Logic Bible outdated? Forum

[dovetail]

I don't understand why someone who simply persists in arguing a position should be considered exceptionally smart. I would certainly call myself intelligent, but I highly doubt that I am significantly more or less intelligent than most of the people who have participated on this thread.

Sigh. You just don't get it. It's NOT what you are arguing, it's HOW you are arguing it.

Oh, I get it. I get that it's perfectly reasonable to call someone a "douche," "fucktard," "idiot," and then some, just because their tone seems dry or pretentious. Maybe if my original statements were actually read for what they are, that is, an intentional contrast between the very serious bulk and the flippant conclusion of "Shut up", mostly for the purpose of comedy, then this entire charade would not have occurred. But even with that aside, there are plenty more instances of your "douchery" that occur on multiple posts, in multiple threads, on these boards. Because I do not usually see the same ferocity of response that accompanied my original statements, even before I posted any follow-up, I must conclude that the argument "it's not what, but HOW you are arguing" is evanescent. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go to a shoe sale, and then work on apps.

*Winner by TKO*

[bk1]

I am defending my position against nonsense. So far, the only "trolls" that I can see are the self-serving agitators who persist in attacking my original statements through name calling and other irrelevant, disparaging declarations. Instead of trying to get an ego boost by insulting me, why don't you instead visit a chat room for junior high students and see if you can't outwit them?

--ImageRemoved--

[nStiver]

Do you guys think MysticalWheel woke up in the middle of the night last night, sprung out of bed and thought "OH yeah! I was trolling that thread!"? Then he fired up his computer and responded to about four days' worth of posts.

I am defending my position against nonsense. So far, the only "trolls" that I can see are the self-serving agitators who persist in attacking my original statements through name calling and other irrelevant, disparaging declarations. Instead of trying to get an ego boost by insulting me, why don't you instead visit a chat room for junior high students and see if you can't outwit them?

I can't go to junior-high chat rooms anymore. This guy keeps showing up at my doorstep:

AHAHAH Thats rich. Good one.

[nStiver]

I am defending my position against nonsense. So far, the only "trolls" that I can see are the self-serving agitators who persist in attacking my original statements through name calling and other irrelevant, disparaging declarations. Instead of trying to get an ego boost by insulting me, why don't you instead visit a chat room for junior high students and see if you can't outwit them?

--ImageRemoved--

Funny, that is the exact image I had in my head of this Mystical Wheel guy. He is defending his position against nonsense inbetween twinkies and D&D sessions.

[nStiver]

Yes, his penis comment was definitely funny. But why does everything have to relate to insecurity? Just because we don't like your douchery, doesn't mean we're all insecure, okay?

The answer is very simple: He calls everyone insecure because he himself is insecure. Very, very obvious. As pointed out earlier, MW's words are not those of a secure man. This is a case of someone taking out their frustrations on an internet forum by expressing themselfs in a way that they think makes them sound smart. This guy is essentially the internet equivilent of a law school gunner.

[dovetail]

Yes, his penis comment was definitely funny. But why does everything have to relate to insecurity? Just because we don't like your douchery, doesn't mean we're all insecure, okay?

The answer is very simple: He calls everyone insecure because he himself is insecure. Very, very obvious. As pointed out earlier, MW's words are not those of a secure man. This is a case of someone taking out their frustrations on an internet forum by expressing themselfs in a way that they think makes them sound smart. This guy is essentially the internet equivilent of a law school gunner.

And people that can't stand intelligent discourse are the internet equivalent of high school jocks.

[Patriot1208]

Yes, his penis comment was definitely funny. But why does everything have to relate to insecurity? Just because we don't like your douchery, doesn't mean we're all insecure, okay?

The answer is very simple: He calls everyone insecure because he himself is insecure. Very, very obvious. As pointed out earlier, MW's words are not those of a secure man. This is a case of someone taking out their frustrations on an internet forum by expressing themselfs in a way that they think makes them sound smart. This guy is essentially the internet equivilent of a law school gunner.

And people that can't stand intelligent discourse are the internet equivalent of high school jocks.

HEY HEY HEY..........I was a high school jock

[dovetail]

Yes, his penis comment was definitely funny. But why does everything have to relate to insecurity? Just because we don't like your douchery, doesn't mean we're all insecure, okay?

The answer is very simple: He calls everyone insecure because he himself is insecure. Very, very obvious. As pointed out earlier, MW's words are not those of a secure man. This is a case of someone taking out their frustrations on an internet forum by expressing themselfs in a way that they think makes them sound smart. This guy is essentially the internet equivilent of a law school gunner.

And people that can't stand intelligent discourse are the internet equivalent of high school jocks.

HEY HEY HEY..........I was a high school jock

[nStiver]

Yes, his penis comment was definitely funny. But why does everything have to relate to insecurity? Just because we don't like your douchery, doesn't mean we're all insecure, okay?

The answer is very simple: He calls everyone insecure because he himself is insecure. Very, very obvious. As pointed out earlier, MW's words are not those of a secure man. This is a case of someone taking out their frustrations on an internet forum by expressing themselfs in a way that they think makes them sound smart. This guy is essentially the internet equivilent of a law school gunner.

And people that can't stand intelligent discourse are the internet equivalent of high school jocks.

Its not that I can't stand intelligent internet discourse. It is obnoxous internet personalities like MW that annoy me.

[MysticalWheel]

Yes, his penis comment was definitely funny. But why does everything have to relate to insecurity? Just because we don't like your douchery, doesn't mean we're all insecure, okay?

