How do you view humanity in general?

[Ahriman]

Or I'm employing a fundamentally deeper mode of logic than you are. Most people, including you, only understand things on a surface level. You surface dwellers would never understand the kind of deep logic I'm employing.

How can you know what I understand?  What do you really know about me?  Just what I post on this forum, and I put forth a full explanation of any opinions or ideas that I have, unlike your tendency to just post some contrarian nonsense that doesn't conform to the known body of knowledge at all.  And when questioned, you duck and run, avoiding the opportunity to explain yourself fully.  Anyone who truly has something of value to say would be willing to make their ideas clear.  What you do is just bait and that's actually a form of trolling.

However, if you do know some mystical "deeper mode of logic" that the rest of us aren't privy to, then prove it.  Explain it.  Describe it in detail and let us underlings learn from your genius.

Watch as Ahriman fades like a sunset, nothing to say.

It doesn't even matter what I try to say. Even if I could rationally explain how I see things, which is doubtful to begin with, you wouldn't be satisfied. You would just pick apart everything I have to say and insert your own "principled" (barf) perspective.

[Spongebob]

It doesn't even matter what I try to say. Even if I could rationally explain how I see things, which is doubtful to begin with, you wouldn't be satisfied. You would just pick apart everything I have to say and insert your own "principled" (barf) perspective.

That's completely unfair because when you are asked, you usually run away.  If you can't explain things how you see them, then how can you be sure you even understand them yourself?  There must be something in you that recognizes the fact that if you present a controversial opinion, you will get challenged.  If you try to explain it with more controversy, you will get challenged on that as well.  You can't say "my logic works because the earth is flat", then get upset when you get corrected that the earth is not flat.  So is your goal to just to spew out your opinions or is it to be understood?  And mind you, I haven't heard one single original thing from you yet.  You should be asking more questions than you're answering.

[Ahriman]

It doesn't even matter what I try to say. Even if I could rationally explain how I see things, which is doubtful to begin with, you wouldn't be satisfied. You would just pick apart everything I have to say and insert your own "principled" (barf) perspective.

That's completely unfair because when you are asked, you usually run away.  If you can't explain things how you see them, then how can you be sure you even understand them yourself?  There must be something in you that recognizes the fact that if you present a controversial opinion, you will get challenged.  If you try to explain it with more controversy, you will get challenged on that as well.  You can't say "my logic works because the earth is flat", then get upset when you get corrected that the earth is not flat.  So is your goal to just to spew out your opinions or is it to be understood?  And mind you, I haven't heard one single original thing from you yet.  You should be asking more questions than you're answering.

I can't empathize with other people, so the logical soundness of someone else's opinion doesn't matter to me. I really only care about my own opinions, although it is interesting to read the opinions of others. But really, I think my "ultimate perspective" on things is just too personal for anyone else to understand, or at least, for most people to understand. I think most people are too concerned with what is "absolutely true", they're too concerned with proving things right or wrong, instead of focusing on what would change the world for the better. This world, the way it is now, is not good enough to justify people squabbling over petty issues. Of course, if this world really was a good place, people wouldn't be squabbling over petty issues anyway. But I'm actually about to post something in the "Random Thoughts" thread, that relates to my lack of empathy.

[Angrboda]

That's completely unfair because when you are asked, you usually run away.  If you can't explain things how you see them, then how can you be sure you even understand them yourself?  There must be something in you that recognizes the fact that if you present a controversial opinion, you will get challenged.  If you try to explain it with more controversy, you will get challenged on that as well.  You can't say "my logic works because the earth is flat", then get upset when you get corrected that the earth is not flat.  So is your goal to just to spew out your opinions or is it to be understood?  And mind you, I haven't heard one single original thing from you yet.  You should be asking more questions than you're answering.

I can't empathize with other people, so the logical soundness of someone else's opinion doesn't matter to me. I really only care about my own opinions, although it is interesting to read the opinions of others. But really, I think my "ultimate perspective" on things is just too personal for anyone else to understand, or at least, for most people to understand. I think most people are too concerned with what is "absolutely true", they're too concerned with proving things right or wrong, instead of focusing on what would change the world for the better. This world, the way it is now, is not good enough to justify people squabbling over petty issues. Of course, if this world really was a good place, people wouldn't be squabbling over petty issues anyway. But I'm actually about to post something in the "Random Thoughts" thread, that relates to my lack of empathy.

