White? Dont teach here. Op Updated to address false 'racist' labal

[justoh]

lol +1 I see what you did there.

Just for the record, racism is an inherent belief that a particular race is inherently superior or inferior to another. Whether or not one believes that a minority studies teacher must be a minority, surely we can agree that valid points can be raised on grounds other than racism.

Thank you. And we can't determine that the OP or anyone else in this thread or featured therein believes that from their posts or from the link. Well, maybe dank could... he's magic

 

[dphantom]

That's a funny way to apologize. I expect nothing less from someone so dishonest.

I am truly curious though and this is a serious question. What is motivating you that you must be shown to be right when in your own admission the some of us are idiots? What is the driving factor you need to prove yourself to idiots?

For me, I typically do not feel the need to prove myself to anyone. My actions demonstrate my capabilities - for better or worse. Maybe that in effect is proving myself. But I do not waste my time trying to convince someone who clearly does not and can never understand the topic at hand.

 

[dank69]

I am truly curious though and this is a serious question. What is motivating you that you must be shown to be right when in your own admission the some of us are idiots? What is the driving factor you need to prove yourself to idiots?

For me, I typically do not feel the need to prove myself to anyone. My actions demonstrate my capabilities - for better or worse. Maybe that in effect is proving myself. But I do not waste my time trying to convince someone who clearly does not and can never understand the topic at hand.

I've said multiple times that this is a simple concept. Any idiot could understand it if they wanted to. My hope for Justoh was that as a liberal, he would be open to reason, but for some reason he has dug in to his alternate reality in the same way that conservatives typically do. The fact that all of his supporters in this thread have been staunch conservatives should be setting off alarm bells in his brain, but maybe he just doesn't pay attention to who is who here like I do. In the meantime, I can lay out in black and white the basic logic and then people that disagree with it are there in black and white disagreeing with basic logic. I also learned that I can just add "leaning towards" to any insult and it won't technically be an insult anymore, so there is that.

The sad part, for me at least, is that just about everyone here CAN understand. They just don't want to understand.

 

[dphantom]

I've said multiple times that this is a simple concept. Any idiot could understand it if they wanted to. My hope for Justoh was that as a liberal, he would be open to reason, but for some reason he has dug in to his alternate reality in the same way that conservatives typically do. The fact that all of his supporters in this thread have been staunch conservatives should be setting off alarm bells in his brain, but maybe he just doesn't pay attention to who is who here like I do. In the meantime, I can lay out in black and white the basic logic and then people that disagree with it are there in black and white disagreeing with basic logic.

fair enough answer

I also learned that I can just add "leaning towards" to any insult and it won't technically be an insult anymore, so there is that.

Logic requires precision in language. Without precision, assumptions may be made that may then result in an incorrect conclusion

 

[justoh]

The sad part, for me at least, is that just about everyone here CAN understand. They just don't want to understand.

Yeah, we don't want to understand something that's entirely irrelevant to the topic and something, if understood, would be completely without consequence to anyone but dank (maybe waggy? since he'd have to come to terms with understanding how he believes something that he doesn't, and his head might explode).

The only person with any real interest or anything to lose in dank being wrong or right is dank, but it's us who don't want to understand. I don't know about you guys (all you supporters out there, whoever you are - i don't really pay attention), but i'm convinced.

 

[dank69]

Yeah, we don't want to understand something that's entirely irrelevant to the topic and something, if understood, would be completely without consequence to anyone but dank (maybe waggy? since he'd have to come to terms with understanding how he believes something that he doesn't, and his head might explode).

The only person with any real interest or anything to lose in dank being wrong or right is dank, but it's us who don't want to understand. I don't know about you guys (all you supporters out there, whoever you are - i don't really pay attention), but i'm convinced.

For someone who doesn't want to prove me wrong you sure spent a lot of time trying to prove me wrong. I honestly engaged you because I wanted to learn and thought you wanted to learn as well, but now it is clear that you don't want to learn anything. You are here to mock anything you don't understand. What a great way to approach life. You can go through the rest of it without learning anything!

