(September 9, 2018 at 2:55 am)negatio Wrote:

(September 8, 2018 at 9:15 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: The substance of an argument is not somehow diluted by the manner in which it is communicated.  That's a bullshit cop out.  Try again.  Or don't.  I really don't care.

The above is an absurd claim. Of course I can dilute, even annihilate, the substance of an argument by the manner in which the argument is communicated. Reference the interchange between Jormungandr and myself, where she posited an argument which I shot-down precisely on the basis of the fallacious manner wherein she communicated the argument.
Please do not accuse me of bullshitting, I do not intentionally bullshit/mislead others. I am not bullshitting when I say you appear to be constantly on the rag! Negatio.

Cool sexism, bro. Please, continue showing the world exactly who you are.

And, someone presenting something fallaciously != using language that can be widely understood. Using clearer language doesn't necessitate a dilution of any argument.

Tell you what - howabout you at least try? If you don't want to simply be considered a troll, that's the best way to do it.

(September 9, 2018 at 4:42 am)negatio Wrote:

(September 9, 2018 at 3:48 am)Losty Wrote: Yes yes I know I am unethical and ignoble 😂
And you are boring. Come on. Say something new already.

Okay, since you say that you were referring to being tired of continually correcting my posts, and, were not commenting on the post I had just sent to Abaddon, which, to me, your statement appeared to be.
Oh, yes, if you were correcting my mistakes ad infinitum, why the hell didn't you tell me what I was doing wrong, instead of suffering?!  What is this unethical thing staff has about withholding code knowledge from Newbies, or, maybe you did so inform me, and the information was flawed...I was under such extreme psychological stress, being under constant attack then...and now, you have got to be bullshitting me, because I do not think there are extra tags in my posts. Everytime I try to type the code I use out in this box it fails to send when I press post reply. However you guys are able to send code.  If I could send you what I am doing, we could sort it out.  I just do not see how there can be any superfluity in my code now, it is so terse now that, if it were cut down, it would not function, that much I do now know.  Negatio.

Myself and others did take the time to tell you how to do it correctly, but sure, keep being dishonest.

(September 9, 2018 at 12:54 pm)Losty Wrote:

(September 9, 2018 at 4:42 am)negatio Wrote: Okay, since you say that you were referring to being tired of continually correcting my posts, and, were not commenting on the post I had just sent to Abaddon, which, to me, your statement appeared to be.
Oh, yes, if you were correcting my mistakes ad infinitum, why the hell didn't you tell me what I was doing wrong, instead of suffering?!  What is this unethical thing staff has about withholding code knowledge from Newbies, or, maybe you did so inform me, and the information was flawed...I was under such extreme psychological stress, being under constant attack then...and now, you have got to be bullshitting me, because I do not think there are extra tags in my posts. Everytime I try to type the code I use out in this box it fails to send when I press post reply. However you guys are able to send code.  If I could send you what I am doing, we could sort it out.  I just do not see how there can be any superfluity in my code now, it is so terse now that, if it were cut down, it would not function, that much I do now know.  Negatio.

Myself and others did take the time to tell you how to do it correctly, but sure, keep being dishonest.

Having you, Losty, repeatedly accuse me of being dishonest, when it is not what is happening, is as maddening as me ascribing fault to you, for you.  Here is what happened. Abaddon did tell me early on that one had to be very careful and precise regarding the spacing when doing code.  I successful did Reply to Mathtilda immediately; then under all of the tremendous pressure of being continually insulted; harassed; put into a double bind; in combination with a recent serious exposure to round-up, I lost touch with the Abaddon instruction; and, started using paradigm examples sent from other members, which misrepresented the spacing, thus I had too many spaces, which brought more damn trouble.  Now, thanks to emjay's careful tutoring I am doing OK, end of story. Negatio.

---

(September 9, 2018 at 12:53 pm)KevinM1 Wrote:

(September 9, 2018 at 2:55 am)negatio Wrote: The above is an absurd claim. Of course I can dilute, even annihilate, the substance of an argument by the manner in which the argument is communicated. Reference the interchange between Jormungandr and myself, where she posited an argument which I shot-down precisely on the basis of the fallacious manner wherein she communicated the argument.
Please do not accuse me of bullshitting, I do not intentionally bullshit/mislead others. I am not bullshitting when I say you appear to be constantly on the rag! Negatio.

Cool sexism, bro.  Please, continue showing the world exactly who you are.

And, someone presenting something fallaciously != using language that can be widely understood.  Using clearer language doesn't necessitate a dilution of any argument.

Tell you what - howabout you at least try?  If you don't want to simply be considered a troll, that's the best way to do it.

I have not merely tried, and, I have repeatedly informed members that a rewritten version of Part I of the OP appears on page 19 #184 of my thread. Sexism now. What sexism?

---

(September 9, 2018 at 12:25 am)Whateverist Wrote:

(September 8, 2018 at 5:44 pm)negatio Wrote: Whateverist, what does QFT mean? Negatio

I had to look it up too:  Quoted For Truth


I think I asked too.  It is better just to google it in order to be less of a drag.  I learned.  You can too.

Abaddon did Google QFT, and, there were four possibilities, none of which was Quoted for Truth, but they were heavy duty. Negatio.

(September 9, 2018 at 2:59 am)Losty Wrote:

(September 9, 2018 at 2:55 am)negatio Wrote: I am not bullshitting when I say you appear to be constantly on the rag! Negatio.

