Whirly had a "blast" with me cos I was the only thing occupying his time, I found it flattering if a bit annoying.
I, unlike certain people, don't care what people see me like. The fact that people can't handle me and ALWAYS end up debating at me rather than my point, is what makes ME laugh. You have proven yourself to be no exception. I don't go around claiming anything of myself, it's others that do so, and it seems to reflect back on me for some odd reason.
Besides, if you're so up for defending the art of debating, why are you not saying anything to the sheer ridiculous points that EPIIIBITES is making? If you agree with him, then you have no room to speak about the art of anything.
If you wish to discuss ME further, my PM box is open.
you don't interest me, because i know nothing about you. your debating style interests me, because it's akin to bullying and misdirection.
perhaps you have a hard time differentiating between the two? i haven't given a single personal view this whole thread. i've been taking an angle, one that strikes some sort of balance between the two extremes present (you and epiiibites, if you haven't been keeping track).
Exactly. Even though manorastroman might not fully understand my point, I don't think he would call me an idiot for saying "I think truths exist regardless of being proven factually."
That's where I'm coming from. That's why I say what I do about music actually being bad or acutally being good.
He sees that this is my opinion, and that you (AC) have no right to say that I'm wrong.
Jimi > Britney.
Sorry I can't prove it for you...but it's true. And I'm saying that at least the truth can be suggested at by presenting determing factors.
And as I also said before...
"...looking at whether an artist who has made an album like "Alright, Still" is better and more creative than an artist who has made "Oops!...I Did It Again" comes down to determing factors and informed opinion."
Taste has nothing to with it. It's a truth regrdless of if you like it or not.
And this goes for determining all pop music. It's not all bad because it's pop and people don't tend to like it.
__________________
Last edited by EPIIIBITES on Apr 16th, 2007 at 05:40 PM
Then I'll be happy to discuss it with you, PM me. I fail to see why I need be the focal point of every debate that people can't win.
I don't bully anybody here. The fact that people are intimidated by me isn't my fault. Why find me intimidating? I don't know, I find the notion ridiculous, but it's the shame of feeling this that causes people to blame ME. I say things and certain people get insulted, that isn't my fault, they got insulted without necessarily the intent to insult them. I am always clear in what I say, but if people still don't get it and prefer to assume rather than ask, then there isn't much more I can do.
I'm not basing that on nothing, I've been told by a number of members. It's silly, and I'm not using it as some kind of positive accolade. Maybe people can't handle the fact that I do know my stuff regardless of them disliking how I put it across, no idea.
The problem is, people dislike my debating style (Whatever that may be.) so much that they will focus on that, rather than the fact that I do talk sense. They concentrate on HOW I talk rather than what I'm saying, and it happens every time I gain the edge in a debate. Once again, you're not exception.
That's him, not me. What you are doing and saying are both idiotic. I don't know how smart you are outside of music debates, I'm not calling you an idiot in general, I'm calling you an idiot as it pertains to ALMOST every debate we've been in.
I don't feel the need to not call someone an idiot if they're being one.
You are wrong though, and this has been proven.
But you are, and I have proven so. You confuse informed opinion with fact; I prove you wrong. You say fact and truth are not the same; I prove you wrong. You reply with silliness, I try to get you back on topic; You say "You take things too seriously.". You are a very idiotic debator. He cannot stand for the art of debating if he is defending a man who cannot tell the difference between fact and opinion.
Is it a fact? No. Fact is truth, so is it truth? No. I've proven you wrong, the dictionary proves you wrong, YOU prove YOU wrong.
The more you say it's an informed OPINION, the more you prove me correct. All you have on your side is this ridiculous believe you hold that something can be true, and yet, not be proven. That is ridiculous.
on a side note, "truth" is among the most complex and argued subjects in all of philosophy. so there's probably a whole handful of schools that agree with epiiibites.
We're not discussing philosophy, we're discussing music, an area where taste is entirely subjective. As it always is.
Informed opinions are just that, opinions. Truth is fact, fact is truth, none of these apply to taste, subjectivity or opinion. You would never find a school that suggests opinion is fact. Ever. Unless it's a special school. Though even then I doubt it.
Jimi being better than Britney is AS GOOD AS, but it isn't ACTUALLY, is it? No. It's not an undeniable truth. Come back when you grasp that.
Truth is fact, though. Dictionary defined. Fact is the opposite of opinion.
Epibites thinks informed opinions are fact just because they are more credible. There is no argument toward there being no such thing as MORE credible opinions, just taste as fact, which it can never be.
Then why sit there arguing something I didn't disagree with? I didn't say there wasn't such a thing, I didn't say being as good as fact didn't exist. I said it's still not fact.
I know also, he's just wrong. He's saying he can't prove it, absolutely no way to prove it, can't be proven, but it still might be true. I get it, it's just stupid. I'm not going to afford him the courtesy of "Well..." and then discussing it as if it's a credible debate, JUST because it's his belief. He's wrong, it's ridiculous.
I do grasp the idea of subjective reality, he's quite clearly dwelling in his own little universe, I wouldn't deny that for a second. It's the most obvious trait about the man.
The obviousness that he is talking bullshit is something you're not admitting to because you either wish to disagree with me or you are foolishly giving everyone credit for having an opinion.
As things stand, he is wrong. We can all say "My ass." to things we dislike, but when they prove us wrong...it's a different story.
There's just no need for philosophising here, unless people are trying to be anal. Taste = Subjective. Opinion = Taste, informed or not. Therefore, no music is factually good or bad, which is his stance, which is factually wrong, WHICH you continually ignore in favour of debating me.
wait a minute...i thought that we were on a message board, and had to come to an understanding?
ah well. one point of subjective reality would be that by living in his own little world we are all living in his own little world, to his degree. the constituent parts of his little world are as good as anything you, i, or "reality" might come up with.
in terms of defining truth, philosophy is a much better source than the dictionary, being that truth is a concept AND a word.
just throwing things out there. you know. just throoooooooowing things out there.
__________________
Last edited by manorastroman on Apr 16th, 2007 at 06:05 PM
Yes, wherein did you make a connection to the part you quoted?
Giving everyone credit for having an opinion and conducting yourself in a way that allows people to understand your posts as far as you are obligated to do so (Ie: Typing correctly.), are connected, how?
KMC Community Forums
Apr 16th, 2007 05:16 PM
