16 Mar 13
Originally posted by avalanchethecatYou're the funny one. On one hand you seem to understand that you don't understand what they're saying, yet on the other hand you keep insisting that you have understood what you've read. Just get over yourself and read what they're actually saying. In other words, "put your big boy pants on".
You're a funny guy, you know that?
16 Mar 13
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneYou just can't help yourself can you? You realise you've explained nothing in this thread? You've posted cut & pasted stuff which you claim explains your position, but you doggedly refuse to deal with the subject yourself. Every time I ask you to explain, you climb right up there on your high-horse and come up with some patronising swipe about how I'm failing to grasp these simple arguments. You appear to be aligning yourself with a verificationist dismissal of psychological egoism, but seem unable or unwilling to discuss the matter in question directly. Just explain your position. Don't tell me to read somebody else's again, use your own words. You can do that, can't you?
You're the funny one. On one hand you seem to understand that you don't understand what they're saying, yet on the other hand you keep insisting that you have understood what you've read. Just get over yourself and read what they're actually saying. In other words, "put your big boy pants on".
16 Mar 13
Originally posted by avalanchethecatlol. You're like a little kid who can't admit that he needs to reread something because he didn't understand it. So in order to avoid doing so, launches unfounded personal attacks on the person who keeps pointing them in the right direction. You keep claiming that you're "not an idiot", yet insist on proving otherwise.
You just can't help yourself can you? You realise you've explained nothing in this thread? You've posted cut & pasted stuff which you claim explains your position, but you doggedly refuse to deal with the subject yourself. Every time I ask you to explain, you climb right up there on your high-horse and come up with some patronising swipe about how I' ...[text shortened]... 't tell me to read somebody else's again, use your own words. You can do that, can't you?
17 Mar 13
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneOh for crying out loud. I'm not making any personal attacks on you, I'm trying to get you to explain your position, that's all. If you're not interested in getting your views across, well, fine, don't bother. If all you're after is a frank exchange of insults, I'm afraid you'll have to find somebody else to play with.
lol. You're like a little kid who can't admit that he needs to reread something because he didn't understand it. So in order to avoid doing so, launches unfounded personal attacks on the person who keeps pointing them in the right direction. You keep claiming that you're "not an idiot", yet insist on proving otherwise.
17 Mar 13
Originally posted by avalanchethecatWow. If nothing else you really know how to 'play the victim' by making unfounded accusations - all to avoid admitting that you need to reread something because you didn't understand it.
Oh for crying out loud. I'm not making any personal attacks on you, I'm trying to get you to explain your position, that's all. If you're not interested in getting your views across, well, fine, don't bother. If all you're after is a frank exchange of insults, I'm afraid you'll have to find somebody else to play with.
As I've pointed out more than a couple of times now: You've already had it explained to you at least three different ways. I have no reason to believe that a fourth is going to be of more help to you than you going back over it with the attitude that there are things that you don't sufficiently understand.
Evidently you can't understand the above either.
17 Mar 13
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneYeah, well, thanks for all your help there. I'm just gonna go ahead and accept that your inability to discuss the subject reflects your understanding of it.
Wow. If nothing else you really know how to 'play the victim' by making unfounded accusations - all to avoid admitting that you need to reread something because you didn't understand it.
As I've pointed out more than a couple of times now: You've already had it explained to you at least three different ways. I have no reason to believe that a fourth i ...[text shortened]... t you don't sufficiently understand.
Evidently you can't understand the above either.
17 Mar 13
Originally posted by avalanchethecatFascinating. In order to relieve his cognitive dissonance, ATC has convinced himself that I have an 'inability' to discuss the subject - even though I have plainly stated on numerous occasions exactly why I don't believe that yet another explanation (at least the fourth) would prove fruitful. Classic. Hopefully someday ATC will gain some much needed maturity.
Yeah, well, thanks for all your help there. I'm just gonna go ahead and accept that your inability to discuss the subject reflects your understanding of it.
17 Mar 13
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneYou've got issues, dude.
Fascinating. In order to relieve his cognitive dissonance, ATC has convinced himself that I have an 'inability' to discuss the subject - even though I have plainly stated on numerous occasions exactly why I don't believe that yet another explanation (at least the fourth) would prove fruitful. Classic. Hopefully someday ATC will gain some much needed maturity.
18 Mar 13
1 edit
Originally posted by avalanchethecatNot 'arguing' at all. Just continuing to point out the facts. Not that they mean much of anything to you. From what I can tell, you believe things are true simply because you think them.
Do you realise you're arguing on your own?
18 Mar 13
Originally posted by avalanchethecatActually I was wondering the same about you. Based on your world view, seems like that of a college kid, yet reading between the lines of your responses, it wouldn't surprise me if you're older chronologically.
How old are you ToO? No insult intended or prepared, I'm just curious.