Gentoo Forums :: View topic - Split from Dawkin's The God Delusion

Split from Dawkin's The God Delusion

View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page 1, 2 Next

This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.

Gentoo Forums Forum Index

Off the Wall

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

srunni
Guru
Guru

Joined: 26 Dec 2007
Posts: 365

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:26 am Post subject:

cokehabit wrote:

srunni wrote:

cokehabit wrote:

srunni wrote:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

I had lunch with Richard and also read his book. Both were unoriginal.

Science isn't meant to be original. It's meant to be truthful.

science is about fact, you're thinking of philosophy.

No, I'm thinking of science. Facts == truth.

Maybe in your obsolete version of English it isn't the case, but in the modern version of English that I speak, truthful and factual are actually synonyms

a fact and the truth are very different things.

...did you even read what I wrote? The two words are interchangeable, evidenced by the fact that they are considered synonyms in a thesaurus.

Need more proof? Let's look at the definition for ``science'':

Dictionary.com wrote:

a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws

cokehabit wrote:

You can only have something that has a truth when there is a belief whether it be right or wrong

Let me tell you again, more directly this time: my original comment had no philosophical implications.
_________________

Patrick Ewing wrote:

if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it’s a duck, right? So if this duck is not giving you the noise that you want, you’ve got to just punch that duck until it returns what you expect.

Last edited by srunni on Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:37 am; edited 2 times in total

cokehabit
Advocate

Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3302

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:30 am Post subject:

srunni wrote:

cokehabit wrote:

srunni wrote:

cokehabit wrote:

srunni wrote:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

I had lunch with Richard and also read his book. Both were unoriginal.

Science isn't meant to be original. It's meant to be truthful.

science is about fact, you're thinking of philosophy.

a fact and the truth are very different things.

Dictionarycom wrote:

a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws

cokehabit wrote:

You can only have something that has a truth when there is a belief whether it be right or wrong

Let me tell you again, more directly this time: my original comment had no philosophical implications.

sure, quoting a load of websites that are rubbish means a lot...

srunni
Guru
Guru

Joined: 26 Dec 2007
Posts: 365

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:32 am Post subject:

cokehabit wrote:

srunni wrote:

cokehabit wrote:

srunni wrote:

cokehabit wrote:

srunni wrote:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

I had lunch with Richard and also read his book. Both were unoriginal.

Science isn't meant to be original. It's meant to be truthful.

science is about fact, you're thinking of philosophy.

a fact and the truth are very different things.

Dictionarycom wrote:

a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws

cokehabit wrote:

You can only have something that has a truth when there is a belief whether it be right or wrong

Let me tell you again, more directly this time: my original comment had no philosophical implications.

sure, quoting a load of websites that are rubbish means a lot...

That's fucking pathetic. You're left without absolutely no rebuttal for my argument except ``the dictionary is wrong''?
_________________

Patrick Ewing wrote:

if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it’s a duck, right? So if this duck is not giving you the noise that you want, you’ve got to just punch that duck until it returns what you expect.

Last edited by srunni on Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:38 am; edited 1 time in total

LadyLinux29
n00b
n00b

Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 2

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:36 am Post subject:

cokehabit wrote:

srunni wrote:

cokehabit wrote:

srunni wrote:

cokehabit wrote:

srunni wrote:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

I had lunch with Richard and also read his book. Both were unoriginal.

Science isn't meant to be original. It's meant to be truthful.

science is about fact, you're thinking of philosophy.

a fact and the truth are very different things.

Dictionarycom wrote:

a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws

cokehabit wrote:

You can only have something that has a truth when there is a belief whether it be right or wrong

Let me tell you again, more directly this time: my original comment had no philosophical implications.

sure, quoting a load of websites that are rubbish means a lot...

I'm fairly confident this is where you've gone astray.

LadyLinux29
n00b
n00b

Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 2

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:40 am Post subject:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

cokehabit wrote:

srunni wrote:

cokehabit wrote:

srunni wrote:

cokehabit wrote:

srunni wrote:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

I had lunch with Richard and also read his book. Both were unoriginal.

Science isn't meant to be original. It's meant to be truthful.

science is about fact, you're thinking of philosophy.

a fact and the truth are very different things.

Dictionarycom wrote:

a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws

cokehabit wrote:

You can only have something that has a truth when there is a belief whether it be right or wrong

Let me tell you again, more directly this time: my original comment had no philosophical implications.

sure, quoting a load of websites that are rubbish means a lot...

