see i hate these kind of people. I mention i smoke and they start doing this stupid shit. I don't think its cool. I only smoke when i'm sad,bored,tired.....this just happens to be all the time. chill the fuck out faggot. I could care less if you laugh. i lookclumsy when i smoke and thats far from bad-ass. chill, anon.

i always feel like a dick when i ask someone not to smoke around me but i have asthma and its either they leave or i do, most times i'll walk away without saying anything just to not bother people.

When i smoke i make sure to ask if anyone around me if they have asthma,I don't want my bad habits to majorly affect others. If they are really cool i just decide not smoke at all, but if they are being an ass-munching fuckwit about it i tell them to leave.

Personally, it just bugs me, and I tend to get nauseous when cigarette smoke gets in my face, but I also tend to move up wind of someone when they smoke. Let's both be cool guys here!

oddly the smoke bugs me too. like its giving me signs that i'm just not a smoker, but its a habit i just can't kick.

not smoking if someone around you has asthma. your a cool guy Adam.

yay! approval from social peers!

You're really laying the moronic intellectual character on thick, aren't you? It doesn't make you sound wiser to call me a "fool" or "child." If you're old enough to call me a child, you should be embarrassed your writing is so poor. Also, your attempts at sophisticated insults just sound awkward.

I don't need to run along. I'm content to keep talking if you keep replying, though if you quit, I could find a new conversation elsewhere, but if this one continues, I can very much partake in both at once. It really doesn't even frustrate me that you're making these cheap digs. If you don't have any interest in replying, quit posting. If you want to continue, I'll indulge you, even if the content is sophomoric like that of your last several comments.

I expressed my purpose already: to debate for the sake of mental stimulation. The brain might be an organ, but it can be exercised like a muscle. Even writing out these sentences is good work for my brain, so though your contribution to the discussion has grown lackluster, it still takes some effort to compose all these criticisms. The real disappointment here is that you don't seem to value that same exercise. Instead of forcing this shallow character to make yourself seem above the conversation, you could have continued the debate on objective terms and benefited your mind. I don't think there's as much stimulation to be derived from spewing lame insults.

Okay.

Now you've dropped all efforts to have an intelligent discussion and are trying to demean me, which is really embarrassing when you write like a twelve-year-old who memorized the words for his next vocabulary test but still can't manage sixth grade grammar.

I don't care if you think I'm an amusement. I like to debate. It's mentally stimulating, good for strengthening neural connections and forming new ones. However, it's not me who's been used up, but rather you who can't reason your way out of the hole you've dug yourself.

Objectively, I don't believe that you had initially meant to just bait me because you wanted a show. You're ten posts into this conversation. You wanted to prove a point about which you thought yourself right, but couldn't keep up with my counterarguments, so now you're copping out with the excuse that you were only trying to amuse yourself.

That's what I'm choosing to believe based on the evidence before me. You can deny it all you want and honestly, even if it was true it wouldn't bother me that I was an amusement for you. I got the mental stimulation I wanted from this discussion. You're the one depriving yourself of that exercise and you'll be worse for it. Dialectic made Socrates' dick rock hard. It's the reason we remember him thousands of years later. You're not looking cool or wiser by rage-quitting. It makes you look like the fat kid in gym class who quits running the mile because he's out of shape, but laughs at everyone who keeps running and pretends he's too good for it.

What? Yes of course I've dropped all efforts child. And of course I'm trying to demean you, you act as if i was trying to be clever about it! I'm a stubborn man yes, but I know when I've dug a hole or not. I stated you were unexpected , so how would i have baited you, fool? I'm ten posts in this because i'm trying to give piss-poor excuses that might allow you see that you've achieved what ever you wanted and can now move on. I'm copping out because you are a worm squirming in my brain and I've decided to get rid of it. What kind debate is this? You clearly are a fool-hardy man itching to go against things facing a bored man with ill will in his heart. I do not care what you think of me, you sad sack of shit. You'e had your fun, yes? Good, i'll go look for mine. Now run along and take that dick out your mouth. I didn't want to look cool or smarter....is that your purpose? to impress someone, to make yourself feel smarter? shame. I don't care about your counterarguments, and i don't care about you. You are really dense aren't you. I don't care what you believe, you were amusement. sadly it didn't turn how i planned.....you are used up. go be a pain elsewhere......please? I'm begging you, just shut up and go on

You're really laying the moronic intellectual character on thick, aren't you? It doesn't make you sound wiser to call me a "fool" or "child." If you're old enough to call me a child, you should be embarrassed your writing is so poor. Also, your attempts at sophisticated insults just sound awkward.

