Certainly.
Sorry, I could not make you to understand.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Anita Moorjani Experiance?
- Thread starter Kumar
- Start date
Sorry, I could not make you to understand.
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2006
- Messages
- 26,876
OK. A question for other posters in this thread, DOES ANYONE AT ALL UNDERSTAND?
New things are difficult to understand esp by commons. It is quite common logic.
Daylightstar
Philosopher
Yes, most of the time Kumar's posts are half cooked, often they are not cooked at all.
They are never fully cooked.
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
I think I understand the post in question. Here it is again:
He's saying that a poster's first few responses to him suggest that they understand him despite his problems expressing himself in English, but then they start complaining that they don't understand him even though his posts don't change.
Daylightstar
Philosopher
What it really means, and Kumar refuses to see this, is that people are initially helpful and are willing to make an effort in understanding him, but the continued utter stupidity in his posts in spite of corrections etc is annoying people and they start to show this annoyance.
Kumar couldn't be bothered, he carries on just the same. It's a form of anti social behavior.
Kumar couldn't be bothered, he carries on just the same. It's a form of anti social behavior.
Donn
Philosopher
Deep neural learning net language generator being trained here. I tells ya...
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2006
- Messages
- 26,876
What "new things"?
Why are they "difficult to understand"?
Why is Extra Sensory Perception involved?
What are "commons"?
How does "common logic" differ from "uncommon logic"?
What "new things"?
Why are they "difficult to understand"?
Why is Extra Sensory Perception involved?
What are "commons"?
How does "common logic" differ from "uncommon logic"?
To understand above special uncommon logic power, faith and dedication are needed not just contradictions.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Note that Kumar has repeatedly argued that if a lot of people believe in something it might be true.
Daylightstar
Philosopher
Science needs facts and data. It doesn't need irrational belief and certainly doesn't need the believers.
Anti social belief pushers are a menace to society at large, Kumar.
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2006
- Messages
- 26,876
Ah. So to misunderstand regular common illogic weakness, disbelief and dilettantism are not required, just consistency. Got it.
I am closing these discussions with a conclusion that this case is a mystery of nature esp to commons.
Was it something I said?
That's rather a hurried flounce, for a Kumar thread.
Jeeze, we're just a buncha commoners. Now I yam all dejected and so forth.
That's rather a hurried flounce, for a Kumar thread.
Jeeze, we're just a buncha commoners. Now I yam all dejected and so forth.
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2006
- Messages
- 26,876
Maybe he finally understood what I have been saying? Which is immensely curious because . . . I don't.
Daylightstar
Philosopher
However, there is no valid reason whatsoever to accept 'this case' as it is presented by the relevant subject.
It is rather reasonable to reject 'this case' as subject to irrational thinking, greed/fraud, attention seeking or an irrational search for significance.
Maybe he finally understood what I have been saying? Which is immensely curious because . . . I don't.
Understandings in use seems to be quite limited and knowledge not yet in use seems to be quite scattered and can be pending for use in future.
Daylightstar
Philosopher
Only if it works. If not, there is no valid use for it and it becomes the domain of criminals.
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2012
- Messages
- 10,259
Balderdash. That is the fabrication of a charlatan trying desperately to eschew demands for evidence of their claims. If you must invoke "faith" so blatantly in a scientific context then you have already conceded your claims are garbage so toxic it cannot even be recycled or composted without contaminating society with injurious absurdity.