|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 03, 2009 7:05 pm
CH1YO Lumanny the Space Jew brainnsoup CH1YO brainnsoup Psychiatry.
That was fun.
Got a link? Pardon me? A link to what? A study and practice?
I'm not calling you a liar.
I'm not calling you a troll.
But you've given us nothing.
And also this, to come full circle: You make me glad I'm not currently dating gentiles.What a terrible way of thinking. I'm the finest of gentiles, I'm sure that you should find the lower orders more agreeable.
Through experience I have learned that those who claim to be the best of their group never are, and in fact often are some of the worst.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 03, 2009 7:10 pm
CH1YO brainnsoup CH1YO brainnsoup CH1YO brainnsoup Psychiatry.
That was fun.
Got a link? Pardon me? A link to what? A study and practice?
I'm not calling you a liar.
I'm not calling you a troll.
But you've given us nothing.Nothing tangible, granted. I've been sharing plenty however. I get this a lot- do I really come off as though I make an effort to use longer words than necessary? Not to say that my words are at all empty- rather they try to tell a story worth learning.
In the times I've run into you in this guild, even in the threads I did not get involved in, your style of debating seems to be to argue with whatever the popular opinion is and use creative language to discredit your opponents instead of actually proving anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 04, 2009 5:20 pm
brainnsoup CH1YO brainnsoup CH1YO brainnsoup Even Wikipedia is more credible than your word right now.
I'm not calling you a liar.
I'm not calling you a troll.
But you've given us nothing. Nothing tangible, granted. I've been sharing plenty however. I get this a lot- do I really come off as though I make an effort to use longer words than necessary? Not to say that my words are at all empty- rather they try to tell a story worth learning.
In the times I've run into you in this guild, even in the threads I did not get involved in, your style of debating seems to be to argue with whatever the popular opinion is and use creative language to discredit your opponents instead of actually proving anything.Oh I'm happy enough to agree but I see no need to post where I agree with that which is popular. It's more the note on syllables, do I truly come off as though I'm simply selecting the longest entries of a thesaurus or just being flowery?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 04, 2009 5:21 pm
brainnsoup CH1YO brainnsoup CH1YO brainnsoup I have no reason to believe you.
If you're an expert you should have no problem proving your point.
If you want to keep your credibility, only post things that you can back up. None at all. At this hour I'll have difficulty with many simple tasks. Far too time consuming, I'll post what happens to be true and hopefully share a few laughs too. Perfectly understandable. Do try not to dismiss anything on such grounds however. If I'm considered wrong then that's a wholly different grounds and perfectly acceptable. Perhaps mistaken but reasonable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 04, 2009 5:22 pm
Lumanny the Space Jew CH1YO Lumanny the Space Jew brainnsoup CH1YO brainnsoup Psychiatry.
That was fun.
Got a link? Pardon me? A link to what? A study and practice?
I'm not calling you a liar.
I'm not calling you a troll.
But you've given us nothing.
And also this, to come full circle: You make me glad I'm not currently dating gentiles.What a terrible way of thinking. I'm the finest of gentiles, I'm sure that you should find the lower orders more agreeable. Never sounds terribly black swan. I'm as good as gold anyhow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 04, 2009 7:50 pm
CH1YO brainnsoup CH1YO brainnsoup CH1YO brainnsoup Even Wikipedia is more credible than your word right now.
I'm not calling you a liar.
I'm not calling you a troll.
But you've given us nothing. Nothing tangible, granted. I've been sharing plenty however. I get this a lot- do I really come off as though I make an effort to use longer words than necessary? Not to say that my words are at all empty- rather they try to tell a story worth learning.
In the times I've run into you in this guild, even in the threads I did not get involved in, your style of debating seems to be to argue with whatever the popular opinion is and use creative language to discredit your opponents instead of actually proving anything.Oh I'm happy enough to agree but I see no need to post where I agree with that which is popular. It's more the note on syllables, do I truly come off as though I'm simply selecting the longest entries of a thesaurus or just being flowery?
