You Know My Name
New member
basic arithmetic..? But with the wrong answers?
This question was violated by a certain person. Here it is again, with his answer and my response to it. Unfortunately, I did not get to save further responses before it was deleted again. Feel free to add them yourselves, violators.
Mandelbrot: I know 'higher algebra' inside out, and for that matter poetry too. I do not think they are that much alike, but I do think they are both drawn from a common well that lies at the intersection of logical analysis, precise articulation, and emotional and aesthetic arrest. You know only the poetry so you cannot compare them in any meaningful way; in many ways my life experience, my educational experience, has made me uniquely qualified. Because I cannot fully agree with your antecedent, I expect to be insulted, threatened, and dismissed, but the fact that 'real poetry' is not so much like 'higher algebra' means that I can provide only qualified support for your revised antecedent and hence find, based on logical premises that derive from rules for assigning truth values to material conditionals (which your statement is) that your consequent statement does not follow directly from it.
And the ad hominems continue. You have earned your inferiority, and now you spend your days consolidating it. So predictable. The problem is that you are too limited in your understanding of logic to understand the point I am making. I do not hold your ignorance against you. I think of it as a birthmark, and I do not dislike people for cafe au lait spots so how can I dislike you for this. You simply have chosen to study things other than mathematics and poetry so your understanding of them is limited. I'm sure you're helping your patients and that you are an asset to the Albuquerque community...
I've posted no questions in weeks and anticipate none in the forseeable future; you can simply sign out of a blocked account and into another one to answer. I've seen you do it more than a dozen times merely to give a thumbs down in my responses to other questions. If you really want to answer a question, it seems that you should be willing to make that much of an effort. By the way, since you're serving waffles, I like mine with butter and maple syrup, and make it snappy because I'm hungry.
Me: Samuel Johnson is said to have made the following analogy: "Dictionaries are like watches; the worst is better than none, and the best cannot be expected to go quite true." I can readily see what he means, but there are those who would say, "But a dictionary is nothing like a watch" - and thereby miss the point of the comparison. Such a one has answered my question, and - by wallowing in what he mistakenly thinks is his cleverness - has thus revealed the limits of his intellect and imagination. It has been - and continues to be - a pleasure being his superior. (It is also interesting to note that his current answer is not in accord with his initial one - but then, consistency has never been his strong point.)
Nothing about my refutation of a certain person's misuse of logic is based on an attack on his character, so it cannot be described as "ad hominem". I completely see the point he is trying (and failing) to make in his waffle about poetry and algebra; however, it is my contention that his tedious verbiage serves only to demonstrate that he has almost completely missed the point of my question. Furthermore, he is merely indulging in his long-winded discourse to prompt me to reply so that he can then violate my question. Also, it is a sure sign that someone has lost the argument when he blocks the person he responds to from reciprocral comment on his own questions. That simply shows fear on his part.
Jesus once said "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into Heaven." To which some bright spark responded "But it's impossible for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle", little realizing that, in missing the point of the parable, he had confirmed the truth of it. For some people it seems to be the same with analogies.
Ah, what poetic irony! The man who once so much protested his dislike of Buk has now descended to emulating him in his feeble put-downs. An admission, it seems to me, that your professed dislike of him was down to simple jealousy. And it matters little whether I can bypass blocks or not - the fact that you do it proves you're running scared. I offer a level playing field because I know I'll win - whereas you have to stack the deck in what you imagine to be your favour. You are indeed a source of rich amusement - contrary to the goal you may aspire to.
This was the response I was typing out when the question was deleted:
And again you misunderstand the art of analogy. Is a watch like a dictionary? No, but they can be comparable in the effect they have on people. You see, you are too rigid and blinkered in your thinking, and consequently have a limited imagination. I was not saying that an analogy was the same as a hyperbolic statement - I was pointing out that both can be misunderstood in a similar way. Try stretching your brain a little - instead of your @rse - just for a change.
You seem to be overlooking the fact that a material conditional need not be regarded as a truth function, but rather as a symbol of formal theory. You know fine well you're manipulating language to distort logic because few people will even understand what you're saying.
Nonsense? It'd entirely factual - as you'd know if you learned before you talked. And I never click on links.
I am now going to apply my attention for the next few hours to making more money than you can even dream of - feel free to waffle on, then report my question. No skin of my nose - it'll be back.
And I always knew that you were no brighter than this, so your frantic posturing is no surprise. Not wow.
And as you're a virgin, you don't even know what a f*ck is, so stick to talking about what you know - even if you are limited as to choice.
