The Rhetoric of Philosophy Now's Forum

[Age]

...

Don't hate the players - hate the game.

Philosophers have been framing philosophical discourse in zero-sum terms like "winning" and "losing", "right" and "wrong" - that sort of seetting sure plays out well with testosterone-driven hariless apes.

You've made your bed...

Even though this 'trying to' 'win' here is exactly what these so-called "philosophers" play, or do, this is NOT what the words 'philosophy' and 'philosopher' ACTUALLY MEANT NOR REFER TO, AT ALL.

In fact this kind of MISBEHAVING is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what 'philosophy' IS and what "philosophers" ACTUALLY DO, to me.

[Flannel Jesus]

Even though this 'trying to' 'win' here is exactly what these so-called "philosophers" play, or do, this is NOT what the words 'philosophy' and 'philosopher' ACTUALLY MEANT NOR REFER TO, AT ALL.

In fact this kind of MISBEHAVING is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what 'philosophy' IS and what "philosophers" ACTUALLY DO.

Why did you separate 'trying to' and 'win' into separate quotes?

[Age]

Even though this 'trying to' 'win' here is exactly what these so-called "philosophers" play, or do, this is NOT what the words 'philosophy' and 'philosopher' ACTUALLY MEANT NOR REFER TO, AT ALL.

In fact this kind of MISBEHAVING is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what 'philosophy' IS and what "philosophers" ACTUALLY DO.

Why did you separate 'trying to' and 'win' into separate quotes?

BECAUSE of the VERY REASON WHY I USE single quote marks.

I MIGHT NOT be USING 'them' in the way 'you' or "others" MIGHT BE USED TO.

[Flannel Jesus]

I suggest that if there is absolutely ANY 'thing' in ANY sentence, which CONFUSE ANY one of you, like capital letters and/or citation marks, then you just seek out CLARIFICATION, and gain CLARITY. That way the CONFUSION WILL DISAPPEAR COMPLETELY, OBVIOUSLY.

Even though this 'trying to' 'win' here is exactly what these so-called "philosophers" play, or do, this is NOT what the words 'philosophy' and 'philosopher' ACTUALLY MEANT NOR REFER TO, AT ALL.

In fact this kind of MISBEHAVING is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what 'philosophy' IS and what "philosophers" ACTUALLY DO.

Why did you separate 'trying to' and 'win' into separate quotes?

BECAUSE of the VERY REASON WHY I USE single quote marks.

I MIGHT NOT be USING 'them' in the way 'you' or "others" MIGHT BE USED TO.

I'm seeking out clarity, age. You're not delivering on your promise, Age.

[Skepdick]

...

Don't hate the players - hate the game.

Philosophers have been framing philosophical discourse in zero-sum terms like "winning" and "losing", "right" and "wrong" - that sort of seetting sure plays out well with testosterone-driven hariless apes.

You've made your bed...

Yes, those damn philosophers.

Apparently the first rule of Philosophy is "I am right - everybody else is wrong".

Everybody adheres to the rule...

[Wizard22]

I MIGHT NOT be USING 'them' in the way 'you' or "others" MIGHT BE USED TO.

...understatement of the century

[Age]

I suggest that if there is absolutely ANY 'thing' in ANY sentence, which CONFUSE ANY one of you, like capital letters and/or citation marks, then you just seek out CLARIFICATION, and gain CLARITY. That way the CONFUSION WILL DISAPPEAR COMPLETELY, OBVIOUSLY.

Why did you separate 'trying to' and 'win' into separate quotes?

BECAUSE of the VERY REASON WHY I USE single quote marks.

I MIGHT NOT be USING 'them' in the way 'you' or "others" MIGHT BE USED TO.

I'm seeking out clarity, age. You're not delivering on your promise, Age.

You SOUGHT OUT CLARITY on WHY I SEPARATED the words 'trying to' and the word 'win' into separate quotes, ONLY.

I INFORMED you that the reason IS BECAUSE of WHY I USE 'single quotation marks'. (Which, by the way, I have EXPLAINED here a few times, ALREADY, NOT that I expect ANY one to have seen 'it', NOR to have even remembered the reason.)