I'm all for straying from the popular opinion if the popular opinion is wrong.
As long as it's not just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing.
And a little of both, I guess.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 04, 2009 10:33 pm
CH1YO Lumanny the Space Jew CH1YO Lumanny the Space Jew brainnsoup Even Wikipedia is more credible than your word right now.
I'm not calling you a liar.
I'm not calling you a troll.
But you've given us nothing.
And also this, to come full circle: You make me glad I'm not currently dating gentiles.What a terrible way of thinking. I'm the finest of gentiles, I'm sure that you should find the lower orders more agreeable. Never sounds terribly black swan. I'm as good as gold anyhow. Not to mention as useful in a debate as a whole pirate treasure when you're deserted on a desolate island - no matter how much money you have, you can't buy food when there's none there, and no one to buy it from. While I'm not the best at much of anything, at least I like to call myself a "reader". I read things - books, newspapers, sometimes even posts and thread titles. Once I even read a dictionary because I don't believe in allowing boredom. And no matter how "black swan" the word sounds, you have yet to do anything with it, much less disprove his assertion. Do you even know what "black swan" means? And simply calling yourself "good as gold" does nothing in the realm of debate. All you do is look like you have an ego the size of a small continent and the communication skills of a small child.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 12:16 pm
PrometheanSet CH1YO Lumanny the Space Jew CH1YO Lumanny the Space Jew brainnsoup Even Wikipedia is more credible than your word right now.
I'm not calling you a liar.
I'm not calling you a troll.
But you've given us nothing.
And also this, to come full circle: You make me glad I'm not currently dating gentiles.What a terrible way of thinking. I'm the finest of gentiles, I'm sure that you should find the lower orders more agreeable. Never sounds terribly black swan. I'm as good as gold anyhow. Not to mention as useful in a debate as a whole pirate treasure when you're deserted on a desolate island - no matter how much money you have, you can't buy food when there's none there, and no one to buy it from. While I'm not the best at much of anything, at least I like to call myself a "reader". I read things - books, newspapers, sometimes even posts and thread titles. Once I even read a dictionary because I don't believe in allowing boredom. And no matter how "black swan" the word sounds, you have yet to do anything with it, much less disprove his assertion. Do you even know what "black swan" means? And simply calling yourself "good as gold" does nothing in the realm of debate. All you do is look like you have an ego the size of a small continent and the communication skills of a small child. Indeed, I am a source not an implement. A reader is an academic position, something terribly confusing to call yourself if your vocation is otherwise. Come now, when all is said and done even the fattest of children would be far beneath myself in terms of my communicative abilities. It is not, I'm afraid, my manner but rather ad hominim tactics that are most impotent in the realms of furthering civilised discourse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 1:52 pm
CH1YO PrometheanSet CH1YO Lumanny the Space Jew CH1YO What a terrible way of thinking. I'm the finest of gentiles, I'm sure that you should find the lower orders more agreeable. Never sounds terribly black swan. I'm as good as gold anyhow. Not to mention as useful in a debate as a whole pirate treasure when you're deserted on a desolate island - no matter how much money you have, you can't buy food when there's none there, and no one to buy it from. While I'm not the best at much of anything, at least I like to call myself a "reader". I read things - books, newspapers, sometimes even posts and thread titles. Once I even read a dictionary because I don't believe in allowing boredom. And no matter how "black swan" the word sounds, you have yet to do anything with it, much less disprove his assertion. Do you even know what "black swan" means? And simply calling yourself "good as gold" does nothing in the realm of debate. All you do is look like you have an ego the size of a small continent and the communication skills of a small child. Indeed, I am a source not an implement. A reader is an academic position, something terribly confusing to call yourself if your vocation is otherwise. Come now, when all is said and done even the fattest of children would be far beneath myself in terms of my communicative abilities. It is not, I'm afraid, my manner but rather ad hominim tactics that are most impotent in the realms of furthering civilised discourse. I'll admit that there's ad hominem in my post - the way you fluff yourself up as though you were some authority who is beyond the need to back your info up with credible sources moves us beyond the "civilized discourse" of debate into a pedantic playground argument. Just saying "it's good because it's from me" is even more harmful to the discussion, especially given the outdated information you're using. I don't see how it follows that somehow "fat children" appear to have good communication skills to you. Is that some cultural idiom that I'm not aware of?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 4:31 pm