This question was violated by a certain person. Here it is again, with his answer and my response to it. Unfortunately, I did not get to save further responses before it was deleted again. Feel free to add them yourselves, violators.
Mandelbrot: I know 'higher algebra' inside out, and for that matter poetry too. I do not think they are that much alike, but I do think they are both drawn from a common well that lies at the intersection of logical analysis, precise articulation, and emotional and aesthetic arrest. You know only the poetry so you cannot compare them in any meaningful way; in many ways my life experience, my educational experience, has made me uniquely qualified. Because I cannot fully agree with your antecedent, I expect to be insulted, threatened, and dismissed, but the fact that 'real poetry' is not so much like 'higher algebra' means that I can provide only qualified support for your revised antecedent and hence find, based on logical premises that derive from rules for assigning truth values to material conditionals (which your statement is) that your consequent statement does not follow directly from it.
And the ad hominems continue. You have earned your inferiority, and now you spend your days consolidating it. So predictable. The problem is that you are too limited in your understanding of logic to understand the point I am making. I do not hold your ignorance against you. I think of it as a birthmark, and I do not dislike people for cafe au lait spots so how can I dislike you for this. You simply have chosen to study things other than mathematics and poetry so your understanding of them is limited. I'm sure you're helping your patients and that you are an asset to the Albuquerque community...
I've posted no questions in weeks and anticipate none in the forseeable future; you can simply sign out of a blocked account and into another one to answer. I've seen you do it more than a dozen times merely to give a thumbs down in my responses to other questions. If you really want to answer a question, it seems that you should be willing to make that much of an effort. By the way, since you're serving waffles, I like mine with butter and maple syrup, and make it snappy because I'm hungry.
Me: Samuel Johnson is said to have made the following analogy: "Dictionaries are like watches; the worst is better than none, and the best cannot be expected to go quite true." I can readily see what he means, but there are those who would say, "But a dictionary is nothing like a watch" - and thereby miss the point of the comparison. Such a one has answered my question, and - by wallowing in what he mistakenly thinks is his cleverness - has thus revealed the limits of his intellect and imagination. It has been - and continues to be - a pleasure being his superior. (It is also interesting to note that his current answer is not in accord with his initial one - but then, consistency has never been his strong point.)
Nothing about my refutation of a certain person's misuse of logic is based on an attack on his character, so it cannot be described as "ad hominem". I completely see the point he is trying (and failing) to make in his waffle about poetry and algebra; however, it is my contention that his tedious verbiage serves only to demonstrate that he has almost completely missed the point of my question. Furthermore, he is merely indulging in his long-winded discourse to prompt me to reply so that he can then violate my question. Also, it is a sure sign that someone has lost the argument when he blocks the person he responds to from reciprocral comment on his own questions. That simply shows fear on his part.
Jesus once said "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into Heaven." To which some bright spark responded "But it's impossible for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle", little realizing that, in missing the point of the parable, he had confirmed the truth of it. For some people it seems to be the same with analogies.
Ah, what poetic irony! The man who once so much protested his dislike of Buk has now descended to emulating him in his feeble put-downs. An admission, it seems to me, that your professed dislike of him was down to simple jealousy. And it matters little whether I can bypass blocks or not - the fact that you do it proves you're running scared. I offer a level playing field because I know I'll win - whereas you have to stack the deck in what you imagine to be your favour. You are indeed a source of rich amusement - contrary to the goal you may aspire to.
This was the response I was typing out when the question was deleted:
And again you misunderstand the art of analogy. Is a watch like a dictionary? No, but they can be comparable in the effect they have on people. You see, you are too rigid and blinkered in your thinking, and consequently have a limited imagination. I was not saying that an analogy was the same as a hyperbolic statement - I was pointing out that both can be misunderstood in a similar way. Try stretching your brain a little - instead of your @rse - just for a change.
You seem to be overlooking the fact that a material conditional need not be regarded as a truth function, but rather as a symbol of formal theory. You know fine well you're manipulating language to distort logic because few people will even understand what you're saying.
Nonsense? It'd entirely factual - as you'd know if you learned before you talked. And I never click on links.
I am now going to apply my attention for the next few hours to making more money than you can even dream of - feel free to waffle on, then report my question. No skin of my nose - it'll be back.
And I always knew that you were no brighter than this, so your frantic posturing is no surprise. Not wow.
And as you're a virgin, you don't even know what a f*ck is, so stick to talking about what you know - even if you are limited as to choice.