Science, Meta-physics and Trading

Saynt Chaosity is kewl.

F. P.

 

Saynt said : "oh no, please don't take this thread in this direction. "john edwards" nonsense we don't want or need."

I am not John Edwards, Saynt, but you don't have to worry as I don't throw pearls to THE swines as the saying goes.

I am however still waiting for you, chicken, to respond to my challenge where the odds are 300,000 in your favour. Come on, Live dangerously, rip me off for any amount you care to nominate.

I don't even expect to win with such odds against me. I am merely offering the bet to show you up for the chicken you are Saynt.


BTW I noticed your remark : "PhD, research.
........................................ I know more about these things than 99.99% of those here. i am educated.

"i AM EDUCATED"

Well well, I would never have guessed.

freealways

 

freealways i don't usually respond to insults or threats but i will make an exception.

now, what is it that you want from me??

 

Good post.

 

another thinking in dark ages

 

Well seeing that you appear to want me to present you with a wishlist, here it is :

You could start off with by

1. to be intellectually honest by not trying to score and win an argument with false premises

2. tucking your head in. Don't be so cocky to think that you know it all as the price will be too high for you to pay at some stage in your life.

In fact I would say that the moment someone states that he knows it all (or much better than 99.9% of all the people here) many people would, rightly or wrongly, jump to the conclusion that you are an absolute idiot.

3. being a bit humble (and your whole world will change). Having a diploma or a degree isn't the be all and end all. Many such people are totally unsuitable for and incapable of getting and thence keeping a job in the private world. That would even more so apply to people who have studied and now perhaps have a job teaching philosophy.

You don't appear to be aware that there are many qualities other people have got which you, or I for that matter, haven’t got. Yet all you seem to want to do is dismiss and rubbish other people.

And I suggest that you don’t ever again utter the words ‘I am educated’ because you clearly aren’t educated enough to realize that people on hearing such an inane remark immediately will think ‘that guy has a chip on his shoulders as big as a house’.

4. not insulting other people just because they happen to have a viewpoint opposite to yours.

5. joining an english class and educating yourself a bit better as you make some atrocious mistakes.

6. always try to think before you open your mouth.

7. try to address all questions or points made by others.

For example, I think it was Surfer who asked you what the subject of your thesis was and whether it was published on the internet. You ignored that question. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if you and Mr Market were one and the same person. He too was rather evasive about his education and a total idiot to boot.

Now coming back to my offer of a bet, I will sum it up in a few words.

1. You claim that metaphysics is b/s.

2. It appears as if you consider synchronicity to fall into the same class.

3. You claim to be involved in research work.

4. I offered you, as someone who doesn't believe that there is anything of value in synchronicity, the opportunity to participate in an experiment which may possibly provide you with research material about synchronicity which could place you in a class of your own, up there with leading philosophers of the past.

5. I am prepared to accept just only one third of the true odds in our bet. The correct odds of the results I previously achieved were such that, statistically speaking, the chances of such result being due to chance were 300,000/1.

6. You can nominate any reasonable amount you want me to risk and I will come up with the money (just as you will be required to do) with all moneys being placed on deposit with the winner to get all.
Provided of course that the amount you nominate for me to risk must be an amount reasonably large enough to hurt me if I were to lose.

7. As you appear to be certain that there is no such thing as synchronicity (even though it is impossible to prove this as at anyone time results can be due to pure chance) and with the odds being 300,000/1 in your favour you are hereby invited to participate.

8. Participating will provide you with the opportunity to dislodge the reputation which you are well on your way of establishing i.e. that you are a loudmouthed would be, could be, never will be top philosopher.

freealways

 

Well said freealways...

One thing that was in my mind was that some people have a narrow mind and can't think in a broad mind. Also, like you mention, we want a discussion, not a narrow minded debate.

Wise and thoughtful thinking as usual.

 

Freealways post is complete rubbish. And it seems you have aligned yourself with a fool.. so what does that make you?

What you choose to call narrow minded is a mind that is skeptical by nature, requires proof or evidence for the existence of that which is claimed and realizes that man creates only models of reality, not reality itself, and the measure of the validity or truthfulness of a model is its usefulness and explanatory power, and how well it conforms to the existing knowledge base of "wisdom" or current paradigm (among others).

I'm sick and tired of uneducated uncritical neo-dweebs labeling as narrow-minded anyone and everyone who chooses not to accept, whole-heartedly embrace or believe every stupid thing that comes down the pike. Broad-minded, in the context of freealways post is equivalent to GULLIBLE. FOOLISH. WHIMSICAL. PRESUMPTUOUS.

On the other hand, please continue your "discussion" along these lines. Every day I will read it and have a good laugh. I need a good laugh, please ... keep talking. LOL. Ii will be great fun for me to pick apart your "arguments", expose your faslehoods, illogic, and fallacies! BWHAHAHA!

Please ... PLEASE continue!!

 

Longshot, thank you for introducing a most adapt word to this thread. (the word 'dweep')

My dictionary describes its meaning as : 'A person regarded as socially inept or foolish, often on account of being overly studious.'

And, as it happens, it describes Saynt to a tee.

I don't want it being said that favours are going unrewarded on E.T. so my invitation to participate in a bet is hereby extended to you, Longshot, (on similar terms and conditions as those offered to Saynt of course).

So please proceed from here and nominate an amount for me to stake which amount is large enough to severely hurt me (now that would really teach me a lesson I will never forget won't it ? ) in the event I lose (as I probably will).

What Saynt probably only now is waking up to is the realisation that he opened his mouth so big that he is now stuck with an offer of a bet which no-one in his right mind could possibly accept just in case I got lucky. No doubt Saynt is, at this very moment, consulting the PH.D. specialising in statistics in the room next to his.

freealways

 

Yes, I will continue... someday... someday... I'll talk in your standards...