I'm enjoying The Brief and Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao right now. About halfway through, there have been rebellions (both political and teenage) and an easily accessible Lord of the Rings motif. It's not fantasy, but reminds me a little bit of Vonnegut. (Speaking of whom, Cat's Cradle and Sirens of Titan are good books of his.)
If you want fantasy, there is a book called The Cloud Atlas (no relation to the movie) which involves Alaskan spirits and Japanese terrorists in some fashion. I've yet to read it, but think I'll have to get to it soon. Until I can read it to give it a definite endorsement, Terry Brooks has some interesting fantasy. I really enjoyed Running with the Demon, a stand-alone/prequel work to his more High-Fantasy universe.
KV, I've got an actual Kas'im argument plotted out but haven't had a chance to write it up. If you're not too burned out, would you be willing to promise me a response so it's worth my time to actually write it? I got distracted by whiskey last night and then had to move back to campus today. I can get it to you by noon on Tuesday.
Originally posted by Zampanó
KV, I've got an actual Kas'im argument plotted out but haven't had a chance to write it up. If you're not too burned out, would you be willing to promise me a response so it's worth my time to actually write it? I got distracted by whiskey last night and then had to move back to campus today. I can get it to you by noon on Tuesday.
Call me "NK" Zamp. I'm assuming you've skimmed/read my exhaustive 4 part response? If you have an actual Kas'im argument, then yeah I will promise to respond to it.
I have work on Tuesday, and classes resume on Wednesday for me, but I will make time to debate your post.
Originally posted by The_Tempest
Nai, would you like an exhaustive response to your 2-part post to me?
To that one? No. You can simple answer this:
Originally posted by Nai
And my genuine question for you in particular is: How can you know that Vitiate is not lightyears ahead of everyone?
😉
Originally posted by Nai
To that one? No.
Perhaps I should, as I see our age-old clash of methodology will continue to manifest.
Originally posted by Nai
You can simple answer this:
Etiquette dictates that you answer my question first. Then I'll answer yours. 😉
Originally posted by The_Tempest
Perhaps I should, as I see our age-old clash of methodology will continue to manifest.
You could. But since my methodology, albeit mostly performed behind the scenes, is the result of years of extensive studies in all fields that matter, while yours is based upon the firm belief, that your opinion is correct, I don't know, what the result of such a clash should be. Last time you attempted to debate that issue, you backed off after having a small fraction of your usual errors exposed. You see: Ideologists make awful debaters, once their ideology is questioned and will do nigh everything to protect it. So at a certain point, you will either back off or put me on ignore - with me winning. Or you will learn something. If your motivation is the latter, feel free to give it a try. If you want to "win" though, I can only advice against it. Your choice.
Etiquette dictates that you answer my question first. Then I'll answer yours. 😉
Hardly. You didn't adress your question at me. That aside: I don't answer to trick questions, which are still regarded as logical fallacies (plurium interrogationum). 😉
Originally posted by TheOneOfMortisHurr?
Discworld is - apparently - shit. At least what I have heard. Apparently Terry Pratchett wanted to make a sitcom but NBC would nto approve of pilot so he decided to make book series instead and base all of his characters and humerous storylines in fantasy setting. I Believe Nemebro pointed this out in VG social thread.
I've never read Discworld, lol.
Originally posted by Tzeentch._Amazing dual, imo.
Also, Obi-Wan was clearly holding his own against Maul there up until he started tapping into the dark side, Jessiah's anti-Obiwan bias withstanding. 313
I'd prefer amazing duels any day to having my preferred character winning the fight.
It's why I didn't mind Obi-Wan besting Maul with Opress (even though I prefer Maul to Obi-Wan) because it was just an awesome episode and fight.
Plus it's boring when fights are predictable.
Originally posted by Nai
You could. But since my methodology, albeit mostly performed behind the scenes, is the result of years of extensive studies in all fields that matter, while yours is based upon the firm belief, that your opinion is correct, I don't know, what the result of such a clash should be.
Well that was a sudden but predictable shift from awkward civility back to naked hostility. I’m sorry to have caught you menstruating, but feel free to apply an extra large tampon and carry on.
All you’ve done is claim “years of extensive studies in all fields that matter.” Your posting history suggests otherwise. To be honest, I really hope you didn’t: if your present abilities are the result of money and time spent, you should go get a refund.
Spoiler:
You just committed a logical fallacy called an appeal to authority. Setting aside the fact that your expertise is, at the very least, questionable, any credibility you have is stifled by your enduring bias on such matters.
I guess you must have missed that class?
Originally posted by Nai
Last time you attempted to debate that issue, you backed off after having a small fraction of your usual errors exposed. You see: Ideologists make awful debaters, once their ideology is questioned and will do nigh everything to protect it. So at a certain point, you will either back off or put me on ignore - with me winning. Or you will learn something. If your motivation is the latter, feel free to give it a try. If you want to "win" though, I can only advice against it. Your choice.
lol
I “back off” when I feel a debate has run its course and perpetual trolling is about to ensue. That’s why I make a habit of ignoring S_W_LeGenD. If one has made one’s case and neither opponent will cede the point, why bother? Do you really want my attention that bad?
I’m very sorry I prefer not to argue with a brick wall?