NOW, if ANY one was Truly INTERESTED in WHY I, ACTUALLY, USE 'single quotation marks', then they would, OBVIOUSLY, JUST ASK me, 'Why?'

[Age]

Don't hate the players - hate the game.

Philosophers have been framing philosophical discourse in zero-sum terms like "winning" and "losing", "right" and "wrong" - that sort of seetting sure plays out well with testosterone-driven hariless apes.

You've made your bed...

Yes, those damn philosophers.

Apparently the first rule of Philosophy is "I am right - everybody else is wrong".

Everybody adheres to the rule...

But that is the EXACT OPPOSITE of 'philosophy', itself. Well to me anyway.

[Flannel Jesus]

I suggest that if there is absolutely ANY 'thing' in ANY sentence, which CONFUSE ANY one of you, like capital letters and/or citation marks, then you just seek out CLARIFICATION, and gain CLARITY. That way the CONFUSION WILL DISAPPEAR COMPLETELY, OBVIOUSLY.

BECAUSE of the VERY REASON WHY I USE single quote marks.

I MIGHT NOT be USING 'them' in the way 'you' or "others" MIGHT BE USED TO.

I'm seeking out clarity, age. You're not delivering on your promise, Age.

You SOUGHT OUT CLARITY on WHY I SEPARATED the words 'trying to' and the word 'win' into separate quotes, ONLY.

I INFORMED you that the reason IS BECAUSE of WHY I USE 'single quotation marks'. (Which, by the way, I have EXPLAINED here a few times, ALREADY, NOT that I expect ANY one to have seen 'it', NOR to have even remembered the reason.)

NOW, if ANY one was Truly INTERESTED in WHY I, ACTUALLY, USE 'single quotation marks', then they would, OBVIOUSLY, JUST ASK me, 'Why?'

But you haven't given any clarity. You've just said you're using them in a way I'm not used to. You haven't said HOW you're using them. That's not an answer. That hasn't produced clarity.

[Skepdick]

Yes, those damn philosophers.

Apparently the first rule of Philosophy is "I am right - everybody else is wrong".

Everybody adheres to the rule...

But that is the EXACT OPPOSITE of 'philosophy', itself. Well to me anyway.

Q.E.D

[Age]

I MIGHT NOT be USING 'them' in the way 'you' or "others" MIGHT BE USED TO.

...understatement of the century

What you also seem to UNDERESTIMATE here is just how MANY DIFFERENT ways quotation marks CAN BE USED.

So, the Fact that you ALL CAN, and DO, USE punctuation marks DIFFERENTLY seems to be AN UNDERSTATEMENT of maybe MORE than just the tiny length of a century.

[Wizard22]

Age, do me a favor, and go respond to my response to you in the 'I came from a cult' thread...

[Iwannaplato]

22) Take up too much space with either unnecessary quoting of images, unique formatting or empty space. This creates extra noise in the thread and less signal.

23) Treat any topic as an invitation to bring up one of your pet peeve issues. Do not be a respecter of topics.

I will keep updating the list in posts and in the OP. Suggestions may be welcomed.

[Age]

Apparently the first rule of Philosophy is "I am right - everybody else is wrong".

Everybody adheres to the rule...

But that is the EXACT OPPOSITE of 'philosophy', itself. Well to me anyway.

Q.E.D

What does 'Q.E.D' here MEAN, EXACTLY?

Does 'it' MEAN some 'thing' like you have PROVED some 'thing' here to be true, and thus also 'won' some 'thing' here, as well?

If yes, then is this an EXACT REPRESENTATION of what 'philosophy' is and/or that 'you' are being a "philosopher" here, in the way that you SEE what what the words 'philosophy' and 'philosophers' MEAN?

'I', by the way, NEVER 'won' ANY 'thing' here, as all I REALLY did here was just express A VIEW that 'I' have.

But, THEN AGAIN, we will WAIT to SEE what 'Q.E.D' ACTUALLY MEANS, to you, BEFORE we can Truly proceed here ANY further.

[Age]

Age, do me a favor, and go respond to my response to you in the 'I came from a cult' thread...

Did you want me to do this BEFORE you respond to what I POINTED OUT and SHOWED in what you have WRITTEN and SAID here, or AFTER?