hatred is a swindle

[Lonestar_logic]

What is telling is those that spout their high level of education then use profanity laced rants.

Profanity and vulgarity along with all crudeness in speech is the result of a lack of education and refinement. It shows a lack of real culture and wisdom. When one can adequately express himself, he needs no filthy words or vulgarity to do so.

That is not a logical statement.

Why because you say so?

Explain why you think it's illogical.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Nobody asked. Aristotle's constant boasting of his is tiresome, but the speedos, matthew, etc. crowd's shameless ducking of direct questions is more than telling.

And they all were asked?

Only about 1,000 times. Where have you been?

Prove it.

 

[Unkotare]

What is telling is those that spout their high level of education then use profanity laced rants.

Profanity and vulgarity along with all crudeness in speech is the result of a lack of education and refinement. It shows a lack of real culture and wisdom. When one can adequately express himself, he needs no filthy words or vulgarity to do so.

That is not a logical statement.

Why because you say so?

Explain why you think it's illogical.

It's not that I "think" it's illogical, it IS illogical. That's kind of how logic has to work.


There is no necessary connection between choosing to use certain words and expressions and not being educated. An educated person can choose to express himself any way he wants - for certain effect or to express emotion and attitude. Your conclusion above is not logical.

 

[Unkotare]

And they all were asked?

Only about 1,000 times. Where have you been?

Prove it.

Are you just playing around now? Read any of the threads heavily polluted by speedos or matthew and see for yourself. There are pages and pages of them. You seem pretty obsessed with Aristotle, so you should have seen him ask both of them over and over again many times by now.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

That is not a logical statement.

Why because you say so?

Explain why you think it's illogical.

It's not that I "think" it's illogical, it IS illogical. That's kind of how logic has to work.


There is no necessary connection between choosing to use certain words and expressions and not being educated. An educated person can choose to express himself any way he wants - for certain effect or to express emotion and attitude. Your conclusion above is not logical.

There are thousands of words that they can use yet they CHOOSE to use the ones that they KNOW are vulgar/offensive. The only people that do that are ones that are the uneducated and just don't know the thousands of other words or ones trying to get a rise out of other people. Most, if not all, that are trying to get a rise out of other people are uneducated.

It's not "just how someone speaks" they can control how they talk, they pick which words to use. they CHOOSE to speak this way.

By doing this they have to accept the fact that people will see them as uneducated.

If they don't like it?

They can CHOOSE to stop swearing and expand on their vocabulary, otherwise they have to deal with the image that they, themself project to other people.

And there is nothing illogical about how people percieves a person going on a profanity laced rant.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Only about 1,000 times. Where have you been?

Prove it.

Are you just playing around now? Read any of the threads heavily polluted by speedos or matthew and see for yourself. There are pages and pages of them. You seem pretty obsessed with Aristotle, so you should have seen him ask both of them over and over again many times by now.

No. You made a claim. The onus is on you to prove it.

I seem obsessed?

How so?

FTR I do not read every line of every single post to see who is insulting who or who is being asked certain questions.

 

[Unkotare]

Why because you say so?

Explain why you think it's illogical.

It's not that I "think" it's illogical, it IS illogical. That's kind of how logic has to work.


There is no necessary connection between choosing to use certain words and expressions and not being educated. An educated person can choose to express himself any way he wants - for certain effect or to express emotion and attitude. Your conclusion above is not logical.

There are thousands of words that they can use yet they CHOOSE to use the ones that they KNOW are vulgar/offensive. The only people that do that are ones that are the uneducated and just don't know the thousands of other words or ones trying to get a rise out of other people.

You see where your argument falls apart here? You can't prove that "The only people that do that are ones that are the uneducated and just don't know the thousands of other words," and are forced to concede that an educated person can be " ones trying to get a rise out of other people." You have no choice but to abandon your own illogical conclusion. Do you see what I was trying to tell you now?

 

[Unkotare]

It's not "just how someone speaks" they can control how they talk, they pick which words to use. they CHOOSE to speak this way.

That's what I said, which contradicts your original, illogical claim.

 

[Unkotare]

And there is nothing illogical about how people percieves a person going on a profanity laced rant.