I'm fairly confident this is where you've gone astray.

And I just have to toss this out there because it's becoming a bit annoying. I made a statement that I thought it was unoriginal. I expected a debate wherein you defend how original it is, make your points and allow me to discuss mine in return. Instead, we go down this winding road that just turns the whole conversation into a joke. Furthermore, you've completely misused the Thesaurus and I can't believe this digression.

historian
n00b
n00b

Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Posts: 0
Location: Maritime Republic of Eastport

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:41 am Post subject:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

This happens a lot in OTW. The quote trees are entertaining, though.

_________________
"As soon as the generals and the politicos can predict the motions of your mind, lose it. Leave it as a sign to mark the false trail, the way you didn't go."--Wendell Berry

LadyLinux29
n00b
n00b

Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 2

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:44 am Post subject:

historian wrote:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

This happens a lot in OTW. The quote trees are entertaining, though.

srunni
Guru
Guru

Joined: 26 Dec 2007
Posts: 365

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:46 am Post subject:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

That was cokey's fault, not mine.

LadyLinux29 wrote:

Furthermore, you've completely misused the Thesaurus

LadyLinux29 wrote:

and I can't believe this digression.

This is OTW. Get used to it.
_________________

Patrick Ewing wrote:

if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it’s a duck, right? So if this duck is not giving you the noise that you want, you’ve got to just punch that duck until it returns what you expect.

Last edited by srunni on Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:47 am; edited 1 time in total

LadyLinux29
n00b
n00b

Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 2

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:52 am Post subject:

srunni wrote:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

That was cokey's fault, not mine.

LadyLinux29 wrote:

Furthermore, you've completely misused the Thesaurus

Please do elaborate. I don't know much about Russian, but in modern (i.e., American) English, the same word can be used with several shades of meaning, and several words can mean the same thing. If I had wanted to be precise in my wording, I would've written a scientific paper. This setting, however, is much more informal. If you Brits are too uptight to understand that, feel free to mentally substitute in ``fact'' for ``truth'' in my original response if it makes you happy.

First, I am not a Brit, thank you. Second, I can't substitute words for you. You need to pick the word for yourself. A fact is concrete and cannot change. A truth is subject to change if you learn more information. It's a fact your heart is beating. It's a truth your name is Srunni.

LadyLinux29 wrote:

and I can't believe this digression.

This is OTW. Get used to it.

cokehabit
Advocate

Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3302

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:57 am Post subject:

srunni wrote:

That's fucking pathetic. You're left without absolutely no rebuttal for my argument except ``the dictionary is wrong''?

si tu vers.

Quote:

Meanings for the word truth extend from honesty, good faith, and sincerity in general, to agreement with fact or reality in particular.[1] The term has no single definition about which a majority of professional philosophers and scholars agree, and various theories of truth continue to be debated.

Quote:

Generally, a fact is defined as something that actually exists, or something having objective reality that can be verified according to an established standard of evaluation.

From "fact" and "truth" in wikipedia. Or 'one of your websites that knows all'. :roll:

srunni
Guru
Guru

Joined: 26 Dec 2007
Posts: 365

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:59 am Post subject:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

First, I am not a Brit, thank you.

You're in London. The longer you spend in the UK, the further your head goes up your ``arse'', as they say over there. It will never be as far up as a native like Cokey's, but it can get quite close.

LadyLinux29 wrote:

Second, I can't substitute words for you. You need to pick the word for yourself.

I said that you can mentally substitute it. Meaning that when you see what I wrote, instead of writing a book about what the word should have been, just go on your merry way. Weren't you the one who didn't want to derail the thread?

LadyLinux29 wrote:

A fact is concrete and cannot change. A truth is subject to change if you learn more information. It's a fact your heart is beating. It's a truth your name is Srunni.

Yes, I'm fully aware of the precise definitions of both words. I just don't care to think too hard about which one to use when I'm writing on OTW. I have to think enough about the diction in my writing all day long.

Oh, and the funny thing is that the scientific method actually accepts nothing as absolute fact, so you're wrong here.
_________________

Patrick Ewing wrote:

if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it’s a duck, right? So if this duck is not giving you the noise that you want, you’ve got to just punch that duck until it returns what you expect.

cokehabit
Advocate

Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3302

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:01 am Post subject:

srunni wrote:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

First, I am not a Brit, thank you.

