
Lateral thinking or "divergent" as he said. Is a powerful and often integral part of problem solving process. As it helps imagine new and possibly fruitful roads to travel. However without a logical process to follow after the fact. It is difficult to progress along any of said roads.
The flaw in your philosophy, and its purely lateral thinking is for some reason. You won;t even allow any logical process to exist at all. That every idea should be considered (except ours apparently), to flow freely just as an adjacent possibility, never to be challenged or tested.

Where as the logical thought process and science, allows for the occasional adjacent possibility, more importantly it exist as that structural frame work for which one can capitalize on those fleeting moments of creative clarity and inspiration. No invention, no idea, whether spawning from a purely lateral instance of enlightenment or not. Has ever come to full fruition with out a logical backing. You yourself have formed such a system, a recognizable pattern in this very thread. Though, it is heavily flawed, it exist regardless if you believe it or not.

Do you honestly not see the irony in this? You are literally surrounded by a world built by science. Right now, where ever you're sitting. Every item in that room is the result of extensive critical thinking. You're at a computer, on the internet. The very integral pieces of technology that enable us to have this discussion. Which only exist and can operate due to the formal systems, scientific process, trial and error. Making mistakes. Being wrong, learning from those errors, reapplying the new information to formulate a better, stronger theory.

How you claim to be open to anything, when everything around you was the product of essential functions you compulsorily deny..... It's almost poetic.
Axiom is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Axiom For This Useful Post:
ACt (01-22-2012), Mal (01-21-2012), Miburo (01-21-2012), Numinous (01-21-2012), xxMESTxx (01-21-2012)
Old 01-21-2012, 05:36 PM   #209
Miburo
Deos Fortioribus Adesse
 
Miburo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Valhalla
Posts: 3,546
Thanks: 34,399
Thanked 17,679 Times in 5,440 Posts
Miburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Well said, comrades.

AW, what I don't get is what exactly you're trying to accomplish here. Obviously you're not trying to convince us of anything, since it's evil and wrong to tell other people how to think. And you're obviously not trying to defend yourself against us, since that would involve argumentation and logic. Also evil and wrong and stuff you're totally not cool with.

Honestly, the only intelligent thing you did in this thread was say you're not going to post here anymore. That's really the only rational thing to do when you encounter people that disagree with you and you're adamantly against using logic or argumentation to show your stance to be valid. No one here is going to play by your made-up rules. So bowing out was the way to go and a pretty smart move. Coming back after you said you were leaving, like an unmanly twat...not so much.
Miburo is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Miburo For This Useful Post:
kael03 (01-21-2012), Mal (01-21-2012), Numinous (01-21-2012)
Old 01-21-2012, 06:48 PM   #210
almightywood
Missing-Nin
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 275
Thanks: 37
Thanked 97 Times in 90 Posts
almightywood is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Quote:
Originally Posted by Axiom View Post
Yeah but, Act. It's not like that fancy computer book of yours was concieved of, and constructed by scientists and engineers. After endless bouts of research, experimentation, and trial and error. All while utillizing several formal systems of symbolic logic to solve intense algorithmic processes..... Oh wait.

AW-I'm going to quote something I said in another thread, as I think it applies.



The flaw in your philosophy, and its purely lateral thinking is for some reason. You won;t even allow any logical process to exist at all. That every idea should be considered (except ours apparently), to flow freely just as an adjacent possibility, never to be challenged or tested.

Where as the logical thought process and science, allows for the occasional adjacent possibility, more importantly it exist as that structural frame work for which one can capitalize on those fleeting moments of creative clarity and inspiration. No invention, no idea, whether spawning from a purely lateral instance of enlightenment or not. Has ever come to full fruition with out a logical backing. You yourself have formed such a system, a recognizable pattern in this very thread. Though, it is heavily flawed, it exist regardless if you believe it or not.

