FloatingIdiot said: Bernkastel said: My opinion is that OP is actually the opposite of you. He knows some stuff but decides to shitpost most of the time. You don't know stuff but decide to try make constructive posts most of the time. I can't tell what's better of the two though... Having knowledge but not sharing, or not having knowledge but sharing. My opinion of you is someone who has a lot of knowledge, but limited ability (or potentially desire) to apply that knowledge in a rational sense, demonstrated by your extensive use of fallacies and logic-bending. Yes, my level of knowledge isn't as high in yours in the topics we have butted heads, but despite that I still manage to be more correct. I dunno I take Bernkastel a lost more seriously than you. But take my opinion like a grain of salt. |
ExplicitlyHuman said: FloatingIdiot said: My opinion of you is someone who has a lot of knowledge, but limited ability (or potentially desire) to apply that knowledge in a rational sense, demonstrated by your extensive use of fallacies and logic-bending. Yes, my level of knowledge isn't as high in yours in the topics we have butted heads, but despite that I still manage to be more correct. I dunno I take Bernkastel a lost more seriously than you. But take my opinion like a grain of salt. You should. I owned him so hard in Anime Discussion, proving he is a liar and a pseudo-intellectual. And then shrabster came in. He used to be attackontetris before he was owned. He had to change his name to save face. |
| I argued with people about KLK like 3 times it's not worth it, nothing's worth it. So no, not seriously at all anymore. I will probably answer a question seriously if it isn't posted by a spam alt. |
 |
PoeticJustice said: DAAAAAAMmmmnnnnn That was a rekt tbhAnd then shrabster came in. |
| Twitter and it's consequences had been a disaster for the human race |
| Thats why I was wondering when did the other HXH fan dissapear. |
 |
| As seriously as I take myself. If you're putting paragraphs of effort into writing about how much you don't care, I think you might be lying. |
 |
Bernkastel said: Like I said, you're hardly the best judge for logic or knowledge. I won't derail this thread though. Just because you say something doesn't make it true. I caught you in so much demonstrably bad reasoning that it's kind of sad, and now the best you can do in these threads is bring out your minions who are easily impressed by knowledge showcases. I don't have to even be a judge if you don't want. Your own words can speak for themselves. Your awful analogies, straw men, and laughable inability to even recognize contradictions... all of that. PoeticJustice said: You should. I owned him so hard in Anime Discussion, proving he is a liar and a pseudo-intellectual. And then shrabster came in. He used to be attackontetris before he was owned. He had to change his name to save face. Let me refresh your memory. You didn't even use the word "argument" correctly, or "ad hominem" in common usage, and then after a meltdown kept repeating "it's all subjective" like a salty child. And now that everyone's memories are wiped clear long after the fact, you want to pretend like I changed my name to "save face". |
HalkenburgNov 29, 2015 10:06 PM
 |
| i do |
DejWo said: I can't really complain about being derailed,being a goddawful shitposter that I am. But Bern does not really bend logic nor use fallacies. Lol you said that you didn't read most of the posts in that thread, so who are you to even speak? |
|
DejWo said: FloatingIdiot said: Lol you said that you didn't read most of the posts in that thread, so who are you to even speak? I debate with Bernkastel rather often on Skype,though I admit I have skimmed that thread. Well, he is guilty of all I accused him of, in that thread which you only skimmed. |
|
Bernkastel said: FloatingIdiot said: Just because you say something doesn't make it true. I caught you in so much demonstrably bad reasoning that it's kind of sad, and now the best you can do in these threads is bring out your minions who are easily impressed by knowledge showcases. I don't have to even be a judge if you don't want. Your own words can speak for themselves. Your awful analogies, straw men, and laughable inability to even recognize contradictions... all of that. Did you really? lol. And pls, I don't have minions. It's not like I'm pointing a gun to someone's head and forcing them to side with me. Minion is disrespectful, I do not consider the vast majority of people inferior as human beings. Well it's not like I was even trying to catch you. It's more like you were setting up traps with the adeptness of Wile E. Coyote. Your own words speak for themselves. |
|
| Yes, this is an internet forum. |
| Wait AttackonTetris is FloatingIdiot? Damn. That does make.things more clearer. |