PrometheanSet I'll admit that there's ad hominem in my post - the way you fluff yourself up as though you were some authority who is beyond the need to back your info up with credible sources moves us beyond the "civilized discourse" of debate into a pedantic playground argument. Just saying "it's good because it's from me" is even more harmful to the discussion, especially given the outdated information you're using. I don't see how it follows that somehow "fat children" appear to have good communication skills to you. Is that some cultural idiom that I'm not aware of? It is rather difficult for me to argue without evidence if this fetish of source continues but quite necessary where my evidence is dismissed for little more reason than that I prefer to go to source with my academic exploits, rather than accepting the most recent and often most nonsense opinion. Well you likened me to a small child...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 7:43 pm
CH1YO PrometheanSet I'll admit that there's ad hominem in my post - the way you fluff yourself up as though you were some authority who is beyond the need to back your info up with credible sources moves us beyond the "civilized discourse" of debate into a pedantic playground argument. Just saying "it's good because it's from me" is even more harmful to the discussion, especially given the outdated information you're using. I don't see how it follows that somehow "fat children" appear to have good communication skills to you. Is that some cultural idiom that I'm not aware of? It is rather difficult for me to argue without evidence if this fetish of source continues but quite necessary where my evidence is dismissed for little more reason than that I prefer to go to source with my academic exploits, rather than accepting the most recent and often most nonsense opinion. Well you likened me to a small child...
Not to say that scientists don't make mistakes.
And it's always good to have a healthy skepticism about things.
But it would be plain stupid to accept the opinion of an anonymous person on the internet as fact with absolutely no evidence to support it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 8:56 pm
CH1YO PrometheanSet I'll admit that there's ad hominem in my post - the way you fluff yourself up as though you were some authority who is beyond the need to back your info up with credible sources moves us beyond the "civilized discourse" of debate into a pedantic playground argument. Just saying "it's good because it's from me" is even more harmful to the discussion, especially given the outdated information you're using. I don't see how it follows that somehow "fat children" appear to have good communication skills to you. Is that some cultural idiom that I'm not aware of? It is rather difficult for me to argue without evidence if this fetish of source continues but quite necessary where my evidence is dismissed for little more reason than that I prefer to go to source with my academic exploits, rather than accepting the most recent and often most nonsense opinion. Well you likened me to a small child... And you want to relate the work of modern scholars with modern tools to fashion. While I understand that some times theories compete, and which is taken over the other is a matter of "what's in this decade". However, you would rather use theories that are completely outdated, refuted, and off the table for this debate. It comes off like you would try to use Phrenology to refute all of the Neuroscience that CT and MRI scans have helped to build.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:16 am
brainnsoup CH1YO PrometheanSet I'll admit that there's ad hominem in my post - the way you fluff yourself up as though you were some authority who is beyond the need to back your info up with credible sources moves us beyond the "civilized discourse" of debate into a pedantic playground argument. Just saying "it's good because it's from me" is even more harmful to the discussion, especially given the outdated information you're using. I don't see how it follows that somehow "fat children" appear to have good communication skills to you. Is that some cultural idiom that I'm not aware of? It is rather difficult for me to argue without evidence if this fetish of source continues but quite necessary where my evidence is dismissed for little more reason than that I prefer to go to source with my academic exploits, rather than accepting the most recent and often most nonsense opinion. Well you likened me to a small child...