I don't need to run along. I'm content to keep talking if you keep replying, though if you quit, I could find a new conversation elsewhere, but if this one continues, I can very much partake in both at once. It really doesn't even frustrate me that you're making these cheap digs. If you don't have any interest in replying, quit posting. If you want to continue, I'll indulge you, even if the content is sophomoric like that of your last several comments.

I expressed my purpose already: to debate for the sake of mental stimulation. The brain might be an organ, but it can be exercised like a muscle. Even writing out these sentences is good work for my brain, so though your contribution to the discussion has grown lackluster, it still takes some effort to compose all these criticisms. The real disappointment here is that you don't seem to value that same exercise. Instead of forcing this shallow character to make yourself seem above the conversation, you could have continued the debate on objective terms and benefited your mind. I don't think there's as much stimulation to be derived from spewing lame insults.

Okay.

Funny, that's almost how it's phrased in the first paragraph of the Wikipedia page covering cynicism.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynicism

You'd have to be out-of-touch to assume that's what someone meant by "cynicism," especially when the context clearly implied the contemporary definition.

You dig yourself deeper as far as the reason you continue with this discussion. Last time, you were telling me you had expected me to draw out the faults of your original comment to initiate a debate. I explained that to derive any faults you'd accept would mean taking your word on your intentions for that first comment, since otherwise I'm pointing out faults that don't exist within the context you claim. If you knew I wouldn't take your word on those intentions, why would you ever say, "I thought I was going to be properly engage by a truly smart fellow that would show me up and rightly explain the faults in my comment"? I would have to take your word to meet that expectation. So there's again a contradiction between what you claim to desire and what is actually feasible.

Cynicism isn't my type. Reread the second paragraph of my last comment. I'm not always cynical, but in this instance, it is not irrational of me to conduct myself in that way and it's arguably been better for continuing this debate.

What had you hoped to achieve by adding fuel to my fire?

Again, you're explaining away your poor attempts at debating with unobservable claims. You could be wide awake and trying to slink out of a conversation for all I know. I realize that is more cynicism. However, you shouldn't keep putting out claims that hinge on facts I can't know for certain. Debate in terms we can both observe. And if you're really tired, go to bed. It's hard to believe you're too tired to critically think when you keep commenting.

Why? why should I debate with observable claims? I have no respect or care for what you wish or want. Or what you chose to believe. I hoped i was going to get a good show like i said the first time.My curiosity of what you might say outweighs going to bed. It isn't that hard to believe, actually. My claims are my claims, do with them what you want, but don't think I really care. What do you honestly want, boy? A toy? A book? Some cards? I am truly amazed that you continue to talk, despite knowing the other person simply does not care?Whatever your purpose is, you do have quite the determination. My own reasoning is simply my own, You are a tool and a test for me. your usefulness ran out...run along now

Now you've dropped all efforts to have an intelligent discussion and are trying to demean me, which is really embarrassing when you write like a twelve-year-old who memorized the words for his next vocabulary test but still can't manage sixth grade grammar.

I don't care if you think I'm an amusement. I like to debate. It's mentally stimulating, good for strengthening neural connections and forming new ones. However, it's not me who's been used up, but rather you who can't reason your way out of the hole you've dug yourself.

Objectively, I don't believe that you had initially meant to just bait me because you wanted a show. You're ten posts into this conversation. You wanted to prove a point about which you thought yourself right, but couldn't keep up with my counterarguments, so now you're copping out with the excuse that you were only trying to amuse yourself.