Originally posted by Nai
Hardly. You didn't adress your question at me. That aside: I don't answer to trick questions, which are still regarded as logical fallacies (plurium interrogationum). 😉
The question was posed to anyone. Vitiate’s abilities do not support the notion that he is lightyears ahead of everyone, something even his most ardent supporters accept (with the exception of yourself).
Originally posted by The_Tempest
Well that was a sudden but predictable shift from awkward civility back to naked hostility. I’m sorry to have caught you menstruating, but feel free to apply an extra large tampon and carry on.
I wonder, where you perceived any kind of hostility there. Was it me placing you on a lower tier than myself when it comes to intelligence and education? I'm awfully sorry.
You see: I've pointed out again and again and again, that my postings here have to do next to nothing with my personal convictions and that the methods I utilize here, are just being used in order to stir debates - not to end them (with the defeat of whatever opposition present). Facts subsumed under my usertitle, and facts you're still incapable of grasping.
All you’ve done is claim “years of extensive studies in all fields that matter.” Your posting history suggests otherwise. To be honest, I really hope you didn’t: if your present abilities are the result of money and time spent, you should go get a refund.
Since I've already demonstrated, that your "analysis" of my posting history is clouded by your confirmation bias, pointing to it once again is rather brave. With "brave" being a nice wording for "stupid". Especially, given the general motivation of my tenure here. Which is not to win debates, but to maintain my English skills in a way that is entertaining for me. Sounds familiar? Maybe because I've also pointed that out before.
You just committed a logical fallacy called an appeal to authority. Setting aside the fact that your expertise is, at the very least, questionable, any credibility you have is stifled by your enduring bias on such matters.
I guess you must have missed that class?
No, son. I did not miss that class. This is why I can tell you that an appeal to authority is just present, when I attempt to advance my argument based on my authority. You may want to use your vaunted skills in analysing my posting history for an incident where I have done so. Did I once bust credentials here in order win a debate regarding a SW topic? I recall having sited them once, when introducing the topic of "focalization", after being lectured of how I should expand my knowledge beyond the realm of Wikipedia. Here, I'm doing the entire opposite, by pointing out, that I usually do not make use of that skill set here and that my arguments are usually not based upon it. Why? Explained above.
If you would be so kind to reread my prior posting, you would see, that I just proclaimed you will lose any debate regarding methodology, which is fairly obvious, given that you don't even seem to grasp my methods. But just for you: Your "method" here, is to compile quotes in favor for your opinion that aren't directly contradicted by another source and then use them as "absolute proof" for your point - and then defend it relentlessly. I mock that technique by making such compilations myself without double checking the quotes, delivering what could be seen as an argumentum ad verbosiam. I also, frequently, make use of an entire setlist of logical fallacies, and more often than not getting through with it. Schopenhauers "The Art of being right" is the only (non SW)book I consult when posting here. It is, most certainly, irritating an enneverating for you, since you can't understand it. But that is not my problem, is it?
What I would do if I really wanted to "win" debates here? I would base most of my tenure he on a very simple idea, that one of my former professors for literature studies has made a general rule for her seminars: "Interpretation is a joint effort." You see: If 10 persons read a single book, you will get 10 interpretations and even then a "right one" doesn't need to be among them - if it even exists. Acknowledging that idea, I would then try to establish connections between two contrary point of views until the point, where I can come up with an interpretation that both parties can possible live with - then post it. That would, however, minimize opposition, end debates and ensure a rather high work load for me - besides undermining the reason for me visiting here. Why? Because I would perform such "serious" business in German to translate it afterwards, instead of just putting stuff off my head out in English.
I “back off” when I feel a debate has run its course and perpetual trolling is about to ensue. That’s why I make a habit of ignoring S_W_LeGenD. If one has made one’s case and neither opponent will cede the point, why bother? Do you really want my attention that bad?I’m very sorry I prefer not to argue with a brick wall?
This must be new character trait, provided a repitition of arguments ad nauseam was what coined the debating technique of a certain somebody in the past. I would love to point to your posting history, but, meh. I don't know which of your various accounts to use.
The question was posed to anyone. Vitiate’s abilities do not support the notion that he is lightyears ahead of everyone, something even his most ardent supporters accept (with the exception of yourself).
I guess that, what you wanted to say is, that your interpretation of a fraction of Vitiate's demonstrated abilities does not support the notion that he is lightyears ahead of everyone, right? And even then, your question was worded in a way that would make every possible answer a concession to your assumption. That is a logical fallacy.
And to answer the question I've left for you, since you seem so reluctant to do it: You can't know. Vitiate could be the damn embodyment of the Dark Side, deciding to add a certain amount of spice to confrontations, by limiting himself - not utilizing all his power. Is that notion rather nonsensical? Yes. Probable? Hell, no. Possible? Well...
Since I usually regard yourself as a rather intelligent person, I'm trying to lecture you on thinking outside the box. Even in the realm of literature studies, much like in the realm of quantum physics, in the end everything comes down to probabilities. That an intelligent, young human like yourself seems to constantly reject that very idea is what irks me, not differing oppinions or your constant attempt to prove your own abilities by going up against my forum alter ego. Got that now?
And just for your information: My personal convictions - at the moment - are not that far away from what you are usually defending here. But I arrived there on a very different road and can accept the possibility, that I am totally and utterly wrong. Which may lead to a sudden change of that convictions, especially in light of new information (which is constantly presented in the SW universe). That's one reason for not arguing them in public - aside from the fact that I would probably need to write a book just to explain the thoughts behind them.