FloatingIdiot said: DejWo said: I debate with Bernkastel rather often on Skype,though I admit I have skimmed that thread. Well, he is guilty of all I accused him of, in that thread which you only skimmed. You have no proof. All you do is make empty assertions and then backtrack when you are proven to be a fraud. Bernkastel runs circles around you intellectually and just because you speak somewhat eloquently, it cannot hide your shallow logic. |
PoeticJustice said: You have no proof. All you do is make empty assertions and then backtrack when you are proven to be a fraud. Bernkastel runs circles around you intellectually and just because you speak somewhat eloquently, it cannot hide your shallow logic. Do you really want me to link to the thread in which you shat your pants? "Shallow logic", coming from you, shouldn't mean a whole lot to anyone. |
|
| You cannot defeat my impenetrable logics, for I have evolved to level 50 intellectual, destroyer of fallacies. I am a truly superior master debater. |
|
Red_Keys said: Prove it.You cannot defeat my impenetrable logics, for I have evolved to level 50 intellectual, destroyer of fallacies. I am a truly superior master debater. |
ExplicitlyHuman said: Red_Keys said: Prove it.You cannot defeat my impenetrable logics, for I have evolved to level 50 intellectual, destroyer of fallacies. I am a truly superior master debater. ....And you fell for it.Wonderful. |
|
Animestic said: Prove itExplicitlyHuman said: Prove it. ....And you fell for it.Wonderful. |
FloatingIdiot said: PoeticJustice said: You have no proof. All you do is make empty assertions and then backtrack when you are proven to be a fraud. Bernkastel runs circles around you intellectually and just because you speak somewhat eloquently, it cannot hide your shallow logic. Do you really want me to link to the thread in which you shat your pants? "Shallow logic", coming from you, shouldn't mean a whole lot to anyone. Shat my pants from what? Your ignorance? Everyone and their grandmother dismantled your poorly constructed Texhnolyze arguments, not just me. Also, your misuse of fallacies and falsely attributing fallacies you commit to your opponents. You claim some kind of intellectual superiority when it is all facade to hide your insecurity about your own intelligence. Which is pitiful. Humble yourself. |
| I willingly take bait to argue with the morons here but I don't get mad because I'm doing it on purpose. Sometimes I get mad when I argue but never really against someone with an equal intelligent opinion. But if I'm arguing with someone religious or someone who thinks Obama is a communist Muslim, I more often than not do not look the other way and engage. |
ExplicitlyHuman said: Prove I need a reason to.Red_Keys said: Prove it.You cannot defeat my impenetrable logics, for I have evolved to level 50 intellectual, destroyer of fallacies. I am a truly superior master debater. |
|
PoeticJustice said: FloatingIdiot said: Do you really want me to link to the thread in which you shat your pants? "Shallow logic", coming from you, shouldn't mean a whole lot to anyone. Shat my pants from what? Your ignorance? Everyone and their grandmother dismantled your poorly constructed Texhnolyze arguments, not just me. Also, your misuse of fallacies and falsely attributing fallacies you commit to your opponents. You claim some kind of intellectual superiority when it is all facade to hide your insecurity about your own intelligence. Which is pitiful. Humble yourself. Well if you were to actually demonstrate one of these things, you may have a point. But of course you can't. My critique of Texhnolyze is all subjective, so you don't have to agree with it. I don't care if you do or don't. Anyway, the final blow in your pants-shitting thread. http://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=1420320&show=50#msg41755950 |
|
Red_Keys said: Because I said so. #ImpeccablereasoningExplicitlyHuman said: Prove I need a reason to.Prove it. |
ExplicitlyHuman said: Prove it Bernkastel said: And what is the incentive?To try to put in effort in proving a point which totally doesn't concern me in an anonymous internet forum,doesn't really provide much motivation.I am a pretty self-centred individual frankly speaking.Prove it. |
|
| yep, not just here but on most forums im once active |