That's what I'm choosing to believe based on the evidence before me. You can deny it all you want and honestly, even if it was true it wouldn't bother me that I was an amusement for you. I got the mental stimulation I wanted from this discussion. You're the one depriving yourself of that exercise and you'll be worse for it. Dialectic made Socrates' dick rock hard. It's the reason we remember him thousands of years later. You're not looking cool or wiser by rage-quitting. It makes you look like the fat kid in gym class who quits running the mile because he's out of shape, but laughs at everyone who keeps running and pretends he's too good for it.

What? Yes of course I've dropped all efforts child. And of course I'm trying to demean you, you act as if i was trying to be clever about it! I'm a stubborn man yes, but I know when I've dug a hole or not. I stated you were unexpected , so how would i have baited you, fool? I'm ten posts in this because i'm trying to give piss-poor excuses that might allow you see that you've achieved what ever you wanted and can now move on. I'm copping out because you are a worm squirming in my brain and I've decided to get rid of it. What kind debate is this? You clearly are a fool-hardy man itching to go against things facing a bored man with ill will in his heart. I do not care what you think of me, you sad sack of shit. You'e had your fun, yes? Good, i'll go look for mine. Now run along and take that dick out your mouth. I didn't want to look cool or smarter....is that your purpose? to impress someone, to make yourself feel smarter? shame. I don't care about your counterarguments, and i don't care about you. You are really dense aren't you. I don't care what you believe, you were amusement. sadly it didn't turn how i planned.....you are used up. go be a pain elsewhere......please? I'm begging you, just shut up and go on

You're really laying the moronic intellectual character on thick, aren't you? It doesn't make you sound wiser to call me a "fool" or "child." If you're old enough to call me a child, you should be embarrassed your writing is so poor. Also, your attempts at sophisticated insults just sound awkward.

I don't need to run along. I'm content to keep talking if you keep replying, though if you quit, I could find a new conversation elsewhere, but if this one continues, I can very much partake in both at once. It really doesn't even frustrate me that you're making these cheap digs. If you don't have any interest in replying, quit posting. If you want to continue, I'll indulge you, even if the content is sophomoric like that of your last several comments.

I expressed my purpose already: to debate for the sake of mental stimulation. The brain might be an organ, but it can be exercised like a muscle. Even writing out these sentences is good work for my brain, so though your contribution to the discussion has grown lackluster, it still takes some effort to compose all these criticisms. The real disappointment here is that you don't seem to value that same exercise. Instead of forcing this shallow character to make yourself seem above the conversation, you could have continued the debate on objective terms and benefited your mind. I don't think there's as much stimulation to be derived from spewing lame insults.

Okay.

Then what one did you originally think I had meant?

well it is a philosophy that states that the purpose of life was to live a life of Virtue in agreement with Nature. This meant rejecting all conventional desires for wealth, power, sex, and fame, and by living a simple life free from all possessions. I know you weren't going to take my word(i've dealt with your type before) so I assumed it was going to add for fuel to your flame, which didn't achieve what I had hoped. I suppose you are right on various matters. Sadly due to the deprivation tugging at me, I haven't really thought about any of your comments and feel as though I've failed you as well. You were an unexpected occurrence, which I hoped would drag me out of my stupor and energize me. In the end I don't really care what you would of done if you took my word.

Funny, that's almost how it's phrased in the first paragraph of the Wikipedia page covering cynicism.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynicism

You'd have to be out-of-touch to assume that's what someone meant by "cynicism," especially when the context clearly implied the contemporary definition.

You dig yourself deeper as far as the reason you continue with this discussion. Last time, you were telling me you had expected me to draw out the faults of your original comment to initiate a debate. I explained that to derive any faults you'd accept would mean taking your word on your intentions for that first comment, since otherwise I'm pointing out faults that don't exist within the context you claim. If you knew I wouldn't take your word on those intentions, why would you ever say, "I thought I was going to be properly engage by a truly smart fellow that would show me up and rightly explain the faults in my comment"? I would have to take your word to meet that expectation. So there's again a contradiction between what you claim to desire and what is actually feasible.