Do you honestly not see the irony in this? You are literally surrounded by a world built by science. Right now, where ever you're sitting. Every item in that room is the result of extensive critical thinking. You're at a computer, on the internet. The very integral pieces of technology that enable us to have this discussion. Which only exist and can operate due to the formal systems, scientific process, trial and error. Making mistakes. Being wrong, learning from those errors, reapplying the new information to formulate a better, stronger theory.

How you claim to be open to anything, when everything around you was the product of essential functions you compulsorily deny..... It's almost poetic.
This is not at all the case.
I do these things on my own, inside my head and never reveal it to anyone else ever, unless it is required to reach a goal I and other people are working towards together.

I find it moralistically reprehensible to have a discussion of that sort, much like I don't watch porn, and leave the room when people begin to talk about their sexual exploits.

My thought processes (about right and wrong) are private, I don't share them in public (barring necessity or extreme irritation). I think that other people's should be private too, so I ignore them (unless the person is being offensive in their presentation, in which case I proceed to attempt to correct their attitude towards me without ever truly addressing the untouchable material they are discussing.) Talking about right and wrong with other people just causes arguments and keeps anything actually important from being discovered because it always devolves into petty squabbles. I have no problem whatsoever reaching conclusions about such in my head and do so regularly. I attempt not to apply them towards other people and only apply them towards myself, but when people come along and give me shit about my behavior that is based on my morals, it becomes hard.



@Numinous
No, it's an AB conversation, I want to have a conversation with someone who's viewpoint is CLOSE to mine. You all are starting from the other end of the spectrum.

A pussy is someone who does/doesn't do something because they are afraid. My viewpoint and my responses to you are not based in fear in any way shape or form. They are based on desire, morals, and despite (because I find your words despicable), so yet another word you all insist on that has nothing to do with anything at hand.

The type of language that is not allowed: Debate, Argumentation
Not only is the language not allowed, the concepts behind them aren't either.

Yet another inapplicable line of reasoning: It doesn't matter how short the path from thought to action is. Someone saying that they have an opinion doesn't mean that they actually do.
Even if they do, unless they do choose to act on it, it would be ethically wrong for me to do anything whatsoever to them about it. If you disagree with someone's ideas, prove them wrong through your own actions, not with words. Debating about it is pointless, it will just cost you the chance to change their mind as well as the friend.

If you truly think that thoughts are as evil as actions, well then if you have ever (even in a flight of fancy) ever considered how you might kill someone (with your attitude, I'd be amazed if you hadn't), then you are guilty of murder, get ready to go to prison for life.

Either way to try and change or censor someone's thoughts outside of a predetermined set of rules set up specifically for that purpose is censoring their freedom, and is tantamount to mental kidnapping.


@Miburo
I didn't come back to talk to any of you gaggle of trolls tbh, I came back to kick you all out of my thread lol.

I know you and the rest of the troll patrol will never agree with me, and I could care less. I am doing this for all the other people who are a part of this community that are afraid to post due to you all's lack of respect. I came here to check on whether a new manga was out, I had 20 messages from people telling me how full of shit you all are, and not to bother posting here. In other words I had messages from 4-5 times the amount of you that have told me I was wrong stating that you guys are always in the wrong. Just because you all run in a pack doesn't make what you have to say more valid than what other people have to say. Just because you are members of this forum doesn't mean we have to discuss anything at all with each other. I came back here to carry on despite you all, not in spite of you all. The proof I found that there are more people who disagree with you all's style of discussion in this community than do agree with it (even though you all have forced them into hiding further proving what I believed all along in that your approach is quite horrendous and unproductive) was enough for me to start back up.

I'd say it's pretty damn unmanly to gang up on someone, something you all seem to take great delight in doing quite regularly, hmmm.... who's a hypocrite now?

Last edited by almightywood; 01-21-2012 at 07:03 PM.
almightywood is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to almightywood For This Useful Post:
matta (01-23-2012)
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.