[QUOTE=Koxinga]
IIRC, it goes something like: one, two, three, many, many-one, many-two, many-three, many-many, many-many-one, many-many-two, many-many-three, many-many-many, many-many-many-one, many-many-many-two, many-many-many-three, LOTS.
Or maybe I’m thinking of trolls.
[/QUOTE]
LOL
Only if you’re counting goats.
[QUOTE=Koxinga]
Ya ever get that feeling that somebody’s being whooshed, but you’re not sure if it’s you or the other guy?
[/QUOTE]
It appeared that BlinkingDuck made a comment about “primitive people” that has been labeled as racist by some, but is considered controversial in some circles.
It further appeared that you were calling him out on it, and begging the question.
I’ll try to keep straight the reading habits and shared experiences of your and other posters. Perhaps you could draw me a diagram.
[QUOTE=Trunk]
It appeared that BlinkingDuck made a comment about “primitive people” that has been labeled as racist by some, but is considered controversial in some circles.
It further appeared that you were calling him out on it, and begging the question.
I’ll try to keep straight the reading habits and shared experiences of your and other posters. Perhaps you could draw me a diagram.
[/QUOTE]
You thought Koxinga was calling BlinkingDuck a troll. But even on the account you’ve given of your reading of the situation, it wouldn’t have made any sense for Koxinga to call BlinkingDuck a troll. You don’t call someone a troll for using terminology believed by some to be racist. You call someone a troll when you mean to accuse them of posting specifically for the sole purpose of sabotaging the intent of the thread in some way. Even on your account, Koxinga didn’t think BlinkingDuck was doing that.
So I don’t think you can chalk this up to your not knowing some obscure reference in the OP or something. I think you just don’t know what “Troll” means. Or else, you inexplicably were convinced that Koxinga didn’t know what “Troll” means. (And still yet inexplicably failed to mention this in your criticism of him.)
-FrL-
As famously recorded by Plato, Socrates was able to teach an uneducated slave the value of the square root of 2 though his Socratic Method of asking leading questions.
So, both of those thought that math was inherent knowledge.
[QUOTE=Frylock]
You thought Koxinga was calling BlinkingDuck a troll. But even on the account you’ve given of your reading of the situation, it wouldn’t have made any sense for Koxinga to call BlinkingDuck a troll. You don’t call someone a troll for using terminology believed by some to be racist. You call someone a troll when you mean to accuse them of posting specifically for the sole purpose of sabotaging the intent of the thread in some way. Even on your account, Koxinga didn’t think BlinkingDuck was doing that.
So I don’t think you can chalk this up to your not knowing some obscure reference in the OP or something. I think you just don’t know what “Troll” means. Or else, you inexplicably were convinced that Koxinga didn’t know what “Troll” means. (And still yet inexplicably failed to mention this in your criticism of him.)
-FrL-
[/QUOTE]
I thought that Koxinga was calling BD a troll for raising the issue of “primitive people can only count to three”.
[QUOTE=Trunk]
I thought that Koxinga was calling BD a troll for raising the issue of “primitive people can only count to three”.
[/QUOTE]
I know.
How could someone think that constitutes being a troll?
-FrL-
[QUOTE=Malachi Throne]
As famously recorded by Plato, Socrates was able to teach an uneducated slave the value of the square root of 2 though his Socratic Method of asking leading questions.
So, both of those thought that math was inherent knowledge.
[/QUOTE]
“Thought” being the operative word here. Socrates asked some awfully leading questions in that dialogue. The extent to which Plato realized this is debated.
-FrL-
[QUOTE=Frylock]
I know.
How could someone think that constitutes being a troll?
-FrL-
[/QUOTE]
Because it’s been the subject of heated back-and-forths and name calling and the argument devolves into personal, not scientific, interpretations of the same data.
This has gone on a ridiculous amount of words.
[QUOTE=gazpacho]
It is totally learned. Once you learn counting you basically have learned addition and subtraction especially adding and subtracting one.
[/QUOTE]
I will second this statement.
My three-year-old son has learned to count to 20, but to him numbers are little more than words that come in a pre-arranged sequence. When he was a little younger, he was completely unable to grasp the concept of enumeration – namely, that the words corresponded to numbers which stood for quantities – but as time has progressed, he has learned to apply larger and larger numbers to quantities he sees.
He’s up to about four items now. Any more than that and he just starts reciting the remaining numbers through ten regardless of how many there actually are.
[QUOTE=Flander]
I remember hearing studies that children up to a certain age can’t tell the quantity of something unless they count every single item. …
[/QUOTE]
These tests have been considered debunked by some. What appears to happen is that the kids of a certain age really can tell they are the same. But the kids are puzzled by the question and in order to please the adult answer the way they do. See the books I listed above.
If you want primitive, look at English speaking people: Once, twice, thrice. What word comes next?
[QUOTE=ftg]
If you want primitive, look at English speaking people: Once, twice, thrice. What word comes next?
[/QUOTE]
Why, frice, of course. Everybody knows that. 