Cynicism isn't my type. Reread the second paragraph of my last comment. I'm not always cynical, but in this instance, it is not irrational of me to conduct myself in that way and it's arguably been better for continuing this debate.

What had you hoped to achieve by adding fuel to my fire?

Again, you're explaining away your poor attempts at debating with unobservable claims. You could be wide awake and trying to slink out of a conversation for all I know. I realize that is more cynicism. However, you shouldn't keep putting out claims that hinge on facts I can't know for certain. Debate in terms we can both observe. And if you're really tired, go to bed. It's hard to believe you're too tired to critically think when you keep commenting.

Why? why should I debate with observable claims? I have no respect or care for what you wish or want. Or what you chose to believe. I hoped i was going to get a good show like i said the first time.My curiosity of what you might say outweighs going to bed. It isn't that hard to believe, actually. My claims are my claims, do with them what you want, but don't think I really care. What do you honestly want, boy? A toy? A book? Some cards? I am truly amazed that you continue to talk, despite knowing the other person simply does not care?Whatever your purpose is, you do have quite the determination. My own reasoning is simply my own, You are a tool and a test for me. your usefulness ran out...run along now

Now you've dropped all efforts to have an intelligent discussion and are trying to demean me, which is really embarrassing when you write like a twelve-year-old who memorized the words for his next vocabulary test but still can't manage sixth grade grammar.

I don't care if you think I'm an amusement. I like to debate. It's mentally stimulating, good for strengthening neural connections and forming new ones. However, it's not me who's been used up, but rather you who can't reason your way out of the hole you've dug yourself.

Objectively, I don't believe that you had initially meant to just bait me because you wanted a show. You're ten posts into this conversation. You wanted to prove a point about which you thought yourself right, but couldn't keep up with my counterarguments, so now you're copping out with the excuse that you were only trying to amuse yourself.

That's what I'm choosing to believe based on the evidence before me. You can deny it all you want and honestly, even if it was true it wouldn't bother me that I was an amusement for you. I got the mental stimulation I wanted from this discussion. You're the one depriving yourself of that exercise and you'll be worse for it. Dialectic made Socrates' dick rock hard. It's the reason we remember him thousands of years later. You're not looking cool or wiser by rage-quitting. It makes you look like the fat kid in gym class who quits running the mile because he's out of shape, but laughs at everyone who keeps running and pretends he's too good for it.

What? Yes of course I've dropped all efforts child. And of course I'm trying to demean you, you act as if i was trying to be clever about it! I'm a stubborn man yes, but I know when I've dug a hole or not. I stated you were unexpected , so how would i have baited you, fool? I'm ten posts in this because i'm trying to give piss-poor excuses that might allow you see that you've achieved what ever you wanted and can now move on. I'm copping out because you are a worm squirming in my brain and I've decided to get rid of it. What kind debate is this? You clearly are a fool-hardy man itching to go against things facing a bored man with ill will in his heart. I do not care what you think of me, you sad sack of shit. You'e had your fun, yes? Good, i'll go look for mine. Now run along and take that dick out your mouth. I didn't want to look cool or smarter....is that your purpose? to impress someone, to make yourself feel smarter? shame. I don't care about your counterarguments, and i don't care about you. You are really dense aren't you. I don't care what you believe, you were amusement. sadly it didn't turn how i planned.....you are used up. go be a pain elsewhere......please? I'm begging you, just shut up and go on

You're really laying the moronic intellectual character on thick, aren't you? It doesn't make you sound wiser to call me a "fool" or "child." If you're old enough to call me a child, you should be embarrassed your writing is so poor. Also, your attempts at sophisticated insults just sound awkward.

I don't need to run along. I'm content to keep talking if you keep replying, though if you quit, I could find a new conversation elsewhere, but if this one continues, I can very much partake in both at once. It really doesn't even frustrate me that you're making these cheap digs. If you don't have any interest in replying, quit posting. If you want to continue, I'll indulge you, even if the content is sophomoric like that of your last several comments.

