Dude, yes... it's so hard to explain this too people.. because, you know, you can't just MAKE someone be optimistic or something like that... I mean, you can always find something to be depressed about, some unfair thing in your life... and some people really do have some heavy crap to deal with, and it's cool to show feelings about that... but it's your choice if you want to be a sad PERSON... you are the one that controls the way you act towards the world... and if it's selfpity and hatred and lovely things of that nature, that's all your going to get from the world. People just don't take the time to think things out properly and deal with them.. cuz they don't want to make the effort, and then they whine about it... it's easier that way and I suppose it's the first instinct or something... but in the end it's really screwing yourself over
( ... )
Society tells you what's happy and what's sad, and you eat it up like ambrosia.
Do you think this doesn't apply to you? If not equally but perhaps more? Every "intellectual" book you read or program you witness you are just reciting. You're nothing.
What are you but a recitation of an arguement you've observed?
I'd like an answer to that, seeing as how I believe it will end up along the lines of my reply:
I don't read books, I don't watch any sort of programs. I merely utilize the brain I was given. Something shown in the fact that I have no need for the ad hominem remarks you so frequently utilize. :)
Re: cherrypie
anonymous
April 10 2005, 04:23:45 UTC
Once again, you avoided the question. Red Herring Fallacy.
You did not address the posters comments. You changed the subject.
"I merely utilize the brain I was given. Something shown in the fact that I have no need for the ad hominem remarks you so frequently utilize."
I want to pick this apart.
You utilize the brain you were given. That statement means nothing. So does the above poster. "I think, therefor I am." Everyone thinks. Your statement is vague and appeals to the masses.
"Something shown in the fact that I have no need for the ad hominem remarks you so frequently utilize."
Ready for this one, dude? YOUR COMMENT WAS AD HOMINEM.
'You so frequently utilize' is an attack on the above poster. You are claiming that because he uses ad hominem attack in the past that his current points are not valid. That is a fallacy. The same fallacy you were commenting on. Paradoxical. And ironic.
Comments 7
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Do you think this doesn't apply to you?
If not equally but perhaps more? Every "intellectual" book you read or program you witness you are just reciting.
You're nothing.
Reply
I'd like an answer to that, seeing as how I believe it will end up along the lines of my reply:
I don't read books, I don't watch any sort of programs. I merely utilize the brain I was given. Something shown in the fact that I have no need for the ad hominem remarks you so frequently utilize. :)
Reply
You did not address the posters comments. You changed the subject.
"I merely utilize the brain I was given. Something shown in the fact that I have no need for the ad hominem remarks you so frequently utilize."
I want to pick this apart.
You utilize the brain you were given. That statement means nothing. So does the above poster. "I think, therefor I am." Everyone thinks. Your statement is vague and appeals to the masses.
"Something shown in the fact that I have no need for the ad hominem remarks you so frequently utilize."
Ready for this one, dude? YOUR COMMENT WAS AD HOMINEM.
'You so frequently utilize' is an attack on the above poster. You are claiming that because he uses ad hominem attack in the past that his current points are not valid. That is a fallacy. The same fallacy you were commenting on. Paradoxical. And ironic.
Your post is void. It was fruitless.
Reply
Leave a comment