 

[dank69]

fair enough answer



Logic requires precision in language. Without precision, assumptions may be made that may then result in an incorrect conclusion

Logic requires precision language only when one party is being obtuse about semantics. Funnily enough, Justoh was being obtuse about semantics while simultaneously accusing me of being the obtuse one. Most adults can agree on basic concepts even if they aren't worded in some arbitrarily specific manner. Take realibrad's earlier attempt to add the word direct to my use of the word experience when if he had just read my earlier posts he would have seen I used the same language already.

 

[justoh]

For someone who doesn't want to prove me wrong you sure spent a lot of time trying to prove me wrong. I honestly engaged you because I wanted to learn and thought you wanted to learn as well, but now it is clear that you don't want to learn anything. You are here to mock anything you don't understand. What a great way to approach life. You can go through the rest of it without learning anything!

You're right. I'm sorry. You honestly engaged me with condescending, ambiguous/imprecise and irrelevant yes/no questions for 2 days. How could I forget? hehe

You'll probably insist that you honestly thought that's the level you had to go down to instead of admitting to sarcastic mockery of your own.

Even your original "explanation" on page 3 was unnecessarily convoluted and ridiculous. You could express your silly "argument" in a few short sentences. You could express the basis for the argument in one. You've demonstrated that you don't know the meanings of basic logical terms like equivalency. hint: it's not analogous. Who could forget your possible and plausible confusion.

Like i said, you were mostly right, and I was supporting you at first, until you started to abuse people who disagreed with you on the point you were wrong about. Then I gently tried to set the record straight. Then the rest was mockery, yes, after you started to do the same with me, while being wrong! It's like... waaaht?

 

[justoh]

Logic requires precision language only when one party is being obtuse about semantics. Funnily enough, Justoh was being obtuse about semantics while simultaneously accusing me of being the obtuse one. Most adults can agree on basic concepts even if they aren't worded in some arbitrarily specific manner. Take realibrad's earlier attempt to add the word direct to my use of the word experience when if he had just read my earlier posts he would have seen I used the same language already.

That phantom guy seems to have a lot more respect and a better understanding of logic than you do. Good for him!

 

[dank69]

You're right. I'm sorry. You honestly engaged me with condescending, ambiguous/imprecise and irrelevant yes/no questions for 2 days. How could I forget? hehe

You'll probably insist that you honestly thought that's the level you had to go down to instead of admitting to sarcastic mockery of your own.

Even your original "explanation" on page 3 was unnecessarily convoluted and ridiculous. You could express your silly "argument" in a few short sentences. You could express the basis for the argument in one. You've demonstrated that you don't know the meanings of basic logical terms like equivalency. hint: it's not analogous.

Like i said, you were mostly right, and I was supporting you at first, until you started to abuse people who disagreed with you on the point you were wrong about. Then I gently tried to set the record straight. Then the rest was mockery, yes, after you started to do the same with me.

Yes, responding to belligerence with belligerence was awful of me. But those guys that were the first to be belligerent, you have no problem with them because they agree with you. What a fantastic person you are.

But no I am at fault. I explain my position simply and people take that to mean something I never said. My fault. I attempt to break it down to eliminate the source of confusion? I'm being unnecessarily convoluted. My fault. People still think I am saying something I have actually said I am not saying. My fault. Oh and by the way, at this point I have no reading comprehension, am a fucking idiot, have dug myself into a hole, etc, etc. My fault. I made them insult me by posting something they don't understand. How rude of me. I respond with the same attitude? Abusing people who disagree with me! Meanwhile, here you are calling my arguments "ridiculous" and "silly" when you can't poke a single hole in it.

You STILL have not answered my simple question. You asked me a similar question and accused me of not being able to answer it because it was a stupid request. I answered it immediately. Did you acknowledge your mistake? Nope, still belligerent towards me. My fault.