[Spongebob]

That's completely unfair because when you are asked, you usually run away.  If you can't explain things how you see them, then how can you be sure you even understand them yourself?  There must be something in you that recognizes the fact that if you present a controversial opinion, you will get challenged.  If you try to explain it with more controversy, you will get challenged on that as well.  You can't say "my logic works because the earth is flat", then get upset when you get corrected that the earth is not flat.  So is your goal to just to spew out your opinions or is it to be understood?  And mind you, I haven't heard one single original thing from you yet.  You should be asking more questions than you're answering.

1.  I can't empathize with other people, so the logical soundness of someone else's opinion doesn't matter to me. I really only care about my own opinions, although it is interesting to read the opinions of others.

2.  But really, I think my "ultimate perspective" on things is just too personal for anyone else to understand, or at least, for most people to understand.

3.  I think most people are too concerned with what is "absolutely true", they're too concerned with proving things right or wrong, instead of focusing on what would change the world for the better.

4.  This world, the way it is now, is not good enough to justify people squabbling over petty issues. Of course, if this world really was a good place, people wouldn't be squabbling over petty issues anyway. But I'm actually about to post something in the "Random Thoughts" thread, that relates to my lack of empathy.

1.  OK, so empathy is not related to logic in any way.  Empathy is a measure of how you connect with another person emotionally, not logically.  And if you only care about your own opinions, then it is truly baffling that you would present your opinions an open forum for others to dissect.  If you really find it interesting to read the opinions of others, then you would be asking a lot more questions.  I see you talking a lot more than asking.

2.  You are congratulating yourself.  Most likely your opinions aren't original at all.  Few people's are.

3.  Those things are not necessarily related.  I can focus on worldly matters at the same time as considering personal, subjective matters.  Not that hard to do both.  And some things simply are objectively true or false and it is important to understand this when you live in a world with other people around.  There's plenty of subjectivity to go around, like which music is the best or what's the best style of beer.  All up to you because those questions are not universal in nature.  But when you foray into things like logic and mathematics, you are in the objective world and your subjective opinions are not relevant because these things apply to the entire universe.  Sorry, that's just the way it is.

4.  People squabble over all sorts of issues.  In fact, this "squabbling" is how most issues are worked out.  When people stop squabbling is when violence usually starts.  But I don't consider asking you to explain a controversial idea to be squabbling.  It's what someone does to try and understand.  You just avoid explaining anything and the only conclusion I can muster is that you don't know what you are talking about.

[Ahriman]

You're just wrong about everything dude. You have a very "common" perspective on things, as most people do. "because these things apply to the entire universe"? How would you know what applies to the entire universe? Your opinions are too plebeian in nature for me to take you seriously.

[Spongebob]

1.  You're just wrong about everything dude. You have a very "common" perspective on things, as most people do.

2.  "because these things apply to the entire universe"? How would you know what applies to the entire universe?

3.  Your opinions are too plebeian in nature for me to take you seriously.

1.  Here's your opportunity.  Explain how I'm wrong.  How is my perspective "common"?  Use references.  And by association, if you claim that I'm wrong abut "everything", then that must mean you are "right".  So demonstrate this.  How are you right about everything?

2.  Physical laws, for one thing.  Mathematics, also.  And logic.  These things are universal as far as we know, meaning there's no evidence to suggest these concepts behave differently on mars than on earth.  There's always the possibility, so no one who has any sense speaks in absolute terms.

3.  Plebian.  Now that's a strange adjective to apply here.  Plebian just means "common".  So by saying my understanding of things is "common", you are giving me quite the compliment.  You are saying I'm not out on the fringe, which I absolutely agree.  What subjects I've studied, it's been pretty obvious that I'm not a genius in them, so learning from those that have far more accomplishments seems to be a good bet.  What you seem to be saying is that anyone who accepts the consensus on a given subject is not worthy of your interest.  That's fine with me, but you are the outlier.  If you want to prove the earth is flat, it's up to you to provide the evidence (I say this figuratively in case that's not clear).

[Angrboda]

My millennial translater indicates that he simply means that you're too square, Daddy-O.

[Spongebob]

My millennial translater indicates that he simply means that you're too square, Daddy-O.

Seems to be the case.  Generational gap.  I suppose people learn at some point.

[Ahriman]

My millennial translater indicates that he simply means that you're too square, Daddy-O.

Seems to be the case.  Generational gap.  I suppose people learn at some point.

I am a very wise person. Not everyone can be wise. And it has nothing to do with age.