You're in London. The longer you spend in the UK, the further your head goes up your ``arse'', as they say over there. It will never be as far up as a native like Cokey's, but it can get quite close

oh wow, thread over, you won!

LadyLinux29
n00b
n00b

Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 2

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:40 am Post subject:

srunni wrote:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

First, I am not a Brit, thank you.

You're in London. The longer you spend in the UK, the further your head goes up your ``arse'', as they say over there. It will never be as far up as a native like Cokey's, but it can get quite close.

I can tell from what you've displayed of your personality thus far, that any potential you may have will be severely limited by your choice of words. You may see it as a laughing matter until the day you realize your mouth has locked you into the lower social class. A word of advice: make an attempt to refrain from words like "arse". Ok to think, not ok to speak.

LadyLinux29 wrote:

Second, I can't substitute words for you. You need to pick the word for yourself.

LadyLinux29 wrote:

A fact is concrete and cannot change. A truth is subject to change if you learn more information. It's a fact your heart is beating. It's a truth your name is Srunni.

Yes, I'm fully aware of the precise definitions of both words. I just don't care to think too hard about which one to use when I'm writing on OTW. I have to think enough about the diction in my writing all day long.

I struggle to communicate with anyone who doesn't care to think too hard about the words they use, in any environment, OTW or otherwise. Are you suggesting then that I should not pay full attention to anything you say, assuming you've only put in half the effort to formulate your thoughts?

Oh, and the funny thing is that the scientific method actually accepts nothing as absolute fact, so you're wrong here.

That's it. After your final statement, I am forced to only read half of what you write from herein out.

srunni
Guru
Guru

Joined: 26 Dec 2007
Posts: 365

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:06 am Post subject:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

I can tell from what you've displayed of your personality thus far, that any potential you may have will be severely limited by your choice of words. You may see it as a laughing matter until the day you realize your mouth has locked you into the lower social class. A word of advice: make an attempt to refrain from words like "arse". Ok to think, not ok to speak.

We have an anomaly here! By some strange accident, a non-native Brit has got her head further up her arse than a native!

1. Learn to appreciate humor. I know that being in the UK can dull your taste for it, but please do give it a shot. If Cokey can do it, I'm sure you can too.
2. This is an internet forum, not a upper class formal gathering. I can use whatever words I fucking please. If you really think that I am anywhere near as profane IRL as I am on fgo, you are not nearly as intelligent as I thought. My personality cannot be divined from reading some text I posted on fgo.

LadyLinux29 wrote:

I struggle to communicate with anyone who doesn't care to think too hard about the words they use, in any environment, OTW or otherwise. Are you suggesting then that I should not pay full attention to anything you say, assuming you've only put in half the effort to formulate your thoughts?

I'm suggesting that you use your abilities of subjective reasoning to determine what I'm implying. It's really not that hard.

LadyLinux29 wrote:

That's it. After your final statement, I am forced to only read half of what you write from herein out.

Is that why you ignored the part where I said that you were wrong about the scientific method? Or was that just because you don't like admitting you're wrong?

Oh and please stop using bold, as it's extremely obnoxious. And learn how to quote properly.
_________________

Patrick Ewing wrote:

if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it’s a duck, right? So if this duck is not giving you the noise that you want, you’ve got to just punch that duck until it returns what you expect.

desultory
Administrator

Joined: 04 Nov 2005
Posts: 7449

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:25 am Post subject:

srunni wrote:

I can use whatever words I fucking please.

Not exactly.

LadyLinux29
n00b
n00b

Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 2

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:28 am Post subject:

srunni wrote:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

I'm suggesting that you use your abilities of subjective reasoning to determine what I'm implying. It's really not that hard.

LadyLinux29 wrote:

That's it. After your final statement, I am forced to only read half of what you write from herein out.

What was that? I only heard half of what you said.

srunni
Guru
Guru

Joined: 26 Dec 2007
Posts: 365

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:29 am Post subject:

desultory wrote:

srunni wrote:

I can use whatever words I fucking please.

Not exactly.

Those posts don't say anything about specific words being disallowed, only about specific phrases. There is no mention of words not allowed because of their profanity. LadyLinux seems to think that use of profanity is not acceptable on OTW, which is most definitely not true.

LadyLinux29 wrote:

What was that? I only heard half of what you said.