Now you are talking about perception, which was not your original (illogical) claim.



I hope you are learning something from all this.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

It's not that I "think" it's illogical, it IS illogical. That's kind of how logic has to work.


There is no necessary connection between choosing to use certain words and expressions and not being educated. An educated person can choose to express himself any way he wants - for certain effect or to express emotion and attitude. Your conclusion above is not logical.

There are thousands of words that they can use yet they CHOOSE to use the ones that they KNOW are vulgar/offensive. The only people that do that are ones that are the uneducated and just don't know the thousands of other words or ones trying to get a rise out of other people.

You see where your argument falls apart here? You can't prove that "The only people that do that are ones that are the uneducated and just don't know the thousands of other words," and are forced to concede that an educated person can be " ones trying to get a rise out of other people." You have no choice but to abandon your own illogical conclusion. Do you see what I was trying to tell you now?

The perception that one using profanity as being uneducated is real. That is the proof.

I went so far as to give two reason why people may choose profane language and one doesn't neccesarily cancel out the other. Both statements can be true and accurate. One can be uneducated and swear to get a rise out of someone, it doesn't have to be one or the other.

My point is, the use of profanity gives the impression of an uneducated person.


Why only use a portion of my quote?

That's a little disingenuous don't you think?

 

[Unkotare]

Prove it.

Are you just playing around now? Read any of the threads heavily polluted by speedos or matthew and see for yourself. There are pages and pages of them. You seem pretty obsessed with Aristotle, so you should have seen him ask both of them over and over again many times by now.

No. You made a claim. The onus is on you to prove it.

Here, I'll make it easy enough even for you:

speedos and matthew, tell us about your educational backgrounds.



There, now you can watch this thread and see that they do NOT provide the requested information. After this is done, we can ask them about their great contributions to science and technology. Another question both of them constantly avoid.

Are you following along?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

And there is nothing illogical about how people percieves a person going on a profanity laced rant.

Now you are talking about perception, which was not your original (illogical) claim.



I hope you are learning something from all this.

Learn something from you? Not likely.

My claim hasn't changed.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Are you just playing around now? Read any of the threads heavily polluted by speedos or matthew and see for yourself. There are pages and pages of them. You seem pretty obsessed with Aristotle, so you should have seen him ask both of them over and over again many times by now.

No. You made a claim. The onus is on you to prove it.

Here, I'll make it easy enough even for you:

speedos and matthew, tell us about your educational backgrounds.



There, now you can watch this thread and see that they do NOT provide the requested information. After this is done, we can ask them about their great contributions to science and technology. Another question both of them constantly avoid.

Are you following along?

Easy for me? Or you?

I have no desire to know their educational backgrounds. I challenged you to prove they were asked about 1000 times.

 

[Unkotare]

And there is nothing illogical about how people percieves a person going on a profanity laced rant.

Now you are talking about perception, which was not your original (illogical) claim.



I hope you are learning something from all this.

Learn something from you? Not likely.

My claim hasn't changed.

It certainly has. You have essentially conceded the point.

 

[Unkotare]

There are thousands of words that they can use yet they CHOOSE to use the ones that they KNOW are vulgar/offensive. The only people that do that are ones that are the uneducated and just don't know the thousands of other words or ones trying to get a rise out of other people.

You see where your argument falls apart here? You can't prove that "The only people that do that are ones that are the uneducated and just don't know the thousands of other words," and are forced to concede that an educated person can be " ones trying to get a rise out of other people." You have no choice but to abandon your own illogical conclusion. Do you see what I was trying to tell you now?

The perception that one using profanity as being uneducated is real. That is the proof.

I went so far as to give two reason why people may choose profane language and one doesn't neccesarily cancel out the other. Both statements can be true and accurate. One can be uneducated and swear to get a rise out of someone, it doesn't have to be one or the other.

My point is, the use of profanity gives the impression of an uneducated person.

Your original claim was not about impressions and perceptions.


You said, "Profanity and vulgarity along with all crudeness in speech is the result of a lack of education and refinement. It shows a lack of real culture and wisdom."

You drew a conclusion; an illogical conclusion, as has now been explained to you. Qualifying your claim now suggests you understand this, even if you don't want to come right out and admit it.