I expressed my purpose already: to debate for the sake of mental stimulation. The brain might be an organ, but it can be exercised like a muscle. Even writing out these sentences is good work for my brain, so though your contribution to the discussion has grown lackluster, it still takes some effort to compose all these criticisms. The real disappointment here is that you don't seem to value that same exercise. Instead of forcing this shallow character to make yourself seem above the conversation, you could have continued the debate on objective terms and benefited your mind. I don't think there's as much stimulation to be derived from spewing lame insults.

Okay.

Cynicism means distrust. I am distrusting of you when you make claims that I can't know from empirical information, only by taking your word for it. I understand that it's impractical to expect observable truth of your claims. I'd have to know you in the real world. Therefore, it's up to me to decide whether to give you the benefit of the doubt or be cynical. I chose cynical in this instance and there's a reason for it.

You keep telling me you wanted to engage me, but as I explained in my last comment, had I taken your word that you had meant only to share a "fun fact," there would be little with which to engage, especially when I told you I didn't take your "fun fact" as an uncommon or interesting fact whatsoever. I maintained my cynicism because my original argument was hinged on you lying about not trying to be contradictory in your first comment. It isn't necessarily illogical to maintain that doubt either, since as I said, there's no way for me to see any observable information to know either way for certain, so it becomes a simple matter of which way I'd rather conduct myself. Had I chosen to trust you, what would I have done there? Shared more "fun facts"? That doesn't sound fun.

Forget what I said about cynicism, I failed to realize you were using the contemporary meaning.

Then what one did you originally think I had meant?

well it is a philosophy that states that the purpose of life was to live a life of Virtue in agreement with Nature. This meant rejecting all conventional desires for wealth, power, sex, and fame, and by living a simple life free from all possessions. I know you weren't going to take my word(i've dealt with your type before) so I assumed it was going to add for fuel to your flame, which didn't achieve what I had hoped. I suppose you are right on various matters. Sadly due to the deprivation tugging at me, I haven't really thought about any of your comments and feel as though I've failed you as well. You were an unexpected occurrence, which I hoped would drag me out of my stupor and energize me. In the end I don't really care what you would of done if you took my word.

Funny, that's almost how it's phrased in the first paragraph of the Wikipedia page covering cynicism.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynicism

You'd have to be out-of-touch to assume that's what someone meant by "cynicism," especially when the context clearly implied the contemporary definition.

You dig yourself deeper as far as the reason you continue with this discussion. Last time, you were telling me you had expected me to draw out the faults of your original comment to initiate a debate. I explained that to derive any faults you'd accept would mean taking your word on your intentions for that first comment, since otherwise I'm pointing out faults that don't exist within the context you claim. If you knew I wouldn't take your word on those intentions, why would you ever say, "I thought I was going to be properly engage by a truly smart fellow that would show me up and rightly explain the faults in my comment"? I would have to take your word to meet that expectation. So there's again a contradiction between what you claim to desire and what is actually feasible.

Cynicism isn't my type. Reread the second paragraph of my last comment. I'm not always cynical, but in this instance, it is not irrational of me to conduct myself in that way and it's arguably been better for continuing this debate.

What had you hoped to achieve by adding fuel to my fire?

Again, you're explaining away your poor attempts at debating with unobservable claims. You could be wide awake and trying to slink out of a conversation for all I know. I realize that is more cynicism. However, you shouldn't keep putting out claims that hinge on facts I can't know for certain. Debate in terms we can both observe. And if you're really tired, go to bed. It's hard to believe you're too tired to critically think when you keep commenting.

