wonderboy1953
In Runtime
- Messages
- 195
Except there are 37 posts preceding this one you just made (I take it then you don't like philosophy).
Why are you asking about my age?
In regards to post #35, I'm simply trying to clarify JogaBonito's position.
Is math real?
- Thread starter wonderboy1953
- Start date
Except there are 37 posts preceding this one you just made (I take it then you don't like philosophy).
Why are you asking about my age?
In regards to post #35, I'm simply trying to clarify JogaBonito's position.
Because your style of posting and what you say in those posts contradict each-other greatly. I'll Start. I'm 20.
wonderboy1953
In Runtime
- Messages
- 195
I'm over 21 which makes me legal and responsible.
wonderboy1953
In Runtime
- Messages
- 195
I meant that the law fixes responsibility with age (ever watch court tv?). As far as older men (and women) taking care of their kids, I believe the overwhelming majority do take care of their kids.
Anyways how did we get into this discussion as we've gotten off topic in post #1?
The majority of those posts were answering / friendly debating the question from an interested viewpoint, not coming in looking for arguments with all guns blazing. Some things are interesting to discuss, but just not worth arguing or spending time arguing over. Hence I'll gladly discuss such matters with people making genuine observations and drawing conclusions, but not when all it seems you're doing is looking for an argument and acting like you know more than anyone about anything.
wonderboy1953
In Runtime
- Messages
- 195
You're not really being responsive to what I've posted. As far as "This is so far into philosophy, it therefore doesn't really matter, and therefore no-one really gives a toss!" goes, when you saw the title "Is math real?", were you expecting to come to a Sunday school dance? Didn't the title give you a hint?
I was perfectly responsive to what you posted. I don't think it matters if we decide maths is real or just the best made up bunch of crap we can come up with to explain the universe. But it's interesting to discuss these things sometimes, as I was with others in a polite and friendly way if you care to look back earlier in this thread.
But where I draw the line is when people like you, no wait, just you, come in looking for an argument (as you've just done AGAIN with your last post) and trying to cause confrontation just for the sake of it.
I'm out with this thread anyway (should it be locked?) the good points have all been made and your attitude is pretty much preventing anyone else from throwing any other good points in there in case you come in with yet another confrontational / downright stupid remark.
(Oh and the sunday school dance analogy really, really sucked. I'm not even sure what you were trying to do there.)
well stop acting like a child then.
Honestly if you're an adult then you're either looking for an argument or stupid.
given your interest in maths I'm going to assume that you're not stupid and that you intentionally misread posts and pull the wrong meaning from them because you're looking for an argument.
either stop looking for arguments, or just stop posting.
wonderboy1953
In Runtime
- Messages
- 195
Simply clarifying
There's a difference between a mere argument and debating. From Wikipedia:
"Debate or debating is a formal method of interactive and representational argument. Debate is a broader form of argument than logical argument, which only examines consistency from axiom, and factual argument, which only examines what is or isn't the case or rhetoric which is a technique of persuasion. Though logical consistency, factual accuracy and some degree of emotional appeal to the audience are important elements of the art of persuasion, in debating, one side often prevails over the other side by presenting a superior "context" and/or framework of the issue, which is far more subtle and strategic."
So, if you want to argue this, then I suggest to take this up with Wikipedia as the debate was going well on this thread as viewpoints were being expressed. Anyways I think the debate has gone as far as it can on this thread.
There's a difference between a mere argument and debating. From Wikipedia:
"Debate or debating is a formal method of interactive and representational argument. Debate is a broader form of argument than logical argument, which only examines consistency from axiom, and factual argument, which only examines what is or isn't the case or rhetoric which is a technique of persuasion. Though logical consistency, factual accuracy and some degree of emotional appeal to the audience are important elements of the art of persuasion, in debating, one side often prevails over the other side by presenting a superior "context" and/or framework of the issue, which is far more subtle and strategic."
So, if you want to argue this, then I suggest to take this up with Wikipedia as the debate was going well on this thread as viewpoints were being expressed. Anyways I think the debate has gone as far as it can on this thread.
