Originally posted by Trickster
I don't feel the need to use a PM, but I'd just liek to say that I wasn't called by anybody into this thread. I don't often post here, I just read the threads that interest me. When your disagreement blossomed, I felt moved to respond with my PoV. However, I will not post again on this subject.
Thank you. And apologies for my assumption.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
English deffinition of a word beats all the shit i can read in a book?
Right...When Aristotle discussed reality and idea of opposites English language didnt even exist.
And when Chinese introduced the idea of ying-yang, English language didn't exist.Also, I do not udnerstand how someone can prove a theory through English deffinition of a word.
Let me go prove Physics is right - by deining it in English!!
Haha. And there's where your mistake lies. Indeed when Aristotle made up his theories (Aristotle is by no way infallible, by the way) the word "opposite" didn't exist. So he used a different word. IF he had used a word that exactly means "opposite" as it does now exist in the English language he would be wrong, since not everything has an opposite, that happens to be a fact by the way. I can only assume, but you did read them books about Aristotle in English, right?
Also, stop being childish about the topic, it is a discussion and debate topic. That absolutely includes questionings one sources and knowledge about a subject, especially when they pulled their "facts" and an assumed authority right out of their ass. Stop dodging the topic, it is very pathetic and to be honest it's more against the rules than anything AC, Trickster or I have done in this thread.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Haha. And there's where your mistake lies. Indeed when Aristotle made up his theories (Aristotle is by no way infallible, by the way) the word "opposite" didn't exist. So he used a different word. IF he had used a word that exactly means "opposite" as it does now exist in the English language he would be wrong, since not everything has an opposite, that happens to be a fact by the way. I can only assume, but you did read them books about Aristotle in English, right?Also, stop being childish about the topic, it is a discussion and debate topic. That absolutely includes questionings one sources and knowledge about a subject, especially when they pulled their "facts" and an assumed authority right out of their ass. Stop dodging the topic, it is very pathetic and to be honest it's more against the rules than anything AC, Trickster or I have done in this thread.
You assume wrong. I read it in Serbo-Croat.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Fair enough, I should have assumed you didn't read them in Greek, did you?Also, what about not only addressing one point of my post? It's rude.
Bardock, I am tolerating your rude attitude, so please stop it. I do not call you names, I do not call you childish, nor do I imply anything regarding your school or your intelligance. I would expect the same back from you.
As far as Aristotle goes, you did not read him in Greek either, thus comparison regading languages is irrelevant
What is teh point I failed to address?
Second of Seven Cosmic laws -
The second of the Seven Cosmic Laws is Polarity
(GH - In Waves and Out Waves, In Phase and Opposite Phase Waves)
Everything has its opposite, & opposites manifest with a spectrum of polarities between them. Land has valleys as well as mountains. Magnets have opposite poles. People possess varying degrees of strength, intelligence & wisdom. Yin is complemented by Yang. Harmony is achieved by establishing & maintaining equilibrium between opposing forces. The interaction of Parallelism with Polarity results in the phenomena of reflections. Just as a mirror absorbs, refracts, & distorts the light that it reflects, so also can the reflections of Truth be very murky indeed! Supreme clarity of mind is required to discern what is actually real.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Oh and please provide me with evidence which suggests that not everything has an opposite, because maybe then I can stop thinking you're talking out of your ass.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Awwwh, whats the matter? You're all pissy now, and insluting because you have absolutely NO evidence for what you saying.
Technical term for that is ''talking out of one's ass''. This instance yours.You have no grounds for claim apart from your own simple minded logic.
You know what else strikes me mind numbing apart from your arrogance?
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
debbiejo, its pointless arguing. One thing worst than an ignorant person, is the one who is not willing to learn, or think outside what they have thought up.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Posts and posts of irrelevant bullshit, and still no asnwer to my point.
...err?
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Bardock, I am tolerating your rude attitude, so please stop it. I do not call you names, I do not call you childish, nor do I imply anything regarding your school or your intelligance. I would expect the same back from you.As far as Aristotle goes, you did not read him in Greek either, thus comparison regading languages is irrelevant
What is teh point I failed to address?
Second of Seven Cosmic laws -
[b]The second of the Seven Cosmic Laws is Polarity
(GH - In Waves and Out Waves, In Phase and Opposite Phase Waves)Everything has its opposite, & opposites manifest with a spectrum of polarities between them. Land has valleys as well as mountains. Magnets have opposite poles. People possess varying degrees of strength, intelligence & wisdom. Yin is complemented by Yang. Harmony is achieved by establishing & maintaining equilibrium between opposing forces. The interaction of Parallelism with Polarity results in the phenomena of reflections. Just as a mirror absorbs, refracts, & distorts the light that it reflects, so also can the reflections of Truth be very murky indeed! Supreme clarity of mind is required to discern what is actually real. [/B]
There's an actual word for that..and I even happen to know it. It's hypocrite.
No, it is rather important. He did not use opposite. We do actually have a word called "opposite" in the English language. It doesn't fit the theory. We shouldn't adjust, bend or simply ignore the actual word in a debate about the word.
If you remember correctly you only replied to one little part of my post where I assumed you probably read about Aristotle in English.
