Leave a comment

emm June 21 2006, 11:27:29 UTC
It was painful to listen to this crackpot for more then 15min last time I gave it a try, now you want 2 hours? Jesus. wanting me to listen to this is like a black cat or Mae West. by their logic at least.

Reply

alx_lmx June 21 2006, 18:21:21 UTC
You're a fucking idiot. Look, if you can't absorb information because of obvious political bias, then fine, don't, but stop commenting every time! I already know you find anything that isn't establishment-published with a PC stint absolutely repugnant. You don't understand spiritualism and seemingly have no interest in it. You think time = money and life is about trying to get the most money out of one's time (this you have told me ( ... )

Reply

emm June 21 2006, 21:44:49 UTC
It has nothing to do with political bias. I'm open to opinions of all political bases as long as the argument is logical and credible ( ... )

Reply

alx_lmx June 22 2006, 21:40:03 UTC
This is not a matter of 'what ifs' and theoretical gobbledeegook. Nor is it a philosophical discussion...the 'Reasoning' behind it doesn't matter. You can do anything with purely academic reasoning, make the sky not blue, the unseen side of a sheep black, etc etc. It's really taking things from the real world, changing them into symbols, then friggin around with them whilst jerking off. The symbols aren't reality, reality is! 'Faulty Logic' doesn't change reality.

Alex

Reply

emm June 22 2006, 22:01:50 UTC
Of course the reasoning behind it matters! If it didn't then we could all make wild claims.

"Kids are fat! Kids ride schoolbuses! Schoolbuses are making kids fat!"

No, You can't do anything with academic reasoning. you can't make the sky green or a sheep's side black without using a fallacy of reasoning. sure logical reasoning in it's basic elements takes an argument down to points (a=b b=c therefor a=c) but whats wrong with that? there's nothing non-reality about that.

Faulty logic doesn't change reality, but it changes the credibility of the argument. If the statement is true, then why isn't the logic true? If the statement really was true, shouldn't you be able to argue to that effect without making errors of reasoning?

Reply

alx_lmx June 23 2006, 07:03:24 UTC
The actual reasoning behind the problem is a little much for most people to comprehend and accept (there is a program set out to make people dumber so that they better serve the state) so one has to make up other reasoning to get people to notice the problem. This isn't a matter of making the argument a + b = c, it's more along the lines of " A! A A A A A Goddamn it!", pummeling the point home until people finally accept it as fact.

Alex

Reply

emm June 23 2006, 11:18:48 UTC
(A + B = C isn't a sound argument ( ... )

Reply

alx_lmx June 24 2006, 07:28:16 UTC
The articles in question are from the extreme Christian right, and, yes, I and they assume that most people are too stupid to see what's right in front of them, and realize that there are only certain ways to get through to them ( ... )

Reply


Leave a comment

Up