Thank you for finally admitting I was right and I see that you did understand to which part of psychology I was referring to.
Thank you again for admitting I was right all along.
I didn't notice these two comments made by you earlier in which you whole heartedly accept what I have said.
Nice try. Not correct, but nice try.
A- "all cars are red"
X- "this is not true. some cars, it is true, are red."
A- "thank you for agreeing with me that all cars are red"
So why are still arguing? I said it before and I'll say it again. For the sake of arguing.
If you honestly believe this, then you are still unclear on the concept. I find it hard to believe that this is the case at this point.
Will you now keep quiet? We have totaly agreed with each other, what more do you want? Do you have some kind of need to throw up more information so that people will have more appreciation of you? I don't understand this I admit.
We have not totally agreed. Some have tried to correct you, but you have chosen to stick with your incorrect definitions.
Don't be a hypocryt! If you have ever in your life (and I have no doubt that you have) wanted to address say QM and have referred to it as physics or ever in your life talked about friction and gravitation and referred to it as physics and not as Newtonian physics or mechanical physics then you must bow down and appologize a thousand times.
Did you note in my posts where I admitted my ignorance of your area of expertise, and asked you to adjust my counterexamples if needed? Did you see where I said that I recognised that "what the **** do we know?" does not represent physics? I try, when speaking precisely, not to make claims on matters I am ignorant of, and when I find that I was unknowingly ignorant, I try (and sometimes succeed) to thank those who have corrected me.
If you really read some of my posts then you would have seen that I referred to clinical psychology or psychoanalysis the moment you wanted to be 'court of law' precise. The only reason I referred to it afterwards as psychology was so I wouldn't need to write those long words but we would all know what I was talking about.
Did you explain this reasoning at the time? If you did, I missed it, and offer my apologies.
If it was opposite and we were to talk about mechanical physics I would not have said a word if you used the word 'physics'.
My guess is that you would have, had I said something that was true about another area of physics but not about mechanical physicsl. And you
should, if I am using too general a term.
If you can please try and be honest from now on. In hebrew there is a saying that "the paper can withhold anything" meaning that you can write whatever you want whether it be hypocyt, false, true, whatever but try and be more honest.
This is a two way street. I have been honest with you. I honestly say now, that if you misuse the term you will be corrected again. That is as it should be.
You have admitted before I was correct so how can you say now that I am wrong?
No, I have not. I have admitted that if you had used a more specific term, I would have agreed with you. The broader term was, is, and will be (if you use it again) quite simply wrong.
Please please please, try and be honest.
Please. I have my reputation here. You can try a lot of things, but accusing me of dishonesty for pointing out your misuse of a term does not sit well.
In a court of law the term psychology may not be acceptable if I really want to speak of clinical psychology (BTW, I'm not sure this is true since layman sit in the audience and so is the judge and so are the jury) but here it is plenty acceptable especially after I have said so clearly what I meant.
You have said so so clearly that everyone understands. Well, everyone understands but you. There appears to be 100% agreement among your critics. Perhaps you really ought to rethink how "clearly" you phrased what you meant.
I thought we already should have started over but you keep arguing for the sake of argument.
Repeating that does not make it true, you must realize. Again, your critics in this thread are clear that this is not a matter of arguing for the sake of arguing. It is a matter of correcting a misused term.
admitting defeat is very difficult so I can sympathize with your inability to do so but try, please try to be honest.
Admitting defeat is very easy. It is acknowledging that you know more now than you did a moment ago. You really ought to try it some time.