FloatingIdiot said: PoeticJustice said: Shat my pants from what? Your ignorance? Everyone and their grandmother dismantled your poorly constructed Texhnolyze arguments, not just me. Also, your misuse of fallacies and falsely attributing fallacies you commit to your opponents. You claim some kind of intellectual superiority when it is all facade to hide your insecurity about your own intelligence. Which is pitiful. Humble yourself. Well if you were to actually demonstrate one of these things, you may have a point. But of course you can't. My critique of Texhnolyze is all subjective, so you don't have to agree with it. I don't care if you do or don't. Anyway, the final blow in your pants-shitting thread. http://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=1420320&show=50#msg41755950 FloatingIdiot said: All I see is you not correctly understanding a fallacy. Then using that as an argument. Please stop deluding yourself.PoeticJustice said: Shat my pants from what? Your ignorance? Everyone and their grandmother dismantled your poorly constructed Texhnolyze arguments, not just me. Also, your misuse of fallacies and falsely attributing fallacies you commit to your opponents. You claim some kind of intellectual superiority when it is all facade to hide your insecurity about your own intelligence. Which is pitiful. Humble yourself. Well if you were to actually demonstrate one of these things, you may have a point. But of course you can't. My critique of Texhnolyze is all subjective, so you don't have to agree with it. I don't care if you do or don't. Anyway, the final blow in your pants-shitting thread. http://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=1420320&show=50#msg41755950 |
Bernkastel said: Animestic said: And what is the incentive?To try to put in effort in proving a point which totally doesn't concern me in an anonymous internet forum,doesn't really provide much motivation.I am a pretty self-centred individual. Prove that you're self-centred and there is no incentive. Naah,why would I need to put in an effort about something I know as a fact.Self centred individuals tend to consider their opinions as Word of God.So entire point is redundant. |
|
| No, but I still give valid arguments. |
| Be thankful for the wisdom granted to you. |
Animestic said: ExplicitlyHuman said: Prove it Bernkastel said: And what is the incentive?To try to put in effort in proving a point which totally doesn't concern me in an anonymous internet forum,doesn't really provide much motivation.I am a pretty self-centred individual frankly speaking.Prove it. You realize I am not actually asking him to prove it right? I am just joking. But seeing most of the retarded comments I have since seen you make it doesnt suprise me that you cant understand sarcasm. |
ExplicitlyHuman said: All I see is you not correctly understanding a fallacy. Then using that as an argument. Please stop deluding yourself. Can you name the fallacy which I didn't understand? Do you mean "ad hominem" (adjective), with the meaning of "to the person", which also isn't a fallacy? |
|
| I take everything seriously |
 Nico- said: Conversations with people pinging/quoting me to argue about some old post I wrote years ago will not be entertained@Comic_Sans oh no y arnt ppl dieing i need more ppl dieing rly gud plot avansement jus liek tokyo ghoul if erbudy dies amirite |
Comic_Sans said: I seriously wanna touch ur butt.I take everything seriously |
Bernkastel said: FloatingIdiot said: Anyway, the final blow in your pants-shitting thread. http://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=1420320&show=50#msg41755950 I didn't say anything about what you and PJ talked about because I never saw the discussion. Thanks for linking it though, because now I can clearly make a judgement. You lost. You made zero valid points on-topic and instead went off on a tangent about fallacies. By having no argument to begin with, you already lost by default. The semantics of fallacies didn't even matter. The (very) unbiased observer voices his opinion. I wasn't trying to make a particular point, but rather just correct PJ, who demonstrated really bad command of logic. The point was that PJ kept flinging poo at me which he later learned to contain to his own pants. Ever since that thread, he's just been repeating "it's all subjective". PJ, as the attacker, lost on all 3 of the points which I listed. If your attacks miss, that is usually considered a loss. But in Bern's World, I already know that logic doesn't apply. |
|
DejWo said: ExplicitlyHuman said: I seriously wanna touch ur butt. That was seriously explicit. But thats all subjective. |
| Did you stop? Pls continue Tetris. |
| Who cares if you win an argument over the internet? Win one in real life with a reliable source that supports what you're trying to get across. Maybe then people will actually take you seriously. |
 |
