Yeah, he pops in now and then to challenge a girl to a fight............... http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=75392&perpage=6&pagenumber=13 Bit like trying to argue with Zzzz, really.
No I find it funny after trashing CC and acting as if you are above it all in a very recent feedback thread, that you come in trolling for Waggie...on the basis of a post that is nearly 2 years old. Mav, The Objective...indeed...
Your back with Kant again? He was substandard, his work was only accepted as tertiary curriculum by default , due to incredible persistence on his part ,and the timely death of some influential dean's. In fact, his work was so depressing, i beleive it was largely responsible for the world wars, and the russian revolution, just for starters. Why the heck would i revisit his work? Im already depressed, reading your post's.............
My kind? Please explain. Opinions, without merit? You seriously expect, people who have researched, read up on, examined every facet of knowledge, could be bothered to, or remember every relevent quote, every example of "cookie cutter" intellect, the likes of which are thown up by your kind, who would dismiss an arguement, an opinion, without a screed of copy paste supporting arguement?? I think not.
My kind? Please explain. Those who get depressed from rational thought. Opinions, without merit? Yes, the words I wrote down were unequivocal. You seriously expect, people who have researched, read up on, examined every facet of knowledge, could be bothered to, or remember every relevent quote, every example of "cookie cutter" intellect, the likes of which are thown up by your kind, who would dismiss an arguement, an opinion, without a screed of copy paste supporting arguement?? I expect someone who claims to have done anything even approaching serious work on understanding Kant's writings to be more than a smug wiseass as yourself. I think not. And I think....you think, not.
Zzzzzzz quote "I expect someone who claims to have done anything even approaching serious work on understanding Kant's writings to be more than a smug wiseass as yourself. I think not. And I think....you think, not."endquote. "Smug wise-ass"-says the guy who predictably used the lead-in line, i think not, right on cue. You think, that was written that way, to be superior? No, it was included for your benifit, to demonstrate my vast knowledge of human psychology. Quite frankly, i do get depressed when attempting to think rationally, gee i wonder if there are any philosophers who put that into words............. Simply put, you would have to be an encyclopedia to provide"arguements' for or against anything, particularly on a message board. Providing relevant examples can help to illustrate a point, but at the end of the day, nobody cares what you know, what you can quote chapter and verse. Because odds are, they are unfamiliar with your example, or its context. So your left with an "unsubstantiated opinion" , a throwaway line, people can take it or leave it. "cookie cutter intellect" is still a keeper , though.