Oh-mi-kaze
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Posted: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 09:00:17 +0000
Not very mature of me? Yeah, well, when have I ever cared?
To be honest, however, I like to call to attention a huge glaring fallacy on my part (which I may or may not defend).
Here is my proof (which may or may not even be a real proof) that your mom created the world.
And by your mom, I mean your mom italicized.
This was originally prompted by a silly thread titled, "Who created the world?"
Now, being thoroughly shitfaced, I could not let an honest question go unpunished with some smarmy smug elitist sarcasm (First Rule of Fight Club, oldbies!), so simply out of spite (and inebriation), I retorted with, "Your mom."
Now, don't let my diminished capacity lend you any compassion for my bullshit. I'm posting this as a semi-serious topic.
So, kids, I want to see some active probing. Pick a hole, any hole.
Have at it, you voracious piranhas!
I'll be back later today to finish it off.
To be honest, however, I like to call to attention a huge glaring fallacy on my part (which I may or may not defend).
Here is my proof (which may or may not even be a real proof) that your mom created the world.
And by your mom, I mean your mom italicized.
This was originally prompted by a silly thread titled, "Who created the world?"
Now, being thoroughly shitfaced, I could not let an honest question go unpunished with some smarmy smug elitist sarcasm (First Rule of Fight Club, oldbies!), so simply out of spite (and inebriation), I retorted with, "Your mom."
Now, don't let my diminished capacity lend you any compassion for my bullshit. I'm posting this as a semi-serious topic.
So, kids, I want to see some active probing. Pick a hole, any hole.
Oh-mi-kaze
Ugh, fine.
Firstly, the person in question was borne from his/her mother/mom. With this as direct evidence, one can posit that the mother created the child (Judging solely from the first-person aspect, as there is no direct evidence detailing paternal actions in the process of the child's creation, the father's efforts, although known to others, cannot be entered into the argument. This will be explained later).
So, firstly, there is only direct evidence of the mother creating the child, as she has borne him/her.
Secondly, the person in question cannot realize an existence that does not include the person's mother, the reason of which is based upon the first (shaky, but entirely provable argument). Since the person cannot conceive of an existence without his/her mother (presently), his/her own conception of existence is dependent upon his/her mother. As the conception of existence (the world) is dependent upon its mother, the world becomes matricentric. This matricentric universe can only have been spawned from one discernable source and cause: the mother.
Thirdly, the mother's creation of the universe can also be brought up thusly: drawing from the second argument, there is no world conceivable without the concept of one's mother in it (at least, the existence of said mother). Therefore, that one person has no direct knowledge of or experience with the events that transpired before his/her creation. The result, therefore, is that the mother could have created the world within which one exists. As the person has not directly experienced the "events" that may or may not have transpired before the person's own existence, nothing can be verified as truth, not even the mother's own words. Ultimately, even if the mother denies it, she created your world concept, and as such, created your world.
ADMIT IT. YOUR MOM CREATED THE WORLD.
Firstly, the person in question was borne from his/her mother/mom. With this as direct evidence, one can posit that the mother created the child (Judging solely from the first-person aspect, as there is no direct evidence detailing paternal actions in the process of the child's creation, the father's efforts, although known to others, cannot be entered into the argument. This will be explained later).
So, firstly, there is only direct evidence of the mother creating the child, as she has borne him/her.
Secondly, the person in question cannot realize an existence that does not include the person's mother, the reason of which is based upon the first (shaky, but entirely provable argument). Since the person cannot conceive of an existence without his/her mother (presently), his/her own conception of existence is dependent upon his/her mother. As the conception of existence (the world) is dependent upon its mother, the world becomes matricentric. This matricentric universe can only have been spawned from one discernable source and cause: the mother.
Thirdly, the mother's creation of the universe can also be brought up thusly: drawing from the second argument, there is no world conceivable without the concept of one's mother in it (at least, the existence of said mother). Therefore, that one person has no direct knowledge of or experience with the events that transpired before his/her creation. The result, therefore, is that the mother could have created the world within which one exists. As the person has not directly experienced the "events" that may or may not have transpired before the person's own existence, nothing can be verified as truth, not even the mother's own words. Ultimately, even if the mother denies it, she created your world concept, and as such, created your world.
ADMIT IT. YOUR MOM CREATED THE WORLD.
Have at it, you voracious piranhas!
I'll be back later today to finish it off.