 

[Unkotare]

And there is nothing illogical about how people percieves a person going on a profanity laced rant.

Now you are talking about perception, which was not your original (illogical) claim.



I hope you are learning something from all this.

Learn something from you? Not likely..

Don't let your pride get in the way of improving yourself.

 

[Unkotare]

No. You made a claim. The onus is on you to prove it.

Here, I'll make it easy enough even for you:

speedos and matthew, tell us about your educational backgrounds.



There, now you can watch this thread and see that they do NOT provide the requested information. After this is done, we can ask them about their great contributions to science and technology. Another question both of them constantly avoid.

Are you following along?

Easy for me? Or you?

I have no desire to know their educational backgrounds. I challenged you to prove they were asked about 1000 times.

As I indicated, you can find many, many examples in this forum. Since I expected you to be too lazy to go look for them, I kindly provided you a means of seeing their avoidance for yourself simply by watching them fail to address the question I just posted.

If you need even more hand-holding, go watch speedos fail to answer questions here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/race-...-ended-affirmative-action-19.html#post6449243

You're welcome.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

You see where your argument falls apart here? You can't prove that "The only people that do that are ones that are the uneducated and just don't know the thousands of other words," and are forced to concede that an educated person can be " ones trying to get a rise out of other people." You have no choice but to abandon your own illogical conclusion. Do you see what I was trying to tell you now?

The perception that one using profanity as being uneducated is real. That is the proof.

I went so far as to give two reason why people may choose profane language and one doesn't neccesarily cancel out the other. Both statements can be true and accurate. One can be uneducated and swear to get a rise out of someone, it doesn't have to be one or the other.

My point is, the use of profanity gives the impression of an uneducated person.

Your original claim was not about impressions and perceptions.


You said, "Profanity and vulgarity along with all crudeness in speech is the result of a lack of education and refinement. It shows a lack of real culture and wisdom."

You drew a conclusion; an illogical conclusion, as has now been explained to you. Qualifying your claim now suggests you understand this, even if you don't want to come right out and admit it.

You are wrong my original claim was:

"I think you're the one that has no college background.

Your profanity laced rants gives you away."

You obviously don't understand what perception means.

per·cep·tion (pr-spshn)
n.
1. The process, act, or faculty of perceiving.
2. The effect or product of perceiving.
3. Psychology
a. Recognition and interpretation of sensory stimuli based chiefly on memory.
b. The neurological processes by which such recognition and interpretation are effected.
4.
a. Insight, intuition, or knowledge gained by perceiving.
b. The capacity for such insight.

Synonyms: acumen, apprehending, apprehension, approach, attention, attitude, awareness, big idea, brain wave, brainchild, conceit, concept, conception, consciousness, discernment, feeling, flash, grasp, image, impression, insight, intellection, judgment, knowledge, light, notion, observation, opinion, perspicacity, picture, plan, realizing, recognition, sagacity, sensation, sense, study, taste, thought, viewpoint

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Now you are talking about perception, which was not your original (illogical) claim.



I hope you are learning something from all this.

Learn something from you? Not likely..

Don't let your pride get in the way of improving yourself.

Hard to improve perfection.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Here, I'll make it easy enough even for you:

speedos and matthew, tell us about your educational backgrounds.



There, now you can watch this thread and see that they do NOT provide the requested information. After this is done, we can ask them about their great contributions to science and technology. Another question both of them constantly avoid.

Are you following along?

Easy for me? Or you?

I have no desire to know their educational backgrounds. I challenged you to prove they were asked about 1000 times.

As I indicated, you can find many, many examples in this forum. Since I expected you to be too lazy to go look for them, I kindly provided you a means of seeing their avoidance for yourself simply by watching them fail to address the question I just posted.

If you need even more hand-holding, go watch speedos fail to answer questions here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/race-...-ended-affirmative-action-19.html#post6449243

You're welcome.

No you can't hold my hand. But what you can do is prove that each of the people you mentioned was asked about 1000 times about their education.

Since this is approx. the third or fourth time I've asked you to prove your (claim after failing all the previous attempts), I can only assume that you either made it up, over exaggerated or you don't know how to count.