(July 2, 2018 at 12:41 pm)Drich Wrote:(July 2, 2018 at 9:49 am)Jörmungandr Wrote: Not what I meant. I meant that I suspect you believe that a person who is honest knows where their abilities begin and end primarily because you don't know what you are talking about, and are unaware of your basic incompetence regarding the subject. In other words, I suspect that you think you know something you don't actually know because you don't really know what you do and do not know.
No i got it the first time... I was trying to give you an out, by reestablishing the parameters of how I identify what is 'known to me.' Whether or not a subject is 'known to me well enough to fit your standard is irrelevant. As I'm often times required to speak to the most basic understanding in a given thread. if my understanding or answer seems overly simplistic or even too simple it is because i perceive a lack of the basics even though you perceive yourselves as masters of anything religious so I must word things far more simplisticly than I would like.
So by redefining what is know to something I plan to say, takes the ability to judge content out of the equation as an objective to judge a 'knowable.' Again when something or a primise is unknown to me I will simply have an urge to write and I begin sometimes in the middle or end and then have to go back an rearrange paragraphs so they all flow. That to me is/was an unknown. As it is like I'm given a word or two at a time and I get to read it all for the first time as I am proofing a text.
Again content not with standing, that would be how I would define something out of my purview that was given to me.
Doesn't address the point I was making, but by all means, continue spewing bullshit if you think it will get you out of the jam you have put yourself in.