I could try, you know. I could break down that post of yours paragraph-by-paragraph. Analyse it. Point out the numerous flaws, logical fallacies, inconcistencies.
But what fucking use would it be?
I would only log on again tomorrow morning, to find another one of your poorly worded, intellectually flawed posts. I would find that post not because you actually had something NEW to point out, or because I was actually proven wrong: I would find another one of those posts simply because, well, you really, really dig all the attention. Poking the bear, I suppose.
So let’s not go down that path. I don’t have the time, and you clearly don’t have the intellectual capabilities. I would end up no further than I am now, and you would end up with at least a severe headache, and possibly permanent brain damage. That is, in addition to whatever’s wrong with your brain already.
But I gotta hand it to you. Constructing a post like that, and then finishing it by saying “Unless someone is actually playing semantic games, making this accusation is just as much an admission of defeat as calling them a Nazi” really puts you in the running for this years “How Fucking Thick Can You Be?”-award.
Disagreeing with someone who knows more about the situation than you do but blindly believeing that you are right, contrary to all the evidence put against you is “offensive”.
Hamadryad: Chill the fuck out. if you have beef with someone, please dont start it on a thread that has nothing to do with the problem. Take it to email or something.
There ya go, a classic The Ryan observation.
In that thread you jumped to an incredibly insensitive and damn offensive initial conclusion based on no experience of the environment or culture and, in the face of objection from (maybe) 10-15 posters who actually **knew exactly ** what they were talking about i.e. having the necessary knowledge and insight gleaned from experience, continued to defend the indefensibly offensive.
IMHO, you have a problem, The Ryan. I hope you sort it out before your ability to seemingly justify almost anything to yourself lands you in deep trouble IRL.
I agree with The Ryan in his major point (I’ve not dwelled on every nitty-gritty detail). It seems to me that the responses to it are yet another example of the regrettable but perhaps unavoidable tendency to allow personalities to obscure issues.
Well this is the Personality forum, not the Issues Forum. If Ryan wanted to discuss issues, he should have taken it to GD. If he starts a pit thread, he should expect pit responses.
Besides, it could be worse. Imagine if there was a tendency to allow Wessonality[sup]TM[/sup] to obscure issues.
Coldfire:
If you were to just declare that you aren’t interested in continuing the conversation, I would have some respect for you. But essentially saying “Hey, I could counter your arguments, but I don’t have to because you’re wrong, nyaah, nyaah, nyaah” just reinforces my impression that you consider yourself above such pedestrian things as actually defending your statements.
Waterj:
I think that if you called the belief that the sun will rise tomorrow an “assumption”, most people would agree that that is contrary to the connotation of “assumption”, if not the denotation.
SPOOFE
Well, my dictionary agrees with me: “assumption: something taken for granted; a supposition”. In other words, something without proof.
And yet again we see the belief that anyone who disagrees with "conventional wisdom” is not just wrong, but evil. “Fighting ignorance since 1973… except for when we prefer remaining ignorant to being un-PC.”
JonScribe
And the purpose of asking completely irrelevant questions that have nothing to do with the issue at hand is….?
Is that the presumptive “you”, or have you completely ignored what I’ve said?
TwistofFate
There’s so much irony in that post, I just don’t know where to start.
London_Calling
In other words, despite the Self Appointed Experts having declared the One True Opinion, I dared disagree. Or do you promise to never post any opinion whatsoever regarding events occurring in the US? That’s funny, I seem to recall you commenting on the latest presidential election. Since you “don’t understand” our culture, aren’t you completely unqualified to make any comments on our political process?
Alphagene
I wanted to respond to a specific comment made in a Pit thread. Would GD debates really have been the appropriate forum? And do you really think that I would have been immune from these sort of comments in GD? The attitude “If he starts a pit thread, he should expect pit responses” is absurd. How would you like it if I came into a thread you started in the Pit and started insulting you for no reason, and then defended my actions by saying “Well, if you didn’t want Pit responses, you shouldn’t have started a Pit thread”?
Just because an assumption is something that is taken WITHOUT proof, that doesn’t mean there is NO proof, you moron. Jeezum Crow, Ryan, do you really need to be stretching so far just to satisfy your own pathetic ego?
Propositions possibly have proofs, axioms never have proofs, and I’ve yet to run into a postulate that has a proof. The best one can hope for with the latter to is a contradiction to indicate that such a thing cannot be so, given other assumptions, of course.
The Ryan’s claim is that if one makes an assumption, then there is no proof to back up that assumption. Basically, he’s saying that he can “assume” 'til the cows come home and he never has to back up anything he says, which is ridiculous.
So, tell me, what’s all this baloney about propositions, axioms, and postulates?