|
| quote: | Originally posted by tathi
if refuting logic gives you satisfaction, so be it
that really is a great analogy, it completely delineates your concept of "logic"
The general consensus? Ahhh the masses, completely omniscient and au courant, never doubt the masses maxims, they are absolute truths.
I suggest you also read Dialogue aux Enfers entre Montesquieu and Machiavelli.
hehe gw, i can also cut and paste off sites like honestreporting, if anything contradicts my ideals, its racist, anti-semitic, lies! all lies!
shithouse today ;/
|
*yawn*
yes, defeat.
I was convinced you'd pick this specific statement (about the general consensus) and generalize. Very shallow. I might agree with you that relying on what the majority thinks is not the brightest idea (just look at the overwhelming, misinformed anti-Israeli sentiments ) but in language you'll have to accept the genral consensus unless you wanna speak languages of your own, talking to yourself! Also, it's not merely "general consensus" but a clear definition.
What you did was artifical construction justified by "logic" totally ignoring (you still did, seeing that you didnt respond to one point about the word's history) the very motive behind the creation of the word. It is therefore, in a sense, calling bananas apples.
"hehe gw, i can also cut and paste off sites like honestreporting, if anything contradicts my ideals, its racist, anti-semitic, lies! all lies!"
Have not the slightest idea what you're talking about. Can't have anything to do with me and what I said.
Again I ask: What sort of satisfaction does this denial give you? Does it hurt you that a term which theoretically applies to others as well is occupied by Jews only? Believe me when I say that Jewish people would have preferred if it hadn't had anything to do with them. Too bad no1 built a time machine yet.
|