was i wrong about Vimothy?

[Eric]

and your recent statements which demonizes islam leads me to think that the underlying reason for your seemingly moral and unbiased indignation is simply the fact that you come from the same camp as Vimothy; and you are doing nothing more than merely protecting one of your own.

maybe not. but challenging/analyzing the reasons someone gives an argument (rather than the argument) always looks to me like a bit of a category mistake in this kind of context. of course you don't have much else to fall back on in this case.

I don't (as a rule) agree with what Vimothy was saying but in the arguments with Zhao, Nomad and HMLT he was putting his points clearly and fairly and more intelligently than them and received a torrent of abuse in exchange. I think if your ideas are robust enough you should be able to defend them without descending to that level. If you can't win an argument then go and read some more about it and come back when you're up to the debate, don't just put your fingers in your ears and call your opponent a paedophile. This should also have the positive result that you know more about and have reinforced your position (unless - shock, you discover you were wrong). Surely the whole point of this board is discussion and you need to have dissenting (by definition) voices for that.

looks rather innocuous to me (note: I agree with this statement in general (bar perhaps the [more intelligently] part as I dont want to get into it) so, along the lines of your argument above, you might think I have an ulterior motive ). nothing against abuse: this seems to be half of what this board is about but surely one can acknowledge abuse as abuse without the person pointing it out (and agreeing with you, I might add: isn't that the premise of the thread?) can do so without being a `fascist/abhorrent' or whatever ...

 

[noel emits]

However much I may disagree, and sometimes even agree with Vimothy's views, he's nearly always willing to discuss rather than resorting to abuse and tantrums. In fact his character often seems at odds with his politics.

As for zhao's comment, it might have been a bit strong but was obviously a metaphorical description of his own feelings and as such shouldn't really be interpreted as a personal attack of any kind.

 

[boombox]

oh and nice personal attacks on your own part boombox

I was attacking your approach, not branding you a child rapist. I do not know you but I assume you are a good person and wanted you, seeing as you asked for opinions, to act like one.

very considerate of you to be so certain in your interpretation of my apology offer as fake and deceptive

It was an offer of an offer, offered up for discussion. To me this seemed morally weak and insincere, especially given the raft of caveats that formed part of it.

which demonizes islam

My posts questioning the peaceful image of the Koran do not equate with demonisation nor have any bearing on my views on insults and apologies.

 

[zhao]

who has done more research or have the time to get involved with the debates... who has ulterior motives... whatever. i have done what i set out to do in this thread, what i think is right, which was the apology, and that's what is important for me in this thread.

 

[boombox]

Fair enough



Merry Christmas Everybody!

 

[nomadologist]

Yeah, Vimothy made a great case for his points by consistently linking to well-known conservative-biased thinktanks for his "information." Yeah, Idlerich, he really "supported" his points with evidence.

Please.

I used to think British people were in general more intelligent than Americans, but Dissensus robbed me of that delusion.

I would never apologize to Vimothy for disagreeing with him. His point-of-view is going to bring about WWIII.

 

[nomadologist]

Well, I don't want to argue or insult anyone (which is why I stay out of those bruising insult threads) but you did specifically ask for opinions so I gave mine, you asked for clarification so I clarified.

Oh please, by Vimothy's own belief system, I am *vastly* more intelligent than he is, by virtue of:

A) My IQ (190 Sanford-Binet, which I feel safe assuming is higher than his, because it's in the top .001 percentile)

B) My acceptance on full scholarship into a top-tier educational institution

C) My ability to make far more money than Vimothy does, i.e., my "market value"

 

[crackerjack]

Oh please, by Vimothy's own belief system, I am *vastly* more intelligent than he is, by virtue of:

A) My IQ (190 Sanford-Binet, which I feel safe assuming is higher than his, because it's in the top .001 percentile)

Was this before or after your mammoth crack binge? Just curious.

 

[nomadologist]

Ha, no, I've had my IQ tested several times beginning at age 6. It's always within a few points of 190. Once I got a 160 on one actually, but I can't remember which method the were using there.

 

[mistersloane]

Was this before or after your mammoth crack binge? Just curious.

most of the people i know who have brains the size of mountains do waaaaay more drugs than I could ever do. life's really, really, really unfair like that.

 

[nomadologist]

most of the people i know who have brains the size of mountains do waaaaay more drugs than I could ever do. life's really, really, really unfair like that.

So true. The single most intelligent person I know used to literally scare me (and those of you who know how bad am I can imagine how bad it must have been here), and pull down straight As in a fucking Sanskrit-/Greek-/dead languages based Linguistics PhD program. He is so smart I actually feel sorry for him.

For some people, life is just too unchallenging (read: boring, stupid, dull) without drugs (of some kind, not talking just about chemicals here).

