Don't condemn people in AA
-
Oh, this is just too damned funny.
Now you sayOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:
when you started out saying
if you are not a judge (I was addressing sgforumners, not judges)... you need to be GODS in order to judgeOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:
Looks like you're the one who doesn't know the meaning of the word "if" - may I suggest you consult a dictionary?
You have to be able to not just say what "Good" is and what "Bad" is but be the authority to set the standards. You have to be "GOD" -
Well, you're the one who claims to be an old man, so "kid" is relative. Better yet, you're an old man who still has to worry about his boss looking over his shoulder - you're a real paragon of achievement.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Having to explain every little thing to you makes me feel like I am talking to a kid.. *haiz*
-
I surely hope flame haven started in this thread
kk i know what andrew really wanted...
he just wanted to share about the truth of this world... the knowledge he knew...
but andrew... not all people can understand such thing de...
it need alot of explaination for other people who understand...
even for the same type of people who think the same way as you, they need a few explaination to understand...
i understand how you feel cus, i am the same type of person as you
just that i am lazy to explain again and again so i keep quite
lol -
What knowledge might that be, popikachu?
He claims that people "have" to be gods to set standards, because that they need to know everything to do so, and only gods know everything.
When this very obviously flawed proposition is held up for examination, he throws a tanturm and goes into irrelevancies like "okay, you win" and posting pictures of fireworks instead of addressing the issues, and then he's got the unmitigated gall to accuse other people of not addressing the issues.
For someone who claims to be an old man who can dispense advice, I'm sure you'll understand how his hypocrisy is somewhat hard to swallow.
I'm still waiting for him to resolve the issue of how he first said people had to be gods to judge, and then contradicted himself and said that if you're not a god, you must be a judge in order to judge. If he can't even deal with this simple issue, what knowledge of any worth does he have to share? If he changes his tune according to whim and fancy, how can what he says be relied upon as knowledge? -
Originally posted by popikachu:I surely hope flame haven started in this thread
kk i know what andrew really wanted...
he just wanted to share about the truth of this world... the knowledge he knew...
but andrew... not all people can understand such thing de...
it need alot of explaination for other people who understand...
even for the same type of people who think the same way as you, they need a few explaination to understand...
i understand how you feel cus, i am the same type of person as you
just that i am lazy to explain again and again so i keep quite
lol -
reserved...
-
Originally posted by Gedanken:Oh, this is just too damned funny.
Now you sayOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:
if you are not a judge (I was addressing sgforumners, not judges)... you need to be GODS in order to judge[/quote]Originally posted by Gedanken:
when you started out saying
[quote]Originally posted by Gedanken:Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
You have to be able to not just say what "Good" is and what "Bad" is but be the authority to set the standards. You have to be "GOD"Looks like you're the one who doesn't know the meaning of the word "if" - may I suggest you consult a dictionary?Funny meh?
Why must I explain every little thing to you like you are a little kid?
*yawnz*
if you are not a judge... with the proper jurisdiction to judge... in a court of law... you do not need to be GOD to judge...
otherwise, you have to be GOD with "the authority to set the standards" and be able to judge what GOOD and BAD is... looking at the past and future leading to / consequent of any action...
*yawnz* -
Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
Oh, NOW you add the "otherwise" and try to pretend that it was there all the time? Your tricks are getting cheaper all the time.
if you are not a judge... with the proper jurisdiction to judge... in a court of law... you do not need to be GOD to judge...
otherwise, you have to be GOD with "the authority to set the standards" and be able to judge what GOOD and BAD is... looking at the past and future leading to / consequent of any action... -
Then what is a forum for if not to clarify each other's position?Originally posted by Gedanken:Oh, NOW you add the "otherwise" and try to pretend that it was there all the time? Your tricks are getting cheaper all the time. *yawnz* -
Nothing to clarify. You first stated categorically that people have to be gods, then you conveniently added the "if" bit, backpedalling on yourself. If you hoped you could get away with nobody noticing how you've contradicted yourself, you're out of luck.
I'll lay it out for you, sunshine. You don't have the slightest clue what you're writing, so don't go pretending you can dispense advice. Better just stick with what your boss tells you to do, because you obviously can't operate without adult supervision. -
Originally posted by Gedanken:Nothing to clarify. You first stated categorically that people have to be gods, then you conveniently added the "if" bit, backpedalling on yourself. If you hoped you could get away with nobody noticing how you've contradicted yourself, you're out of luck.
I'll lay it out for you, sunshine. You don't have the slightest clue what you're writing, so don't go pretending you can dispense advice. Better just stick with what your boss tells you to do, because you obviously can't operate without adult supervision. OK You win! Gedanken FTW!
-
Yay! We win!
Thanks to Andrew's benevolence and grace, we have been charitably given victory.
Time to close the thread and celebrate. -
You're welcome...Originally posted by MooKu:Yay! We win!