Bernkastel said: FloatingIdiot said: The (very) unbiased observer voices his opinion. I wasn't trying to make a particular point, but rather just correct PJ, who demonstrated really bad command of logic. The point was that PJ kept flinging poo at me which he later learned to keep in his own pants. Ever since that thread, he's just been repeating "it's all subjective". PJ, as the attacker, lost on all 3 of the points which I listed. If your attacks miss, that is usually considered a loss. OK, let's go back to lesson 1 of basic logic:  PJ refuted your central point about Texh failing to be a good science fiction. You on the other hand addressed his counterpoints with ad hom or name calling arguments, right at the bottom of the pyramid. Your 3 points are all at the bottom of the barrel. Anyone with basic debating skills understand that none of the 3 points are even important. First of all, that is not "basic logic". That is someone's interpretation of logic. I wasn't talking about the Texhnolyze part. But in the thread where that came from I made it clear that I was making a judgment of personal taste which wasn't intended to be taken objectively. It was PJ who took it objectively and then tried to insert a chunk of it into the later thread. As you can see in the original thread, I expressed my original view as "I felt", and implied complete subjectivity from thereon, and wasn't trying to make a universal point, but rather just express why Texhnolyze failed to connect with me, and more specifically why i personally couldn't take it seriously. Lol I go back and read what I wrote and it really is horribly inarticulate because that may be the first time I actually tried to critique a show, but I would hope to have improved by now. I came looking for a discussion and then masterofgo challenged my feelings which we discussed respectfully, except for when PJ flung poo. Original thread can be found here: http://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=1413300&show=0 |
HalkenburgNov 29, 2015 11:15 PM
|
This thread brings nostalgia of Immahnoob's threads,which were pretty much CD vs Immahnoob and at the end he was always like... |
| This thread is almost entirely a bunch of sarcastic replies to OP's overly sarcastic OP. Kudos~~ i approve ^_^; @OP online debate is a very serious matter, one does not simply let go of an interweb fight ... you're a loser if you do. Admittedly, everyone engaging in said debate will become a loser in the end :/ |
 |
Bernkastel said: FloatingIdiot said: First of all, that is not "basic logic". That is someone's interpretation of logic. Please don't tell me interpretation of logic is subjective. I beg you. Anything but that. Logic is "the branch of philosophy concerned with the use and study of valid reasoning". The 7-level pyramid just is far too non-grounded in hard rationality for me to intuitively accept as logic, but you can call it someone's interpretation of logic based on that Wikipedia definition. If you are to use a more objective condition for logic to be logic in that it has to be purely rational (which would be a necessary premise for your comment), then I would say it is not logic because it encourages irrational judgments which can lead to false conclusions (that arguments which fit on a higher tier are superior to those below them). The pyramid implies hierarchical superiority of a higher level over the other, when it is fairly easy to come up with counterexamples which either result in ties of floors, or in some cases actually reversals of floors. I can't see it as anything but at best a subjective representation of logic (if we are to use Wikipedia's definition that I quoted). FloatingIdiot said: I wasn't talking about the Texhnolyze part. But in the thread where that came from I made it clear that I was making a judgment of personal taste which wasn't intended to be taken objectively. It was PJ who took it objectively and then tried to insert a chunk of it into the later thread. As you can see in the original thread, I expressed my original view as "I felt", and implied complete subjectivity from thereon, and wasn't trying to make a universal point, but rather just express what I felt Texhnolyze failed about. And he disagrees with you and made a FAR better argument for his case. In this entire thread you kept telling us about how he was being fallacious and you wrecked him. How exactly have you wrecked him if he came up with a better argument than you? If all you wanted to say was "that's how I felt about Texh" then it's fine. You told us you destroyed PJ, but all evidence points to the contrary. You're shifting the goalposts. The topic here is clearly logic, not Texhnolyze. I had abandoned the idea of Texhnolyze and really could care less about it because it was simply "how I felt". The reason I brought that up is because PJ demonstrated poor logic chops at that point in time, and got completely destroyed on the logical side of the argument. |
HalkenburgNov 29, 2015 11:37 PM
|
More topics from this board
Poll: » do you hide or deny your dark side to others or society?deg - 6 hours ago |
13 |
by deg
»»
2 minutes ago |
|
» Plushies_Nette_ - Yesterday |
16 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
5 minutes ago |
|
» Do you enjoy nature?Kamikaze_404 - Apr 23 |
34 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
6 minutes ago |
|
» whats your shoe size ?sussybakagirl420 - Mar 22 |
21 |
by 707supremacist
»»
22 minutes ago |
|
» What do yall collect? ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )bevarnow - Jan 25 |
315 |
by Lightskynight
»»
25 minutes ago |