Philosophy Now Forum

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

HexHammer wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:Why would I have to prove it to you? It's evident he is.

PhilX

You are too stupid, making a claim doesn't make anything true, you have to argue why it's true ..complete tard!!!

You're too stupid to understand an argument loser.

PhilX

I do understand, I understand that you can't say ANYTHING intelligent, even if your life dependent on it!

HexHammer wrote:I do understand, I understand that you can't say ANYTHING intelligent, even if your life dependent on it!

See how retarded you are. You used the wrong word again loser (dependent instead of depended). I hope Denmark never exports you to my country.

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:See how retarded you are. You used the wrong word again loser (dependent instead of depended). I hope Denmark never exports you to my country.
PhilX

Can you speak Danish?

Arising_uk wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:See how retarded you are. You used the wrong word again loser (dependent instead of depended). I hope Denmark never exports you to my country.
PhilX

Can you speak Danish?

Do I need to on a British website? You should know better than that.

PhilX

As Hex is Danish then English will not be his first language. It is therefore wrong to criticise him for a relatively minor grammatical
error. And especially if the one doing it has English as their first language instead. Hence the reason why Arising asked if you could
speak Danish. And so if you cannot or if yours is worse than Hexs English then you cannot logically criticise him for it. The fact that
you think he is a retard does not magically make that any less true. Also the fact that this is a British web site is entirely irrelevant

surreptitious57 wrote:As Hex is Danish then English will not be his first language. It is therefore wrong to criticise him for a relatively minor grammatical
error. And especially if the one doing it has English as their first language instead. Hence the reason why Arising asked if you could
speak Danish. And so if you cannot or if yours is worse than Hexs English then you cannot logically criticise him for it. The fact that
you think he is a retard does not magically make that any less true. Also the fact that this is a British web site is entirely irrelevant

I can criticize Hex as he could seek a Danish philosophy site instead of a British one. And grammar is always important in communications and I don't regard his errors as relatively minor. His attitude sucks and if all he finds is spam here from whoever he criticizes, then why does he bother coming around? What has he ever contributed to this forum? (BTW my American English is far superior to Hex and he doesn't even use a spellchecker so I am logically entitled to criticize Hex).

So when in Rome, do as the Romans do as the saying goes.

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:Do I need to on a British website? You should know better than that.

PhilX

I do and you attacking someone for their English grammar when it is their second language is a joke given you cannot speak theirs.

Arising_uk wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:Do I need to on a British website? You should know better than that.

PhilX

I do and you attacking someone for their English grammar when it is their second language is a joke given you cannot speak theirs.

The joke is that idiot has no business being on this website contributing nothing but attacking other members with name calling. Why do you take up for that moron?

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:... His attitude sucks and if all he finds is spam here from whoever he criticizes, then why does he bother coming around? What has he ever contributed to this forum? ...

What have you? On the whole you just spam the forum with your incessant news links.

Hex might be a pain in the arse but he's made it quite clear why he visits such forums, to point out that Philosophy upon the whole is irrelevant in the modern-age and that most of what's posted and said upon philosophy forums is babble and nonsense. The former I disagree with but the latter, in my opinion, has some grounds as many who post upon such forums have done little to acquaint themselves with Philosophy and what philosophers have said.

It is not a question of taking up for him but the fact that you can not speak his language yet feel entitled to criticise him for how he speaks yours
Your personal opinion of him as I have already pointed out is not relevant to the fact. And so you should really avoid committing one of the most common logical fallacies and on of all places a philosophy forum. You have no right to criticise him for name calling when you respond the same
He did exactly the same to me when I joined the forum but I just ignored him so if you have no interest in engaging him you can ignore him too

surreptitious57 wrote:It is not a question of taking up for him but the fact that you cannot speak his language yet feel entitled to criticise him for how he speaks yours
Your personal opinion of him as I have already pointed out is not relevant to the fact. And so you should really avoid committing one of the most common logical fallacies. And on of all places a philosophy forum. You have no right to criticise him for name calling when you respond the same
He did exactly the same to me when I joined the forum but I just ignored him. So if you have no interest in engaging him you can ignore him also

Again I point out out this is a British website so as I say, when in Rome, do as the Romans do. I'm not criticizing him for his grammar, I'm criticizing him for being disrespectful to this website which is based on British and his lack of respect towards fellow members. Nothing says I need to speak his language as this isn't a Danish website so your logic is off. Since he's violated my space with his name calling and other forms of stupidity, that entitles me to do the same with him. Until he apologizes to me and everyone else for his disrespect, he shall be accorded the same treatment he likes to dish out.

Have I made myself clear?

PhilX

Arising_uk wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:... His attitude sucks and if all he finds is spam here from whoever he criticizes, then why does he bother coming around? What has he ever contributed to this forum? ...

What have you? On the whole you just spam the forum with your incessant news links.

Hex might be a pain in the arse but he's made it quite clear why he visits such forums, to point out that Philosophy upon the whole is irrelevant in the modern-age and that most of what's posted and said upon philosophy forums is babble and nonsense. The former I disagree with but the latter, in my opinion, has some grounds as many who post upon such forums have done little to acquaint themselves with Philosophy and what philosophers have said.

Others will disagree with you about my alleged spamming which is your opinion. As far as babble and nonsense goes, what do you think Hex is doing? He doesn't like ancient Greek philosophy, but doesn't start threads to show what he's interested in. He resorts to name calling and ridicule (which some others do as well) and shows other forms of disrespect. Doesn't like babble he says, but doesn't exchange ideas which is the primary purpose of a forum.

So what does he try to accomplish over here? Can you explain that one? Some of my threads have led to a great deal of discussion. Of course it's hard to find topics of interest as chances are it's already been discussed somewhere on the internet. Still I try. Do you? I can't anticipate everybody's interests as I don't know beforehand what they have in their database. However a number of threads that I've started have started off slow, but then exploded later. I find Flipboard to be a source of inspiration. So why don't you give some indication what you like to discuss? (I regard Hex as a lost cause)

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Arising_uk wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:See how retarded you are. You used the wrong word again loser (dependent instead of depended). I hope Denmark never exports you to my country.
PhilX

Can you speak Danish?

Do I need to on a British website? You should know better than that.

PhilX

PhilX can't speak English - he failed to understand the question, which was quite clearly put.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
PhilX can't speak English - he failed to understand the question, which was quite clearly put.

Of course I understood his question. To me I don't see a substantial difference between British English and American. If I wanted to I can speak British English with about 99% accuracy. I don't expect the British to post American and no one has reported problems with my Americanism. With Hex though, he shows a number of problems in making himself understood which I don't believe simply comes from his speaking Danish. Look at the way he spells exactly e.g. ("excatly"). He doesn't bother with a spellchecker as he keeps misspelling that word the same way.

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

HexHammer wrote:I do understand, I understand that you can't say ANYTHING intelligent, even if your life dependent on it!

See how retarded you are. You used the wrong word again loser (dependent instead of depended). I hope Denmark never exports you to my country.

PhilX

Big deal, you still know what I'm talking about, therefore correct spelling is irrelevant, you are too stupid to understand that.