Thanks to Andrew's benevolence and grace, we have been charitably given victory.
Time to close the thread and celebrate.
But why must close thread ah? -
because it has already went off topic ??
-
"Don't condemn people in AA" and naturally we will have to ask "why"Originally posted by MiX Metal:because it has already went off topic ??
When you try to find answers, you need to know "how" to find answers... the correct way to find answers... what are "valid" answers and what are invalid answers.
Which answers might very well be true but invalid.
It is unlikely that there are valid answers that are false because it would be obvious with so many eyes looking.
"Valid/Invalid" - how to know?
Logic and principles of making a good argument (not argue as in fighting) comes into the picture...
Logic and principles of making a good argument ... according to what standards, considering that this is an open forum....
Should we demand purity and perfection? Should we demand purity and perfection for every nitty gritty detail or simply for the "main issues"?
This is what the 14 pages are trying to resolve if you can sieve out all the rubbish...
Intelligence/Consciousness is a "feedback" process but that is another story... maybe I will start a thread on that and we have a go at it...
Why am I doing all this...? Developing minds....
So I would not say that we are "out of topic", not completely anyway... -
Just to add... because I bring up "difficult" "complicated" issues, and that is why it is "controversial. If the topics and conclusions are obvious to everyone, then what is the point of starting serious threads? Nobody learns anything because everything regarding the issue is already in people's heads...
-
so whats your agony?Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Just to add... because I bring up "difficult" "complicated" issues, and that is why it is "controversial. If the topics and conclusions are obvious to everyone, then what is the point of starting serious threads? Nobody learns anything because everything regarding the issue is already in people's heads...
shouldnt this be in chit chat instead? -
Originally posted by Gedanken:
i agree totally ,his writings have a tinge of pretentiousness, imagined wisdom and hyprocrisy
Nothing to clarify. You first stated categorically that people have to be gods, then you conveniently added the "if" bit, backpedalling on yourself. If you hoped you could get away with nobody noticing how you've contradicted yourself, you're out of luck.
I'll lay it out for you, sunshine. [b]You don't have the slightest clue what you're writing, so don't go pretending you can dispense advice. Better just stick with what your boss tells you to do, because you obviously can't operate without adult supervision.[/b]
and before i forgot
incoherent statements tinged with big words.
have you really experience life enough to say what you want to say with authority?
Critics are like eunuch in a harem: they know how it's done, they've seen it done every day, but they're unable to do it themselves
maybe you can understand this simple english -
The only person who seems to find it difficult is you. Nobody else has any problem understanding that you're spouting nothing but confused, inane, self-contradictory, hypocritical, self-aggrandising gobbledygook.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Just to add... because I bring up "difficult" "complicated" issues, and that is why it is "controversial. If the topics and conclusions are obvious to everyone, then what is the point of starting serious threads? Nobody learns anything because everything regarding the issue is already in people's heads... -
I don't think the old man can say anything with authority - his boss won't let him.Originally posted by Space1999:have you really experience life enough to say what you want to say with authority? -
ok you win!Originally posted by Gedanken:What knowledge might that be, popikachu?
He claims that people "have" to be gods to set standards, because that they need to know everything to do so, and only gods know everything.
When this very obviously flawed proposition is held up for examination, he throws a tanturm and goes into irrelevancies like "okay, you win" and posting pictures of fireworks instead of addressing the issues, and then he's got the unmitigated gall to accuse other people of not addressing the issues.
For someone who claims to be an old man who can dispense advice, I'm sure you'll understand how his hypocrisy is somewhat hard to swallow.
I'm still waiting for him to resolve the issue of how he first said people had to be gods to judge, and then contradicted himself and said that if you're not a god, you must be a judge in order to judge. If he can't even deal with this simple issue, what knowledge of any worth does he have to share? If he changes his tune according to whim and fancy, how can what he says be relied upon as knowledge? -
X 2!Originally posted by Gedanken:The only person who seems to find it difficult is you. Nobody else has any problem understanding that you're spouting nothing but confused, inane, self-contradictory, hypocritical, self-aggrandising gobbledygook.
The issues are really not that "difficult" and "complicated".
But nobody learns anything from an incoherent chain of posts that serve more to confuse than anything else. -
you forgot pretentious..Originally posted by Gedanken:The only person who seems to find it difficult is you. Nobody else has any problem understanding that you're spouting nothing but confused, inane, self-contradictory, hypocritical, self-aggrandising gobbledygook. -
well if he can summarise it in ten sentence or less maybe maybe we understand but his words are like cow intestines just circling around and around and what comes out?Originally posted by MooKu:X 2!
The issues are really not that "difficult" and "complicated".
But nobody learns anything from an incoherent chain of posts that serve more to confuse than anything else.
just XXXX! -
Making that list too long might just get him all confused again.Originally posted by Space1999:you forgot pretentious..