 

[werepossum]

I've said multiple times that this is a simple concept. Any idiot could understand it if they wanted to. My hope for Justoh was that as a liberal, he would be open to reason, but for some reason he has dug in to his alternate reality in the same way that conservatives typically do. The fact that all of his supporters in this thread have been staunch conservatives should be setting off alarm bells in his brain, but maybe he just doesn't pay attention to who is who here like I do. In the meantime, I can lay out in black and white the basic logic and then people that disagree with it are there in black and white disagreeing with basic logic. I also learned that I can just add "leaning towards" to any insult and it won't technically be an insult anymore, so there is that.

The sad part, for me at least, is that just about everyone here CAN understand. They just don't want to understand.

It's not an alternate reality, dude. It's simply a realization that human beings are not in fact precise, accurate machines. Things are very seldom black and white when people are involved; it's a gray, gray world.

tl/dr: People are analog devices, not digital.

 

[justoh]

Missed this one. Alright, give me one possible alternative to me having an elephant on my head. Or can't you? Difficult to force yourself to answer such a stupid request, isn't it?

You STILL have not answered my simple question. You asked me a similar question and accused me of not being able to answer it because it was a stupid request. I answered it immediately. Did you acknowledge your mistake? Nope, still belligerent towards me. My fault.

I didn't accuse you of not being able to answer, if you read it in context. That "can't you" was clearly sarcastic. I was emulating your previous posts. Also in that post I clearly stated that it's difficult to force oneself to answer such a stupid request. Imprecision...

What's the point in answering. Same as your answer. The alternative is that he doesn't believe that and was merely failing at logic, like you are.

 

[justoh]

could the list keeper please add belligerence to the list.

 

[dphantom]

must
equal
analogous
arrogant
possible
plausible
semantics
belligerence

 

[dank69]

It's not an alternate reality, dude. It's simply a realization that human beings are not in fact precise, accurate machines. Things are very seldom black and white when people are involved; it's a gray, gray world.

tl/dr: People are analog devices, not digital.

It is an alternate reality. When someone wants to extend existing logic they need to use equivalent/equal/analogous statements. If they don't, they have built a straw man. That leaves us two options. Waggy found an example he thought was equivalent or he deliberately built a straw man when he had no reason to do so.

 

[dank69]

I didn't accuse you of not being able to answer, if you read it in context. That "can't you" was clearly sarcastic. I was emulating your previous posts. Also in that post I clearly stated that it's difficult to force oneself to answer such a stupid request. Imprecision...

What's the point in answering. Same as your answer. The alternative is that he doesn't believe that and was merely failing at logic, like you are.

Oh yes, any word is different is another excuse to not answer the question. :thumbsup:

"Honestly guys it's not that I can't answer the question because it will make me look foolish it's that this other unrelated statement isn't worded to my satisfaction."

Divert, divert, divert. Anything to avoid answering the question. Standard hack play.

 

[justoh]

Oh yes, any word is different is another excuse to not answer the question. :thumbsup:

"Honestly guys it's not that I can't answer the question because it will make me look foolish it's that this other unrelated statement isn't worded to my satisfaction."

Divert, divert, divert. Anything to avoid answering the question. Standard hack play.

Sorry. I thought I did answer. What's the problem? Respond rationally, please. Did i answer the wrong question? Help me help you.

 

[dank69]

Sorry. I thought I did answer. Was it not worded to your satisfaction?

During a debate it is customary to provide the logic behind your answer.

 

[justoh]

Okay, a possible alternative is that you do not have an elephant on your head. See how easy it is to answer a question when I don't have to be afraid of being honest?

During a debate it is customary to provide the logic behind your answer.

Really? And this isn't a debate. It's a dank mockery / dank self-mockery session

 

[justoh]

I guess answer should go on the list too. At first he stated that there was no answer, when it was "equal" (hahahahaha) to his, then he insists on there being logic behind "the answer"

 

[dank69]

Really? And this isn't a debate. It's a dank mockery / dank self-mockery session

Well if pointing out that you are not able to poke a hole in my argument equals self-mockery, so be it.