Random Stuff

[Despanan]

I don't think you understand what you just read.

[Phantomgrift]

I think I just dismissed whatever you posted as a way of randomly mocking you for no particular reason.
It really had nothing to do whatsoever with reading your linked "study".

I mean, I did read it though- Blah, blah, blah, we may be inherently luck, love and lollipops!
Doesn't prove anything. It's a hypothesis put forth in a single study. No other variables were presented by you, simply: "Here's a study!"

Well that's great. What are the long-term ramifications of this? Are there any? Are they planning on devoting anything more to this or is it just some one-shot by some guy in Harvard for a class project? Will anyone care? Hence my initial line and follow-up. Technically studies show that the roads would be massively safer with fewer accidents and death if drivers simply drove the way that driving manuals taught and obeyed posted road rules.

It will, of course, be a cold day in hell before that ever happens.

So yeah, mostly open mockery of your study. Besides, trying to cite reference to this study would run counter to your "Viva la Revolution!" thing you try to promote. There's numerous occasions in the past where you have droned on at length about how the only change to take place will come from armed resistance and violence and blah, blah, blah. But you want to toss out a "study" on how deep-down we're all good inside?

That's not something to support your own belief or argument. That's you trying to use the internet to counter something I lean towards simply because you like anything that may or may not run counter to the self-conceived notion of me you've built up in your mind.

[Despanan]

It's not a single study - that was just one more in a LONG line of scientific evidence that points to the fact that humans as a species are more inclined towards cooperation together and disinclined towards violence and aggressive action towards each other. For instance, the article I linked mentions the which has been around since 1986 and relies on a large base of previous research. So your ideas about human nature were scientifically disproven well before you were even born, Phant.

[Phantomgrift]

"It was subsequently adopted by UNESCO at the twenty-fifth session of the General Conference on 16 November 1989. The statement, then known as a 'Statement on Violence', was designed to refute "the notion that organized human violence is biologically determined"."


I wish you'd learn to read.
I've never made claims about organized human violence.
I've simply stated that deep down, people are assholes.

Like right now for instance. Deep down, are you trying to post all these things because you are driven by a deep, purely-driven desire to reach out and educate someone on a purely neutral and non-emotional level?

Or deep-down, is this a matter of you smiling inside at something closer to: "Ha! I'll show that stupid moron why he's wrong!" as you inwardly gloat over your chance to supposedly prove online how much of an idiot I am?

Based on your posts in that past, I'd lean heavily towards the latter than any noble teaching moment on your part.
Ergo, you're an asshole. Ergo, I can readily find a great many number of utter assholes on a daily basis. I mean, studies are all well and good. Even scientific ones.

It was a carefully researched and scientifically derived study that states that the roads would be safer if everyone followed posted rules of the road.
I mean, it's right there... Science! But again, it'll be an astronomical improbability the day everyone across the globe suddenly and magically decides to follow posted rules of the road, 100% of the time.

It's okay Desp. You're still a long-haired, overweight, aging activist, and people are still predominantly assholes.

Besides, if this greater truth was discovered back in 86, then how do you explain the rise of reality tv shows that thrive on the concept of everyone in the show being a complete and utter douchewaffle?

(And for the record, I was born in the seventies. Nice try though, you're still an incorrect dildo.)

[Despanan]

[Phantomgrift]

And yet, here you are... Arguing online with me.
Not for the glorious purpose of education and noble gesture, but for the sake of crowing about how wrong I am.

You almost had me going with all your "People aren't assholes" bullshit.

And I'm not focusing on your idiot statement about this new study.

You posted about this new study, I mocked you.
You claimed that it was referenced by other sources, tied in with the Seville Statement about how we're not assholes.
Except the Seville Statement was about warfare and violence in culture. Not how we're all assholes.
I pointed this out that... Highlighting that I was not talking about violence, I was talking about people being assholes.

So instead of trying to refute that in conjunction with the Seville Statement, you bypass it and circle back to your new study, claiming that it proves me wrong.

Do you not see your error in debate here? At all?

Naaaa... I get the feeling all you see is the chance to say I'm wrong on the internet. Discrediting your own initial argument about how we're not assholes... By being a giant asshole yourself.

[Despanan]

You/me behaving like a couple of douchewaffles is not evidence that people are assholes.

What you're doing is appealing to anecdotal evidence -which is meaningless in a conversation about human nature.

That's wrong. Stop it.

[Phantomgrift]

Make me?

I mean seriously, we're down to that "Who get's the last word" thing again.
And I'm going to be amused by how quick you are to point out MY supposed flaw of appealing to anecdotal evidence, while not providing an answer for why you will bounce back and forth between your own topics and contradict yourself. You've done similar things in the past and been called out on it. Kind of like when you get called out for failing to answer a question someone asks you, instead segueing into some massive spiel on a side-note that had nothing to do with the issue.

It's why no one takes what you write seriously anymore, and why I only post to garner reactions out of you.

[Despanan]

It's funny because you constantly try to make this into a contest of personality - one that you ALWAYS fail at.

It's one thing to attack your opponent personally in order to cover up the fact that your argument holds no water. Charismatic people do that all the time.

However, YOU are not charismatic so at the end of the day you have no argument and AND you've failed even to win at a purely rhetorical argument. That's actually a little sad. It's like no one even had to take your One Ewe Lamb - it just wandered off one day.

And now it's sitting in the field with the Rich Man's flock and he didn't even notice - and would probably give it back out of pity - except you're too busy denying that it's gone missing and the lamb likes it better where it is.

[Phantomgrift]

I've never tried to make this a contest of anything.
I just play the first thing that comes to mind with anything you write and just let you run with it.
I've never claimed to have an argument, mostly I just post things counter to whatever tangent you're running on.

Because lets face it if we're all a finger-pointing everywhere. You're about as charismatic as a long-haired street preacher screaming about the End Days to anyone that wanders into vocal range.

See, this is why I view the internet as entertainment. You still hold this view that "winning" or "losing" something in an online forum has some manner of valid implication. It doesnt.

I get a venue to poke someones buttons and string them along, and then continue to whatever else I was doing. You apparently get very involved in this and strategizing about who's winning, losing, arguing, counter-arguing, etc. That's what makes you so damned amusing. You're so wrapped up in your own delusions of self-awareness that you can't see how vapid you really are.

Of course this is made even more sweet and flavorful when you try to resort to pedantic allegories that could be lifted straight from a bygone 80's era "Power Of Positive Thinking" seminar.

Quick! Give me the one about the Eagle that was raised by Ducks!