Your trollishness is showing again

Have you ever seen any really old Chaplin films; there is usually a person, dressed in a black robes, crouching off in a corner, pencil and notebook in hand, with big bug eyes, silently watching everything others who were present, were doing. 
mh.brewer can post me and openly laugh and scorn me, and you don't care.  However, let me do the slightest little thing, and you prejudicially are right on me!

(September 8, 2018 at 9:27 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote:

(September 8, 2018 at 9:04 pm)negatio Wrote: I have made my disproof understandable to others, because the language wherein the disproof is cast is per se intelligible.  It will not be intelligible to all Others, for, all Others are not energetic enough, and, toughminded enough to apprehend what is, in fact, intelligible. 
My central task is to posit an intelligible language, not subject to future defeat; my responsibility is not, cannot possibly be, to reduce my language to being intelligible to every non-toughminded weakling.
If I eject/toss-away the authentic difficulty which is attendant upon my position, I subject my position to being killed by Other intellect.  If I make my position readily available to everyman, to every non-toughminded person, to weaklings, I thereby compromise the indefeasibility of my argument, by diluting the inherent defensive structure contained therein.  Negatio.

Maybe, then, you are too wise to be a philosopher. It happens sometimes. People gain so much knowledge that they can't relate to those who seek knowledge, and love knowledge.

Plato Wrote:Isn't it obvious by now, Socrates, that those who love wisdom are not wise nor ignorant but the ones in between, like Love himself. In addition, the young god Love loves wisdom because wisdom and knowledge are the most beautiful things we know of, and Love is always drawn to beauty. It follows that love must be a lover of wisdom and that all lovers of wisdom, that is, philosophers, like Love himself, are somewhere in between total ignorance and complete omniscience.

Sexism = accusing me of being a woman having their period, as though a woman having their period is somehow overly emotional, or unnecessarily critical.  It's a sexist bullshit response, designed to impugn me by implying I'm acting like a woman, as though a woman is inferior.

Yes, #184 is better.  It's still not great.  Paragraphs would be nice (as in, a clean line between ideas, as is event in this very post).  Cleaning up superfluous commas would be nice.  More clarity re: how laws, man's determination, and the Christian concept of god interact would be nice.

Regarding my attitude towards you, yeah, I take a dim view to people who post something, and then attack those who ask "wait, what?" out of hand.  Tut-tutting people for not having taken the time to familiarize themselves with the background material, to the point of calling them lazy and of weak and/or lesser minds while, at the same time, gloating about your own superiority and the amount of effort it's taken you to grasp this material is, frankly, the hallmark of an asshole.  Continuing to do it when people - some politely, some not - ask you to climb down from your ivory tower and take the effort to make it more digestible is straight trolling.  And, no, your weak justifications for it have no merit.

Don't want to be called a troll?  Then cut the shit and act like an actual person.  Do you bombard your family and friends with philosophy and then chastise them for not being able to grasp it?  Do you insult people in your real life as being lazy or of a lesser mind?

My attitude towards you is directly proportional to the attitude you've exhibited so far.  If you're not happy with me, well, look in the mirror, because that's where the actual problem lies.

(September 9, 2018 at 5:37 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: Sexism = accusing me of being a woman having their period, as though a woman having their period is somehow overly emotional, or unnecessarily critical.  It's a sexist bullshit response, designed to impugn me by implying I'm acting like a woman, as though a woman is inferior.

Yes, #184 is better.  It's still not great.  Paragraphs would be nice (as in, a clean line between ideas, as is event in this very post).  Cleaning up superfluous commas would be nice.  More clarity re: how laws, man's determination, and the Christian concept of god interact would be nice.

Regarding my attitude towards you, yeah, I take a dim view to people who post something, and then attack those who ask "wait, what?" out of hand.  Tut-tutting people for not having taken the time to familiarize themselves with the background material, to the point of calling them lazy and of weak and/or lesser minds while, at the same time, gloating about your own superiority and the amount of effort it's taken you to grasp this material is, frankly, the hallmark of an asshole.  Continuing to do it when people - some politely, some not - ask you to climb down from your ivory tower and take the effort to make it more digestible is straight trolling.  And, no, your weak justifications for it have no merit.

Don't want to be called a troll?  Then cut the shit and act like an actual person.  Do you bombard your family and friends with philosophy and then chastise them for not being able to grasp it?  Do you insult people in your real life as being lazy or of a lesser mind?

My attitude towards you is directly proportional to the attitude you've exhibited so far.  If you're not happy with me, well, look in the mirror, because that's where the actual problem lies.

KevinM!, you  have been on my case, big time, ever since I arrived here.  Look at the history of your posts; and, you swing back and forth between nice, and, being a little dick!  You address me in such a hostile, disrespectful, and condescending manner in your continuous harassing attempts to make me over into a being which you prefer for me, and, so is everyone else.  Did you see the great interaction between Vulcanlogician and Negatio, where I explained why I write the way I write; however, you constantly insist that my being me is entirely insufficient.  Your above criticism takes the same condescending tone, yea, sure, you are going to make me over into the image of you, and, then, all will be well.  To me as an older guy, you are coming-off, in the past, and now, in a very peevish and immature fashion, ordering me to straighten-up and fly it right! And, so are many others, who scream scream for simplicity...read the Vulcanlogician/Negatio interchange from yesterday because, the dialectical pressure which Vulcanlogician subjected me to, in gentlemanly fashion, excited me to giving him a solid answer regarding why I had to write the OP  in the way in which I did. Negatio.

Boru