The answer is very simple: He calls everyone insecure because he himself is insecure. Very, very obvious. As pointed out earlier, MW's words are not those of a secure man. This is a case of someone taking out their frustrations on an internet forum by expressing themselfs in a way that they think makes them sound smart. This guy is essentially the internet equivilent of a law school gunner.

And people that can't stand intelligent discourse are the internet equivalent of high school jocks.

Its not that I can't stand intelligent internet discourse. It is obnoxous internet personalities like MW that annoy me.

Congratulations for completely misinterpreting everything!

MW

[MysticalWheel]

I am defending my position against nonsense. So far, the only "trolls" that I can see are the self-serving agitators who persist in attacking my original statements through name calling and other irrelevant, disparaging declarations. Instead of trying to get an ego boost by insulting me, why don't you instead visit a chat room for junior high students and see if you can't outwit them?

--ImageRemoved--

M.O. of insecurity: when argumentative points of attack are exhausted, resort entirely to physical aspersions. You honestly have no idea how far off you are.

[Gemini]

I don't understand why someone who simply persists in arguing a position should be considered exceptionally smart. I would certainly call myself intelligent, but I highly doubt that I am significantly more or less intelligent than most of the people who have participated on this thread.

Sigh. You just don't get it. It's NOT what you are arguing, it's HOW you are arguing it.

Oh, I get it. I get that it's perfectly reasonable to call someone a "douche," "fucktard," "idiot," and then some, just because their tone seems dry or pretentious. Maybe if my original statements were actually read for what they are, that is, an intentional contrast between the very serious bulk and the flippant conclusion of "Shut up", mostly for the purpose of comedy, then this entire charade would not have occurred. But even with that aside, there are plenty more instances of your "douchery" that occur on multiple posts, in multiple threads, on these boards. Because I do not usually see the same ferocity of response that accompanied my original statements, even before I posted any follow-up, I must conclude that the argument "it's not what, but HOW you are arguing" is evanescent. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go to a shoe sale, and then work on apps.

You seriously need to work on your humor if you think it was funny. Judging by the backlash, it wasn't.

[MysticalWheel]

I don't understand why someone who simply persists in arguing a position should be considered exceptionally smart. I would certainly call myself intelligent, but I highly doubt that I am significantly more or less intelligent than most of the people who have participated on this thread.

Sigh. You just don't get it. It's NOT what you are arguing, it's HOW you are arguing it.

Oh, I get it. I get that it's perfectly reasonable to call someone a "douche," "fucktard," "idiot," and then some, just because their tone seems dry or pretentious. Maybe if my original statements were actually read for what they are, that is, an intentional contrast between the very serious bulk and the flippant conclusion of "Shut up", mostly for the purpose of comedy, then this entire charade would not have occurred. But even with that aside, there are plenty more instances of your "douchery" that occur on multiple posts, in multiple threads, on these boards. Because I do not usually see the same ferocity of response that accompanied my original statements, even before I posted any follow-up, I must conclude that the argument "it's not what, but HOW you are arguing" is evanescent. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go to a shoe sale, and then work on apps.

You seriously need to work on your humor if you think it was funny. Judging by the backlash, it wasn't.

I don't really care a whole lot who did or did not find it funny. You, and many others that have participated in this thread, have some serious problems if you truly believe your responses to my original statements were sensible.

[Gemini]

Right. Because YOU of all people know what is sensible. Of course.

[MysticalWheel]

Right. Because YOU of all people know what is sensible. Of course.

There's a standard of sensibility that is independent of me, and I'm sure "douche," "fucktard," and the rest of the banter do not fit nicely and comfortably within it. Give me a break with your overblown counters; you're accusing me of being a "douche" while playing the role of forum police and jury.

[Jeffort]

I don't understand why someone who simply persists in arguing a position should be considered exceptionally smart. I would certainly call myself intelligent, but I highly doubt that I am significantly more or less intelligent than most of the people who have participated on this thread.

Sigh. You just don't get it. It's NOT what you are arguing, it's HOW you are arguing it.

Oh, I get it. I get that it's perfectly reasonable to call someone a "douche," "fucktard," "idiot," and then some, just because their tone seems dry or pretentious. Maybe if my original statements were actually read for what they are, that is, an intentional contrast between the very serious bulk and the flippant conclusion of "Shut up", mostly for the purpose of comedy, then this entire charade would not have occurred. But even with that aside, there are plenty more instances of your "douchery" that occur on multiple posts, in multiple threads, on these boards. Because I do not usually see the same ferocity of response that accompanied my original statements, even before I posted any follow-up, I must conclude that the argument "it's not what, but HOW you are arguing" is evanescent. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go to a shoe sale, and then work on apps.

You seriously need to work on your humor if you think it was funny. Judging by the backlash, it wasn't.

I don't really care a whole lot who did or did not find it funny. You, and many others that have participated in this thread, have some serious problems if you truly believe your responses to my original statements were sensible.

Please stop accusing people that disagree with your assertions and opinions of having serious problems and concluding that they need professional help (aka psychological/psychiatric help), especially since your basis for repeating that conclusion is that they don't see things the way you do.

Your writing and reasoning in this thread totally sucks and is just building up more evidence to indicate that you are not as smart as you self righteously believe and claim you are. You are in part getting criticized relentlessly by many people because of that. Work on your critical reading, reasoning and writing skills if you want to have a chance at getting into a good Law School and surviving.