 

[nomadologist]

However much I may disagree, and sometimes even agree with Vimothy's views, he's nearly always willing to discuss rather than resorting to abuse and tantrums. In fact his character often seems at odds with his politics.

As for zhao's comment, it might have been a bit strong but was obviously a metaphorical description of his own feelings and as such shouldn't really be interpreted as a personal attack of any kind.

You might feel differently if you lived in the U.S. which is CRAWLING with Vimothy-like ideologues who rule the country with an iron fist of disavowed institutionalized racism and advocate obsene social injustice of the highest order in their policies and practicies.

 

[nomadologist]

there are contrarians here from a feminist (or simply women-are-humans) perspective, but somehow that often doesn't seems to be treated as a valuable contribution that makes people think harder, and instead is often treated as an overly personal or overly politicized approach to whatever it is that people are talking about...

Vimothy was pretty predictable, and easily bracketed into particular self-consciously political arenas of discussion. no idea whether anyone was wrong about him, but I hear his kind of stuff all the time and can read it plenty of places so I don't miss it here.

As far as his feelings or his dignity goes, I'm sure he's managing fine.

Exactly. Brilliantly put. How could I have missed this before?

It is actually HMLT that is the true "contrarian" here--he brings up POVs that even many "liberals" in the U.S. would consider contrarian and way out of the ballpark in terms of far-leftism, but no one ever thanks him for his "contrarian" views that keep the "spirit of debate" alive and well.

Vimothy's views are BY FAR the most popular in the U.S., and he really doesn't take a "contrarian" stance on anything--in fact, he takes what is easily identified as the Fox News Network "fair-balanced" right wing ideological stance on everything I have read by him. This is, of course, the majority view. He is an apologist for the current regime. Since when are apologists contrarians? This is an interesting reversal, but a typical one, made by Dissensians who have never read the vast body of work from which they, at the same time, draw all of their opinions fully-formed.

It never ceases to amaze me how bad people here are with abstraction. They literally think that commonsensicality is the gold standard of reason.

 

[Guybrush]

The situation, not your belief, determines whether you are a contrarian or not. Ever heard of the term ‘preaching to the converted’?

Nomadologist’s IQ is mighty impressive. If she moved here she would be the smartest person in Scandinavia. (The smartest Swede — allegedly the ‘third smartest person in the world’ — has an IQ of 178.)

 

[nomadologist]

The situation, not your belief, determines whether you are a contrarian or not. Ever heard of the term ‘preaching to the converted’?

Nomadologist’s IQ is mighty impressive. If she moved here she would be the smartest person in Scandinavia. (The smartest Swede — allegedly the ‘third smartest person in the world’ — has an IQ of 178.)

The situation on a global scale, since the internet is a "global" situation, still dictates that conservatives are in the majority, and control a majority of media outlets and business ventures in general.

Re "Smartest Person in Scandanavia": That number doesn't seem right--maybe they use a different scale over there? Here I know of several people with 200+ IQs on Sanford-Binet scale. I was put into several "gifted" programs from a young age that fucked me up royally, so I know that I'm up there in the percentile.

Anyway, I don't think IQ has anything to do with intelligence. My IQ is certainly higher than Einstein's or any number of theoretical physicists I can think of, but am I actually smarter than they are? Probably not.

 

[crackerjack]

The situation, not your belief, determines whether you are a contrarian or not. Ever heard of the term ‘preaching to the converted’?

Exactly. Vimothy is a contrarian round these here parts. HMLT is actually fairly typical, if a bit more digmatic, in his views - it's just that his English is garbled and his manner obnoxious.

 

[crackerjack]

My IQ is certainly higher than Einstein's or any number of theoretical physicists I can think of, but am I actually smarter than they are? Probably not.

Brilliant and modest too!

 

[nomadologist]

Exactly. Vimothy is a contrarian round these here parts. HMLT is actually fairly typical, if a bit more digmatic, in his views - it's just that his English is garbled and his manner obnoxious.

Around here? I would say it's about 50-50 with the academics on one side and the "commonsense-ists" (including Mr. Tea, Vimothy, IdleRich, you) on the other side. On the internet in general? There are far more conservatives.

 

[Mr. Tea]

A) My IQ (190 Sanford-Binet, which I feel safe assuming is higher than his, because it's in the top .001 percentile)

But I thought IQ had nothing to do with 'real' intelligence...?

Oh.

 

[nomadologist]

Brilliant and modest too!

It's not like *I* believe IQ means anything, or that my being labelled gifted early is anything I enjoyed or find unproblematic or am proud of on any level. It's just a fact, and one that fits in nicely with the sort of Aristotlean-heirarchical sense of IQ-based intelligence Vimothy has espoused here in the past. According to what Vimothy believes, I am more intelligent than he is, or, at very least, have much more market value than he does.

I don't think very highly of myself at all, as anyone who actually knows me could attest to. Since this is the fucking internet, I really don't give a shit what any of you bozos think.