Where is Asher's Mac Attack?

[KrazyHorse]

Just look in the curveball thread if you want an example.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Show me your definition. What purpose is there in a debate of trying to highlight someones styly of language? Are you trying to embarrass and discredit me in front of Apolyton because I don't write like you speak?

Where I come from, pseudo-intellectuals are the kinds of people who really want people to think highly of them. They bring copies of Nietzsche to Starbucks, wear typically geeky glasses, and use overly formal language in casual situations. They try to overcomplicate simple arguments in an effort to deploy smoke and mirrors so they can "win" using an avalanche of semantics and strawmen.

I'm simply illustrating how you fit this to a T.

How can one learn any discipline, any art or science if you're not prepared to remember what you've learned, and if you're not prepared to put the effort in to perfect your skill?

A good memory and study/work ethic applies to plumbers, lawyers, writers, greengrocers, if they're good at their jobs.

Again, more examples of how you're not a very bright person: since when does "good memory" equate to "prepared to remember what you learn"?

Myself, I've got a terrible memory.

Then it begs a question. What is a flimsy discipline and what is your problem with it?

Flimsy disciplines are subjective disciplines that try to evaluate themselves objectively. My problem with them is they tend to be bull**** and give people like Agathon and you jobs and an air of superiority.

[KrazyHorse]

I haven't bothered to call you out on it in the past, but now I might.

[Whaleboy]

Just look in the curveball thread if you want an example.

I first ask a question, and then another question as another possibility. The fact that I'm asking questions admits in itself that I am under-informed in that subject and want to learn more, does it not?

Your reply reeks of someone who feels like an upstart is questioning his undoubtable superiority in the field, and my response to it admits again that I need to read up.

How is that semi-informed?

[Asher]

How is entering a debate where you end up leaving admitting that you have to read up not semi-informed?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Whaleboy


I first ask a question, and then another question as another possibility. The fact that I'm asking questions admits in itself that I am under-informed in that subject and want to learn more, does it not?

No, the fact that you restated what was already the consensus opinion was the key.

[Whaleboy]

I'm simply illustrating how you fit this to a T.

Where's my sematics? I've posted my understanding of your previous posts but you dont answer them which implies they're correct. If they're strawmen the ball is in your court to correct them.

Again, more examples of how you're not a very bright person: since when does "good memory" equate to "prepared to remember what you learn"?

Same could be said of the people that you're attempting to define.

Flimsy disciplines are subjective disciplines that try to evaluate themselves objectively. My problem with them is they tend to be bull**** and give people like Agathon and you jobs and an air of superiority.

I'm being put through a philosophy degree because the company believes it will help with a future management role.

Where's my air of superiority? As demonstrated in the thread KH pointed out, I'm more than happy to learn from people who know more than me.

[Whaleboy]

How is entering a debate where you end up leaving admitting that you have to read up not semi-informed?

Entering a debate =| asking a question

No, the fact that you restated what was already the consensus opinion was the key.

It was the consensus opinion but at the time I didn't know that it applied to a football. You explained otherwise and the world was happy.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Where's my sematics? I've posted my understanding of your previous posts but you dont answer them which implies they're correct. If they're strawmen the ball is in your court to correct them.

I call you out and correct your strawmen repeatedly. Virtually every argument you've made has ended like that in this thread.

Same could be said of the people that you're attempting to define.

Does not compute; but reminds me of another part of the definition of pseudo-intellectual: they make lots of vacuous statements and pretend they have some kind of deep meaning.

Where's my air of superiority? As demonstrated in the thread KH pointed out, I'm more than happy to learn from people who know more than me.

Then shut it and listen to me.

[KrazyHorse]

I find it incredible that you feel that the forces acting on a soccer ball and a baseball would be so different as to require a wholly separate explanation.

[Whaleboy]

I call you out and correct your strawmen repeatedly. Virtually every argument you've made has ended like that in this thread.

Then you would have no problem in referring to a strawman I have used in this thread.

Does not compute; but reminds me of another part of the definition of pseudo-intellectual: they make lots of vacuous statements and pretend they have some kind of deep meaning.

A good memory might not necessarily apply to an intellectual, pseudo or otherwise if we accept your distinctions. It's reasonable to say that the ability/willingness to learn is essential to both.

And you still haven't made any reference to your definition of pseudo intellectual, which is odd because you clearly want to put my strawmen to bed .

Then shut it and listen to me.

KH knows about physics, I do not. You know about using computers, as do I.

You would also probably like to find one instance in this thread where I have called myself "an intellectual" .

[Whaleboy]

I find it incredible that you feel that the forces acting on a soccer ball and a baseball would be so different as to require a wholly separate explanation.

I'm British, if you talk about the physics of baseball you might as well be talking about Asher's debating style; I have no comprehension of either.

I know that a golf-ball behaves differently to a football and was trying to understand why.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Then you would have no problem in referring to a strawman I have used in this thread.

I've already quoted and identified them above...

But just for you, here you go:

Your thread singing the praises of OSX seems to contradict that sentiment Asher.

You find using OSX frustrating because its internally inconsistent?

Since "intellectuals" by your logic would presumably also have a good study ethic and memory

If pseudo-intellect is a delusion and intellect is a judgement, then the two are not mutually exclusive.
...Your key argument seems to be pseudo-intellectuals delude themselves into thinking themselves intellectuals, and intellectuals are considered to be so by consensus.

And you still haven't made any reference to your definition of pseudo intellectual, which is odd because you clearly want to put my strawmen to bed .

I've defined it twice and applied it to you...

KH knows about physics, I do not. You know about using computers, as do I.

Oh, I see. So computer science and interface design is the speciality of everyone who uses computers, which is the difference.

You know physics just as well as you know computers: what goes up, must come down... you just don't understand the depth to the field, apparently.

You would also probably like to find one instance in this thread where I have called myself "an intellectual" .

You don't need to say it, the smugness is deafening.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Agathon made no indication as to what was making him want to pull his hair out, you seemed to have latched onto "frustrating" and then used OSX's unfamiliarity as your premise. Is is more than reasonable to take that as your argument, and Agathons as another argument entirely.

No Exposé for a start.

[Asher]

Expose is only necessary on MacOS X because of its poor multitasking window design. And you're just used to it.