If This Doesn't Offend You, Someone Will Try Again

Seanchai · January 02, 2008, 02:32:47 PM

Quote from: QuireA fin on a dolphin as opposed to an arm on a human doesn't matter: they are both mammals.

Is that right, Sean?

No. I think you've got the basic idea, but I find the example to be a bad one.

Seanchai

Quire · January 02, 2008, 04:52:10 PM

Quote from: SeanchaiNo. I think you've got the basic idea, but I find the example to be a bad one.

I thought you wouldn't like the example. Here's another one that won't sit comfortably with you.

It doesn't matter what kind of food I'm sticking in my mouth, I'm still eating.

One more: as long as I'm physically exerting myself, it's exercise. To clarify, if I compete against someone else doing the same thing, it's a sport.

- Q

Quire · January 02, 2008, 05:09:08 PM

Aw, tits. Let me not be so gunshy.

Sean, you're using warped logic to deny subcategories in a category, and it's very very silly.

I don't know WHY you're doing it, but you are. Stop being childish.

- Q

Haffrung · January 02, 2008, 08:45:03 PM

Quote from: QuireAw, tits. Let me not be so gunshy.

Sean, you're using warped logic to deny subcategories in a category, and it's very very silly.

I don't know WHY you're doing it, but you are. Stop being childish.

- Q

But Quire, you're forgetting about motive. We know people have all sorts of reasons for lying about what food they like and how they like to eat meals, or who feel they're special because they play frizbee and not basketball. Most people are fucking idiots and liars, so we can't take any stated preference, or assertions that frizbee is different from basketball at face value.

John Morrow · January 02, 2008, 09:57:32 PM

Quote from: HaffrungBut Quire, you're forgetting about motive. We know people have all sorts of reasons for lying about what food they like and how they like to eat meals, or who feel they're special because they play frizbee and not basketball. Most people are fucking idiots and liars, so we can't take any stated preference, or assertions that frizbee is different from basketball at face value.

So that justifies telling other people what they really feel and like because, well, obviously I know what another person really likes better than they do, right? :insane:

Quire · January 03, 2008, 09:12:50 AM

Quote from: HaffrungBut Quire, you're forgetting about motive. We know people have all sorts of reasons for lying about what food they like and how they like to eat meals, or who feel they're special because they play frizbee and not basketball. Most people are fucking idiots and liars, so we can't take any stated preference, or assertions that frizbee is different from basketball at face value.

Forgive me, I don't know what your point is. I'm not disputing fallibility. (I'm also not as convinced as some others that it's that much of an issue, but there you go. I don't think 'most people' are 'fucking idiots and liars', eg, but I think a lot of them are.)

Even if one considers that most stated preferences or experiences are filtered through the announcer, that does not negate variation. The choices and options exist independently of the observations (quantum observations aside, heh).

To suggest that fallibility proves homogeneity is ridiculous, and that's what Sean has been doing.

- Q

James McMurray · January 03, 2008, 09:40:37 AM

Haffrung was being sarcastic, parroting Seanchai's stance to make his point.

Quire · January 03, 2008, 09:55:58 AM

Quote from: James McMurrayHaffrung was being sarcastic, parroting Seanchai's stance to make his point.

Ah, now that does make sense! Thanks James, and sorry Haff!

I blame the head cold.

- Q

Seanchai · January 03, 2008, 11:12:16 AM

Quote from: QuireSean, you're using warped logic to deny subcategories in a category, and it's very very silly.

Not at all. That's your side's doing.

I asked for a definition of "play style" and was told that a play style was anything that affected play. I then ask, "Doesn't that create a whole lot of silly play styles"?

Response: "No, the difference or effect has to be meaningful."

Seanchai

Seanchai · January 03, 2008, 11:14:31 AM

Quote from: QuireTo suggest that fallibility proves homogeneity is ridiculous, and that's what Sean has been doing.

No, I've suggested fallibility is the reason self-reported ancedotes about behavior aren't proof of anything. If you're going to argue in the thread, especially at this late stage, at least read it before you wade in.

Seanchai

Quire · January 03, 2008, 11:46:31 AM

Quote from: SeanchaiNo, I've suggested fallibility is the reason self-reported ancedotes about behavior aren't proof of anything. If you're going to argue in the thread, especially at this late stage, at least read it before you wade in.

Sorry Sean, but I have read the thread, and all that you have done is repeatedly stated that because you don't believe anyone knows anything, the only person who is right is you.

I put it to you, sir, that you are full of shit.

- Q

Quire · January 03, 2008, 11:49:00 AM

Quote from: SeanchaiNot at all. That's your side's doing.

Absolute bollocks. And I'm not going to re-dissect your ridiculous arguments to prove the obvious.

In short: stop dancing around and grow up.

- Q

Quire · January 03, 2008, 11:50:32 AM

MUST. STOP. FEEDING. TROLL.

James McMurray · January 03, 2008, 12:17:41 PM

Seanchai · January 04, 2008, 10:22:09 AM

Quote from: QuireSorry Sean, but I have read the thread, and all that you have done is repeatedly stated that because you don't believe anyone knows anything, the only person who is right is you.

Try again then.

I was told I had to believe that play styles existed. When I said, based on my experiences, etc., that I didn't, I was told the proof that play styles were factual was that many people reported differences in play. Hence the bit about the fallibility of perception and memory.

Seanchai