Atla wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 2:39 pm
I answered it.
In your head maybe. I think you forgot to tell us. Point me to your answer before I call you a liar.
Atla wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 2:39 pm
But it's a strawman, unrelated to the abstract vs concrete fallacy you base your religion on.
It's not a fallacy. Information is as measurable as gravity. Information is as concrete as The Universe.
So one could be forgiven for interpreting your use of the word 'religion' as a pejorative.
I like my religion. It works really well for understanding the world
Atla wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 2:39 pm
you've shown your error to the whole world.
You say that like brushing errors under carpets it's acceptable. Maybe in your field you have low moral standards? In applied ethics that kind of crap doesn't fly
Last edited by TimeSeeker on Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You are right, it is perfectly adequate and what I have been patiently waiting for. Now, would you like to pick one?
Besides the input of just one word both are absolutely correct. But that is NOT because they are correct from your perspective and from your usage of words but because of another perspective and another way of looking at and seeing things.
If you would like we can delve into this much deeper and in much greater detail than you could even yet imagine, but if you are going to carry on sarcastically and with full skepticism like you have been, then there is NO use.
A process which is unfolding right this very minute.
I am sure that would get laughed at more than just might.
But what you just said was a funny thing to say, considering that there was NO connection between that and what we are talking about.
I wasn't talking to you.
I wrote something.
You directly responded to it.
I directly responded back to you, then
You wrote the above.
Why did you write this?
You are both so tedious I thought you were the same person.
I'm also not sure why either of you is writing anything because according to both of you, word meanings mean nothing (or anything you want them to mean). You could be talking about the weather for all I know (or care).
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 7:20 pm
You are both so tedious I thought you were the same person.
I'm also not sure why either of you is writing anything because according to both of you, word meanings mean nothing (or anything you want them to mean). You could be talking about the weather for all I know (or care).
It's pretty obvious that you are either not paying attention or not understanding. Words meanings don't mean 'nothing'. Word meanings mean TOO MANY things! Words are imprecise! Language is ambiguous and yes, people do invent their own meanings and use language in a way they seem appropriate.
This is HOW dialects and jargon develop. This is HOW languages evolves. To assume that words have precise, inflexible and exact and ever-unchanging meaning is your error. Reading into your use of the word 'tedious' as an expression of frustration, I am terribly sorry to disappoint you that language doesn't work the way you want it to work; or that human communication is not as easy as you desire it to be.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 7:20 pm
You are both so tedious I thought you were the same person.
I'm also not sure why either of you is writing anything because according to both of you, word meanings mean nothing (or anything you want them to mean). You could be talking about the weather for all I know (or care).
It's pretty obvious that you are either not paying attention or not understanding. Words meanings don't mean 'nothing'. Word meanings mean TOO MANY things! Words are imprecise! Language is ambiguous and yes, people do invent their own meanings and use language in a way they seem appropriate.
This is HOW dialects and jargon develop. This is HOW languages evolves. To assume that words have precise, inflexible and exact and ever-unchanging meaning is your error. Reading into your use of the word 'tedious' as an expression of frustration, I am terribly sorry to disappoint you that language doesn't work the way you want it to work; or that human communication is not as easy as you desire it to be.
That is why communication is a LEARNED skill.
You are an idiot who doesn't understand language or its subtleties. Probably a yank.
I'm well aware of the evolution of language, but that doesn't excuse the deliberate mis-use of words, or general illiteracy.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:02 pm
You are an idiot who doesn't understand language or its subtleties.
That's ironic. This is somewhat in line with what I am trying to tell you. What you call 'subtlety' - I am calling ambiguity and imprecision.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:02 pm
I'm well aware of the evolution of language, but that doesn't excuse the deliberate mis-use of words, or general illiteracy.
It is PRECISELY because I am generally more literate than you is why I have to account for MORE possible meanings of words than YOU.
That is why ambiguity grows exponentially.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:09 pm
Oh please. Yanks have ruined the English language with their anti-intellectualism and obsession with 'dumbing' everything down.
Case in point you have ASSumed that I am a yank. And to say that they have 'ruined' it is to claim that it was (at some point) perfect.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:09 pm
Oh please. Yanks have ruined the English language with their anti-intellectualism and obsession with 'dumbing' everything down.
Case in point you have ASSumed that I am a yank.
If you are not then don't use yank 'spelling' because it makes you look like an even bigger fool.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:12 pm
If you are not then don't use yank 'spelling' because it makes you look like an even bigger fool.
I ken spel lyk diz ef eye wont to! You don't get to dictate to me or anyone how I use language. Dipshit
The fact that you judge people on the way they speak makes YOU the idiot...
If you ever try to play grammar nazi with me in real life I'd probably punch you in the face. Your inability to adapt is not other people's problem...
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:18 pm
Clearly too stupid (and American) to understand the subtleties of what a 'grammar nazi' is.
As somebody who just unsuccessfully failed to criticise my spelling, I'd say you fit the bill. Which means that you UNDERSTOOD what I was saying and then you still CHOSE to correct/criticise/judge me.
And if that definition isn't in "THE dictionary" - I just added it... c-u-n-t
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:18 pm
Clearly too stupid (and American) to understand the subtleties of what a 'grammar nazi' is.
As somebody who just unsuccessfully failed to criticise my spelling, I'd say you fit the bill. Which means that you UNDERSTOOD what I was saying and then you still CHOSE to correct/criticise/judge me.
And if that definition isn't in "THE dictionary" - I just added it... c-u-n-t
As word meaning are entirely subjective (according to you) then I suppose that lot must mean ''You are the most brilliant person I have ever encountered. I worship at your feet and kiss the ground you walk on, oh great one''.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:39 pm
As word meaning are entirely subjective (according to you) then I suppose that lot must mean ''You are the most brilliant person I have ever encountered. I worship at your feet and kiss the ground you walk on, oh great one''.
That is one interpretation, yes. It's not the one I had in mind.