Are you fucking serious? This isn't grade school. If you're not going to stop acting like a child, I'm going to ignore you.
_________________

Patrick Ewing wrote:

if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it’s a duck, right? So if this duck is not giving you the noise that you want, you’ve got to just punch that duck until it returns what you expect.

Last edited by srunni on Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:32 am; edited 1 time in total

LadyLinux29
n00b
n00b

Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 2

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:31 am Post subject:

srunni wrote:

desultory wrote:

srunni wrote:

I can use whatever words I fucking please.

Not exactly.

Those posts don't say anything about specific words being disallowed, only about specific phrases. There is no mention of words not allowed because of their profanity.

LadyLinux29 wrote:

What was that? I only heard half of what you said.

Are you fucking serious? This isn't grade school. If you're not going to stop acting like a child, I'm going to ignore you.

Ahhh...so you're getting the point...finally.

srunni
Guru
Guru

Joined: 26 Dec 2007
Posts: 365

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:34 am Post subject:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

Ahhh...so you're getting the point...finally.

No, you're the one who didn't get the point. This isn't one of your tea parties, it's an informal gathering of people who talk about various things. If you don't like the atmosphere, feel free to leave at any time. If you don't leave and people don't want to listen to you, they will simply ignore you. And I'm doing that starting now, until you make a post that is actually worthy of a response.
_________________

Patrick Ewing wrote:

if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it’s a duck, right? So if this duck is not giving you the noise that you want, you’ve got to just punch that duck until it returns what you expect.

LadyLinux29
n00b
n00b

Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 2

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:37 am Post subject:

srunni wrote:

LadyLinux29 wrote:

Ahhh...so you're getting the point...finally.

Thank you.

dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1154
Location: Austin, Texas

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:40 am Post subject:

OK break it up you two. I wouldn't like it if this thread is closed now because you wouldn't stop picking at each other. _________________ Your argument is invalid.

denstark
l33t
l33t

Joined: 02 Jun 2003
Posts: 654
Location: sd.ca.us

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:42 am Post subject:

dmitchell wrote:

OK break it up you two. I wouldn't like it if this thread is closed now because you wouldn't stop picking at each other.

I wouldn't like it if one of the only females on the board left because of this.

_________________
Blog

Code:

denstark> starbuck authorizes torture?
rokstar> sure they do, you tried their coffee?

desultory
Administrator

Joined: 04 Nov 2005
Posts: 7449

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:51 am Post subject:

srunni wrote:

Those posts don't say anything about specific words being disallowed, only about specific phrases. There is no mention of words not allowed because of their profanity.

Not so much specific phrases, though there are examples, as standards of address, which does to a certain extent limit the practical vocabulary.

srunni wrote:

LadyLinux seems to think that use of profanity is not acceptable on OTW, which is most definitely not true.

Indeed.

srunni
Guru
Guru

Joined: 26 Dec 2007
Posts: 365

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:58 am Post subject:

denstark wrote:

dmitchell wrote:

OK break it up you two. I wouldn't like it if this thread is closed now because you wouldn't stop picking at each other.

I wouldn't like it if one of the only females on the board left because of this.

I take it your friends in high school never hooked you up with a chick from math class? :lol:

_________________

Patrick Ewing wrote:

if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it’s a duck, right? So if this duck is not giving you the noise that you want, you’ve got to just punch that duck until it returns what you expect.

LadyLinux29
n00b
n00b

Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 2

Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 6:09 am Post subject:

desultory wrote:

srunni wrote:

Those posts don't say anything about specific words being disallowed, only about specific phrases. There is no mention of words not allowed because of their profanity.

Not so much specific phrases, though there are examples, as standards of address, which does to a certain extent limit the practical vocabulary.

srunni wrote:

LadyLinux seems to think that use of profanity is not acceptable on OTW, which is most definitely not true.

Indeed.

Let us be clear, I've not read the guidelines of what is or what is not acceptable on the OTW.

It is simply not acceptable to use profanity when addressing me.

I'm quite shocked that anyone would use foul language with a complete stranger just because they aren't in agreement. My point is that use of profanity will cause some to assume you've not been taught any better and it will eventually shut doors, not open them. Of course, there are exceptions to every rule, but I prefer the social graces. I also use napkins and refrain from licking my fingers.

Display posts from previous:

	Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall	All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Designed by Kyle Manna © 2003; Style derived from original subSilver theme. | Hosting by Gossamer Threads Inc. © | Powered by phpBB 2.0.23-gentoo-p9 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group