|
Post by Karl Aksel on Jul 28, 2017 4:42:45 GMT
That would be made clear by your arguments. I managed to convey my meaning of subjective just fine, without knowing your definition (which I still don't), why can't you do the same? Imagine there are two people each one is handed a box. They are told to look into there box and not show the other person what is in tuere box. Person A says the contents of the box has quality x. Person B says the contents of the box have quality y not X. Person A asks for the arguments in favor if the contents having quality y. Person B declines to answer as he believes that it would be pointless because they aren't even sure they have the same content in the box,, for they know A could have oranges and B could have bananas. Who is right Person A or B? We don't have a box, and the only way we can "show" who is right or wrong is by presenting our arguments. So what qualities do YOU say X has?
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Jul 28, 2017 4:49:50 GMT
I am familiar with what a typo is. But you apparently are not familiar with expressing yourself clearly. Misusing "there" for "their" is not a typo. It's bad grammar, or a deliberate attempt at obfuscation. Same with mixing singular and plural. Because of this, it is not possible to know who looked into which box, and who said what about which box. Fair enough, I guess I just typed it out too fast. Although there is a difference between linguistic performance and linguistic competence. Gadreel lacks the latter but I don't. Performance follows competence. If you drive poorly, it is usually because you're a bad driver.
|
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Jul 28, 2017 9:00:01 GMT
Imagine there are two people each one is handed a box. They are told to look into there box and not show the other person what is in tuere box. Person A says the contents of the box has quality x. Person B says the contents of the box have quality y not X. Person A asks for the arguments in favor if the contents having quality y. Person B declines to answer as he believes that it would be pointless because they aren't even sure they have the same content in the box,, for they know A could have oranges and B could have bananas. Who is right Person A or B? We don't have a box, and the only way we can "show" who is right or wrong is by presenting our arguments. So what qualities do YOU say X has? The box is our ideas in our head. How would that show anything?
|
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Jul 28, 2017 9:00:56 GMT
Fair enough, I guess I just typed it out too fast. Although there is a difference between linguistic performance and linguistic competence. Gadreel lacks the latter but I don't. Performance follows competence. If you drive poorly, it is usually because you're a bad driver. Not neccesarily. This is a scientific fact, I wouldn't sent this if I were you!
|
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Jul 28, 2017 9:08:32 GMT
Fair enough, I guess I just typed it out too fast. Although there is a difference between linguistic performance and linguistic competence. Gadreel lacks the latter but I don't. I find that hard to swallow from someone as incapable of presenting their views as you are. "I had to ask you 4 times one simple question and when you answered it and I corrected you, you had to avoid me. Same thing with your obsession with pedophilia."
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Jul 28, 2017 9:32:30 GMT
Performance follows competence. If you drive poorly, it is usually because you're a bad driver. Not neccesarily. This is a scientific fact, I wouldn't sent this if I were you! How ironic that it's this discussion where you should write this. I don't know what you mean by "I wouldn't sent this if I were you". You mean you wouldn't have sent? And by "sent", do you mean "posted"? And by "this", of course you mean "that". It isn't even clear what "this" is when you write that "this" is a scientific fact. And when you repeat "this" in the next sentence, logically it should point to the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Jul 28, 2017 9:35:26 GMT
We don't have a box, and the only way we can "show" who is right or wrong is by presenting our arguments. So what qualities do YOU say X has? The box is our ideas in our head. How would that show anything? The way people show each other their ideas is typically by explaining them. But you are unwilling to do so.
|
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Jul 28, 2017 9:51:39 GMT
The box is our ideas in our head. How would that show anything? The way people show each other their ideas is typically by explaining them. But you are unwilling to do so. You weren't asking what was in my box though.
|
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Jul 28, 2017 9:52:09 GMT
Not neccesarily. This is a scientific fact, I wouldn't sent this if I were you! How ironic that it's this discussion where you should write this. I don't know what you mean by "I wouldn't sent this if I were you". You mean you wouldn't have sent? And by "sent", do you mean "posted"? And by "this", of course you mean "that". It isn't even clear what "this" is when you write that "this" is a scientific fact. And when you repeat "this" in the next sentence, logically it should point to the same thing. I meant deny this.
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Jul 28, 2017 10:16:02 GMT
The way people show each other their ideas is typically by explaining them. But you are unwilling to do so. You weren't asking what was in my box though. That is precisely what I was doing. I asked you how you feel ethics are objective.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jul 28, 2017 10:56:30 GMT
You weren't asking what was in my box though. That is precisely what I was doing. I asked you how you feel ethics are objective.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jul 30, 2017 3:28:23 GMT
I find that hard to swallow from someone as incapable of presenting their views as you are. "I had to ask you 4 times one simple question and when you answered it and I corrected you, you had to avoid me. Same thing with your obsession with pedophilia." not even sure what this proves for you, care to explain?
|
|