This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

I need a definition of faith that is precise.

#271cyclonekrusePosted 1/23/2013 7:58:50 PM
AynRandySavage posted...
Prior to showing you the Stack Exchange topic, the only "personal opinions" I've given you were just quoting you. If you think its acceptable to talk about your personality flaws, why I can't I?

Let's start with the fact that you say my personal opinions are irrelevant. That would include my opinions of myself. So you discussing them is hypocritical (as per usual).

Next there's the fact that I can say stuff about myself. That doesn't give you license to do the same. I can be self-depracating. You're just being pejorative.

Third, whether or not I say or anyone else says something about me first, it's still your opinion whether or not you agree or disagree. Let's say I told you I thought I was fat. Let's further say that I'm not really fat but just have body image issues. If you then tell me that I am fat, you are still offering your own opinion even if I made the claim first. Making a comment about oneself doesn't make it a fact.

And even if it did, the last reason you shouldn't talk about my personality flaws is because it is just plain rude. If you told me that you had low self-esteem and then I proceeded to remind you of that often and without provocation, that would be unworthy of me. All you seem to be doing is taking digs at me in order to make me feel bad or something. Or to lower others' opinions of me. I'm not sure. Either way, bringing up such things under the shield of "but you said so yourself" isn't kosher.
---
Locke: "Why do you find it so hard to believe?" || Jack "Why do you find it so easy?!" ||
Locke: "It's never been easy!"
#272AynRandySavagePosted 1/23/2013 10:19:32 PM(edited)
You volunteered the information about your personality flaws. Like I said, if you don't want people to talk about you, don't post in a public forum. If you don't want people to talk about your personality flaws, don't broadcast them in a public forum. If you're not comfortable with people mentioning it about you, you should learn to control what you say better, which, of course, you admitted you have a problem with. Since the topic here is your personality flaws however, mentioning it is naturally relevant, remember, it was you who started the conversation about this.
#273cyclonekrusePosted 1/24/2013 8:47:08 AM
AynRandySavage posted...
You volunteered the information about your personality flaws. Like I said, if you don't want people to talk about you, don't post in a public forum. If you don't want people to talk about your personality flaws, don't broadcast them in a public forum. If you're not comfortable with people mentioning it about you, you should learn to control what you say better, which, of course, you admitted you have a problem with. Since the topic here is your personality flaws however, mentioning it is naturally relevant, remember, it was you who started the conversation about this.

No. You're the one who started all of this. Like usual you're trying to shift blame.

Also, and again as usual due to your poor reading comprehension, you missed pretty much the entire point of what I said. The bare fact that you talk about my personality wouldn't be a problem. However you seem to make a special point of bringing up my "flaws" even though the conversation almost never calls for it (despite what you say). Which is not only rude, it's hypocritical. And they still count as *your* opinions.

Now I think I know your reasons for doing all this. One, you realize you are unable to make actual points and have to therefore shift focus away from your argument's deficiencies. Two, you just don't like me and try to insult me when you can. And three, you have admitted to trolling because it gives you advantage or something.

Therefore, from now on, any time you bring up such things without provocation, I will take that as a concession that you've lost the argument. Like here. I will assume that you agree that the student test scenario shows that joint inconsistency is irrational because allowing it can force one to accept a contradiction.
---
Locke: "Why do you find it so hard to believe?" || Jack "Why do you find it so easy?!" ||
Locke: "It's never been easy!"
#274AynRandySavagePosted 1/24/2013 9:05:21 AM(edited)
cyclonekruse posted...

Now I think I know your reasons for doing all this. One, you realize you are unable to make actual points and have to therefore shift focus away from your argument's deficiencies. Two, you just don't like me and try to insult me when you can. And three, you have admitted to trolling because it gives you advantage or something.


Well first of all, that doesn't make sense here, as my "actual point" is that your admitted personality flaws would've benefited you here.
#275AynRandySavagePosted 1/24/2013 9:12:05 AM
AynRandySavage posted...
cyclonekruse posted...

Now I think I know your reasons for doing all this. One, you realize you are unable to make actual points and have to therefore shift focus away from your argument's deficiencies. Two, you just don't like me and try to insult me when you can. And three, you have admitted to trolling because it gives you advantage or something.


Well first of all, that doesn't make sense here, as my "actual point" is that your admitted personality flaws would've benefited you here.



I will assume that you agree that the student test scenario shows that joint inconsistency is irrational because allowing it can force one to accept a contradiction.


And I can assume that you agree that you were wrong about all the claims discussed in the Stack Exchange topic.

---
#276cyclonekrusePosted 1/24/2013 9:14:09 AM
AynRandySavage posted...
Well first of all, that doesn't make sense here, as my "actual point" is that your admitted personality flaws would've benefited you here.

So you also agree that I've shown you to be wrong in several of our discussions? That's good to know.
---
Locke: "Why do you find it so hard to believe?" || Jack "Why do you find it so easy?!" ||
Locke: "It's never been easy!"
#277AynRandySavagePosted 1/24/2013 9:15:36 AM(edited)
cyclonekruse posted...
AynRandySavage posted...
Well first of all, that doesn't make sense here, as my "actual point" is that your admitted personality flaws would've benefited you here.

So you also agree that I've shown you to be wrong in several of our discussions? That's good to know.


So you agree that you were wrong about all the claims discussed in the Stack Exchange topic.
#278cyclonekrusePosted 1/24/2013 10:09:05 AM
AynRandySavage posted...
So you agree that you were wrong about all the claims discussed in the Stack Exchange topic.

I don't agree to anything of the sort. However since we've established that you have dispensed with making any sort of relevant point, you are conceding that your arguments have failed. Better luck next time. Maybe you'll actually be able to argue for yourself rather than parroting others too.
---
Locke: "Why do you find it so hard to believe?" || Jack "Why do you find it so easy?!" ||
Locke: "It's never been easy!"
#279AynRandySavagePosted 1/24/2013 11:02:05 AM(edited)
cyclonekruse posted...
AynRandySavage posted...
So you agree that you were wrong about all the claims discussed in the Stack Exchange topic.

I don't agree to anything of the sort.


You absolutely did, by your own admission. And again, I'm standing by my point that your lack of control in posting(as admitted by you before and demonstrated by you here) would have been useful in arguing against OW. Since you haven't made an argument against that fact, and since you haven't made an argument against the equally relevant fact that your positions are typical in error, you're admitting you're wrong, whether you explicitly say so or not.
#280GegengegengegenPosted 1/24/2013 11:36:03 AM
Cyclonekruse, why did you tell them about your personal issues to begin with?