Not to say that scientists don't make mistakes.
And it's always good to have a healthy skepticism about things.
But it would be plain stupid to accept the opinion of an anonymous person on the internet as fact with absolutely no evidence to support it.I offer the evidence of a number of professionals, once it is dismissed on principle I simply cease to take the needless effort. People can believe what they may but in all honesty it would be well advised to heed my words, for they are generally correct. These claims that I do not provide evidence are becoming monotonously tedious- I do, where requested, provide sources for the claims that I make. Whilst I do not feel that people should be required to read a library I see no reason that I should be required to find dubious arguments posted on the internet or that my sources need be from a given timespan where they would just as likely be wrong and doubly so dire.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:24 am
PrometheanSet CH1YO PrometheanSet I'll admit that there's ad hominem in my post - the way you fluff yourself up as though you were some authority who is beyond the need to back your info up with credible sources moves us beyond the "civilized discourse" of debate into a pedantic playground argument. Just saying "it's good because it's from me" is even more harmful to the discussion, especially given the outdated information you're using. I don't see how it follows that somehow "fat children" appear to have good communication skills to you. Is that some cultural idiom that I'm not aware of? It is rather difficult for me to argue without evidence if this fetish of source continues but quite necessary where my evidence is dismissed for little more reason than that I prefer to go to source with my academic exploits, rather than accepting the most recent and often most nonsense opinion. Well you likened me to a small child... And you want to relate the work of modern scholars with modern tools to fashion. While I understand that some times theories compete, and which is taken over the other is a matter of "what's in this decade". However, you would rather use theories that are completely outdated, refuted, and off the table for this debate. It comes off like you would try to use Phrenology to refute all of the Neuroscience that CT and MRI scans have helped to build. I have never heard of any sensible argument against Adler. Of course since Individual Psychology forms the basis of cognitive psychology it must have some merit to it, particularly as much of what is absurd in it are much more recent additions. I have not argued anything that is so academically unsound as you propose, rather out of no desire to be trendy it could be argued that my statements are even more robust. Whilst I can scarcely argue sensibly for phrenology it must be pointed out that a considerable swathe of literature relying upon imaging techniques such as these it truly absurd- making Freud at his most ridiculous appear to be a greater professor extroadinarious than even he at his best.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:52 am
CH1YO brainnsoup CH1YO PrometheanSet I'll admit that there's ad hominem in my post - the way you fluff yourself up as though you were some authority who is beyond the need to back your info up with credible sources moves us beyond the "civilized discourse" of debate into a pedantic playground argument. Just saying "it's good because it's from me" is even more harmful to the discussion, especially given the outdated information you're using. I don't see how it follows that somehow "fat children" appear to have good communication skills to you. Is that some cultural idiom that I'm not aware of? It is rather difficult for me to argue without evidence if this fetish of source continues but quite necessary where my evidence is dismissed for little more reason than that I prefer to go to source with my academic exploits, rather than accepting the most recent and often most nonsense opinion. Well you likened me to a small child...
Not to say that scientists don't make mistakes.
And it's always good to have a healthy skepticism about things.
But it would be plain stupid to accept the opinion of an anonymous person on the internet as fact with absolutely no evidence to support it.I offer the evidence of a number of professionals, once it is dismissed on principle I simply cease to take the needless effort. People can believe what they may but in all honesty it would be well advised to heed my words, for they are generally correct. These claims that I do not provide evidence are becoming monotonously tedious- I do, where requested, provide sources for the claims that I make. Whilst I do not feel that people should be required to read a library I see no reason that I should be required to find dubious arguments posted on the internet or that my sources need be from a given timespan where they would just as likely be wrong and doubly so dire.
If I did I would be no better than the idiots regurgitating the words of any conspiracy theorist on the street because his "facts" are more interesting.
And I've been asking for a source since I came to this thread...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