The thrd of the 5 laws I just made up is about polarity
Not everything has its opposite, & opposites don't manifest with a spectrum of polarities between them. Valleys are not the true opposite Mountains, but rather an opposite humankind has made up for a slight difference in distance from the core of the earth . Magnets do actually have opposite poles. People possess varying degrees of strength, intelligence & wisdom which do not fit the term opposite. Yin is complemented by Yang in this theory, and we should especially note the word "complemented". Supreme clarity of mind is required to discern what is actually real of course I just add that to keep the superiority and total control of my theories.
Look, lil bitchiness, quoting some philosophical laws, that are in not supported by actual science, just doesn't make your point any more right. I have something to base my point on. You, well, read a book about someone making a thought experiment.
I am going to be a bigger person here, and not bother quoting you calling me stupid, telling me about im a kindergarden drop out, childish and generaly provoking...etc.
Look back Bardock, you're the one who told me that if I believe something you don't, it makes me stupid.
Drop the magifying glass and pick up a mirror. By every one of my posts, add your post prior to that.
I have asked nicely to drop with the arrogant and rude posts. If you cannot do that, then please do not respond to my posts.
As for your argument. I think it is self explanitary.
You make up your theories, I don't mind. But don't pass them as facts - because they are supported by nothing other than your need to win an internet argument.
If you want to further argue ''what i did to you'' use the PM, not this thread. Try and respect that, if you can.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I am going to be a bigger person here, and not bother quoting you calling me stupid, telling me about im a kindergarden drop out, childish and generaly provoking...etc.Look back Bardock, you're the one who told me that if I believe something you don't, it makes me stupid.
Drop the magifying glass and pick up a mirror. By every one of my posts, add your post prior to that.I have asked nicely to drop with the arrogant and rude posts. If you cannot do that, then please do not respond to my posts.
As for your argument. I think it is self explanitary.
You make up your theories, I don't mind. But don't pass them as facts - because they are supported by nothing other than your need to win an internet argument.If you want to further argue ''what i did to you'' use the PM, not this thread. Try and respect that, if you can.
Yeah, you are the bigger person. No wait, you denied doing it, I didn't. I actually admit to my posts and thoughts and take responsibility for what I do.
Oh my, and there's the hypocrisy again.
They are no more rude than yours. And lets face it you prefer that they are a little more aggressive than usual so you can avoid all points and just go to your stubborn mode...focusing on it, despite yourself being just as rude.
No, I don't make up my theories. Chinese Philosophers make up their theories. I just look at the definition of a word we are talking about and point out what it actually means, no theory will change that. The matter of the fact is not everything has an opposite, given we use the actual definition of the word. The "supported by nothing other than your need to win an Internet argument." was quite rude again, is it your major goal to be a hypocrite, since you achieve it just nicely.
I will reply to you in the way you reply to me (that means if you want to take it to PMs then do so, don't tell me to do it though, you are the one addressing me on the forums so I will reply on the forums). If you want the last word in this thread you have to convince me that you are right, which will be hard, since you are wrong.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
The discussion was flowing finely, until people begun to be rude, then when the sae is thrown back at them, they can't handle it.
I tolerated Bardock calling me stupid, passing sly comments regarding 'university or kindegarden dropout comments' which were unecessary.When someone said something back - he called you and AC to visit the thread and be on his side. Hmmm...
I would tell you to refer to the earlier posts and read the thread, but I am pretty sure you have already made up your mind.
At any rate, you can PM me with your concerns regarding what I said and the way I conducted myself - not on the board, please.
Same goes for Bardock anyone else - please use PMs from now on.....
Second, chinese philosophy of oppoistes Im sure you know. Its ying-yang. The idea that whole universe is made up of the opposing forces - ying and yang. They are not independent and they are not absolute - they are relative, but they all have an opposite.
What is opposite of you - would actually be a female. Becuse you cannot be defined into ''one thing'' neither can your opposite - which would be a little strange.
Matter has less ''absolute'' opposites, and they are far more relative - but existant.
....
I am not going to tell you again. If you came here to argue how I conducted myself to bradock, use PMs.
This is for discussion only. And I am absolutey serious about tis.
If you have something to say to me, regarding my modding, or the way I conduct myself, use PMs, not the board.
Lets continue this thread in discussion only.
First off, Bardock didn't contact me at all, so that's incredibly rude of you to assume. I also expect an apology for the assumption there.
Secondly, you can't ban me for repeatedly asking you to prove your shit. You'll have to ban me, Bardock, Trickster. I've already contacted a mod and said "She can't ban me for this.", and was agreed with. It'll never stick, because I'm civilly asking you to prove yourself, you're the one throwing a hissyfit and threatening people. You are the one who made this what it is. If you didn't throw a tantrum when I replied to you, you wouldn't have got what you gave.
I've/We've repeatedly ask to back up your claims without pasting from a website or claiming "I'm basing it on Metaphysics." and you haven't.
"The discussion was flowing finely, until people begun to be rude, then when the sae is thrown back at them, they can't handle it.".
You were being rude long before I came here, then when I called you on your post, you ignored it and went straight for the fact that it was me. You are the one who can't handle people challenging you.
So yeah, let's all continue this discussion with a big non-google post by you, proving to us that which you've studied, where, what and why. What are you basing your claims on? I know what Chinese Philosophy is, my cousin studied/studies it and has done for five years. Stop just telling people what it is, and tell us how you're not just ripping off a philosophy in attempt to win this debate. I've not see you add anything by ghost arguments.
Oh and yes, you do need to prove it, as you claimed it.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
The best way to convince a fool that he is wrong is to let him have his own way.
- Josh Billings
Did you get THAT from a book also?
-AC