|
Post by Anittas on Sept 10, 2011 21:41:36 GMT -5
I'm still waiting for him to prove the contrary. After all his rambling it seems he forgot about his own point. I'm waiting for you to accept the challenge.
|
|
|
Post by uz on Sept 10, 2011 21:44:40 GMT -5
Challenge for what?
I told you three times now, I do not mind being proven wrong. Show me, and I'll make the decision myself.
|
|
|
Post by sandokan on Sept 10, 2011 21:45:56 GMT -5
With all these gloves slapping the cheeks and duel challenges flying around, who was it that said the age of chivalry is dead?
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 10, 2011 21:52:56 GMT -5
Uz, I understand that you do not mind being proven wrong. You seem to be addicted to be wanting to be proven wrong. And as I said earlier, I don't think I will do this for nothing. If you felt so strongly about this that you felt you had to downgrade me, you should be ready to walk the walk.
On another point, if I were to even consider this, we will have to agree on what would count as proof. I can just see myself sourcing scholars and you refuting their claims just because you think you know better than them. Now, the reason why I think you would do just that is because this information is very easy to find--and you've had a lot of time to make a quick research on the subject--which makes me think that you have already looked into the matter, realized your error, and intend to question all sources that I might post--you know, in the Serbian way of debating things: calling everything a conspiracy and an illusion that the West is trying to enforce on others.
So make your stand known. What exactly would you accept as evidence? What sources would be okay with you?
|
|
|
Post by uz on Sept 10, 2011 21:53:54 GMT -5
Don't bother, you just killed this discussion.
Either you do it, or you don't. It's that simple.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 10, 2011 21:54:44 GMT -5
With all these gloves slapping the cheeks and duel challenges flying around, who was it that said the age of chivalry is dead? I suppose several people have said that; but one that comes to my mind is cognate. Are you him?
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 10, 2011 22:04:46 GMT -5
Don't bother, you just killed this discussion. Either you do it, or you don't. It's that simple. Okay Uz, I don't know which wish of yours to fullfil. The one to not bother to do it, or the one that asks me to either do it, or not do it. Choices, choices and so many semantical errors on your part. No, I don't think I will just do it without you agreeing on the nature of the sources that you would find acceptable and without you offering something in exchange for the injury you have caused me. These are my terms. However, there might be a way that both of us might find agreeable. Since we both claimed two different things on the same subject, we should both present sources to back it up. So how about this: for every source that I post that explains what Nietzsche meant when he said that "god is dead"--and which confirms his thoughts that god did not exist at the time when he wrote this the first time, you post another source that tells the opposite: meaning, that he thought that god did exist. Is that fair enough for you? And can we agree that we should only use academical sources?
|
|
|
Post by sandokan on Sept 10, 2011 22:45:31 GMT -5
I suppose several people have said that; but one that comes to my mind is cognate. Are you him? There are many common themes that run through all Balkan; honor and shame, suffering and forgiveness, catharsis through retelling of the story, etc, but my favorite has always been the theme of identity. There is something Homeric about it. It reminds me of one of my favorite characters - Odysseus, always shifting between the poles of identity and non-identity, like sailing through Scylla and Charybdis. Hiding his identity to the cyclops Polyphemus (Odysseys said his name was Nobody) and then revealing it only to bring upon himself the wrath of the Gods (Poseidon, the father of Polyphemus). Hiding his identity to the Nymph Circe, his wife Penelope, his son Telemachus, only to be recognized by his hunting dog and old nurse (and Penelope too) and reveal himself to the suitors after stringing the bow, etc, etc. In this case, however, I am not cognate. I am Sandokan.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 10, 2011 22:52:07 GMT -5
Yes, "in this case" ... as in this instance? Still, very poetic of you. If you ever consider telling me who you are, or just confirm my speculation, you are welcome to PM me. But then again, you are distrustful and like to keep a distance by never allowing others to see the real you. cumnate, cumnate.
|
|
|
Post by uz on Sept 10, 2011 23:29:37 GMT -5
annitas, show it however you want I don't care, i'm up for a neitzsche talk. How do you have patience to post so much nonsense, and have zero contribution to the talk?
|
|
|
Post by sandokan on Sept 10, 2011 23:54:34 GMT -5
..... But then again, you are distrustful and like to keep a distance by never allowing others to see the real you..... It is a little known but a factual truth of psychology that a person can never truly hide if he is communicating. In fact people reveal more about their internal world when they are lying than when they are recounting true facts. In their efforts to hide, in their lies and fantasies, people reveal themselves as they wish to be and to be seen, their weaknesses open to anyone with eyes to pierce. Think of Pyrros and his desire to be accepted as Serb.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Sept 10, 2011 23:54:48 GMT -5
new members are coming out of the woodwork....sockpuppets or reincarnated oldies?
|
|
|
Post by sandokan on Sept 10, 2011 23:56:32 GMT -5
Krivos, there are only 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Sept 11, 2011 0:10:15 GMT -5
odysseus, i may not be your hunting dog nor old nurse, but i have recognized you.
|
|
|
Post by toskaliku8711 on Sept 11, 2011 1:38:28 GMT -5
None of em. They are all totalitarian. I prefer Vendanta Buddhism or Hinduism (if I were faithful): You're not Donnie, but since you answered by mentioning those religions, I suppose you are in agreement with their philosophy. So are you vegetarian, then? I actually tried to be but cannot support it financially at the moment. When I am more able to support myself and get more money, I think I will probably become vegetarian. As for now, I try and be as clean as possible. THis is not because I agree with Buddhism and Hinduism, I made the decision after reading Animal Liberation by Peter Singer.
|
|
|
Post by fishcake on Sept 11, 2011 6:54:09 GMT -5
I was a vegetarian for quite some time, eating no meat at all. Then for another time I ate only chicken. The thing that drives you crazy if you become vegetarian is that you feel as if you have to become vegan because eggs and cheese are animal byproducts too. I'll probably be a vegetarian again in the future but I'd also have to be heavily medicated because it's not good for my health.
|
|
|
Post by derk on Sept 11, 2011 6:58:04 GMT -5
^very interesting. Do you also think fur is murder?
|
|
|
Post by fishcake on Sept 11, 2011 7:01:14 GMT -5
Of course I hate I hate it with a passion. It's cruel and unecessary
|
|
|
Post by derk on Sept 11, 2011 7:04:08 GMT -5
man, so you are saying that you have never; ate a medium-rare, juicy kobe beef while wearing your favorite fur coat? What a poor soul
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Sept 11, 2011 9:47:41 GMT -5
Of course fur is murder and only retards would support such a cruel industry in the 21th century.
Melty, maybe you should consider percetarianism. I've been pescetarian since 2008.
|
|