Why? why should I debate with observable claims? I have no respect or care for what you wish or want. Or what you chose to believe. I hoped i was going to get a good show like i said the first time.My curiosity of what you might say outweighs going to bed. It isn't that hard to believe, actually. My claims are my claims, do with them what you want, but don't think I really care. What do you honestly want, boy? A toy? A book? Some cards? I am truly amazed that you continue to talk, despite knowing the other person simply does not care?Whatever your purpose is, you do have quite the determination. My own reasoning is simply my own, You are a tool and a test for me. your usefulness ran out...run along now

Now you've dropped all efforts to have an intelligent discussion and are trying to demean me, which is really embarrassing when you write like a twelve-year-old who memorized the words for his next vocabulary test but still can't manage sixth grade grammar.

I don't care if you think I'm an amusement. I like to debate. It's mentally stimulating, good for strengthening neural connections and forming new ones. However, it's not me who's been used up, but rather you who can't reason your way out of the hole you've dug yourself.

Objectively, I don't believe that you had initially meant to just bait me because you wanted a show. You're ten posts into this conversation. You wanted to prove a point about which you thought yourself right, but couldn't keep up with my counterarguments, so now you're copping out with the excuse that you were only trying to amuse yourself.

That's what I'm choosing to believe based on the evidence before me. You can deny it all you want and honestly, even if it was true it wouldn't bother me that I was an amusement for you. I got the mental stimulation I wanted from this discussion. You're the one depriving yourself of that exercise and you'll be worse for it. Dialectic made Socrates' dick rock hard. It's the reason we remember him thousands of years later. You're not looking cool or wiser by rage-quitting. It makes you look like the fat kid in gym class who quits running the mile because he's out of shape, but laughs at everyone who keeps running and pretends he's too good for it.

What? Yes of course I've dropped all efforts child. And of course I'm trying to demean you, you act as if i was trying to be clever about it! I'm a stubborn man yes, but I know when I've dug a hole or not. I stated you were unexpected , so how would i have baited you, fool? I'm ten posts in this because i'm trying to give piss-poor excuses that might allow you see that you've achieved what ever you wanted and can now move on. I'm copping out because you are a worm squirming in my brain and I've decided to get rid of it. What kind debate is this? You clearly are a fool-hardy man itching to go against things facing a bored man with ill will in his heart. I do not care what you think of me, you sad sack of shit. You'e had your fun, yes? Good, i'll go look for mine. Now run along and take that dick out your mouth. I didn't want to look cool or smarter....is that your purpose? to impress someone, to make yourself feel smarter? shame. I don't care about your counterarguments, and i don't care about you. You are really dense aren't you. I don't care what you believe, you were amusement. sadly it didn't turn how i planned.....you are used up. go be a pain elsewhere......please? I'm begging you, just shut up and go on

You're really laying the moronic intellectual character on thick, aren't you? It doesn't make you sound wiser to call me a "fool" or "child." If you're old enough to call me a child, you should be embarrassed your writing is so poor. Also, your attempts at sophisticated insults just sound awkward.

I don't need to run along. I'm content to keep talking if you keep replying, though if you quit, I could find a new conversation elsewhere, but if this one continues, I can very much partake in both at once. It really doesn't even frustrate me that you're making these cheap digs. If you don't have any interest in replying, quit posting. If you want to continue, I'll indulge you, even if the content is sophomoric like that of your last several comments.

I expressed my purpose already: to debate for the sake of mental stimulation. The brain might be an organ, but it can be exercised like a muscle. Even writing out these sentences is good work for my brain, so though your contribution to the discussion has grown lackluster, it still takes some effort to compose all these criticisms. The real disappointment here is that you don't seem to value that same exercise. Instead of forcing this shallow character to make yourself seem above the conversation, you could have continued the debate on objective terms and benefited your mind. I don't think there's as much stimulation to be derived from spewing lame insults.

Okay.

A.) I understand that, I was explaining how you should have still expected to come off as contradictory.

B.) I hadn't meant to exclude myself. This is obviously a debate. I was pointing out the atmosphere to show how it's not unreasonable for someone to assume you're being contradictory.

C.) I don't care if you don't care if I take your word for it. I'm not always cynical, but in this instance I am of your intentions.

D.) That again demands I take your word. I've already established I won't.

I did explain the faults in your comment as I originally perceived it. However, you changed the intention of your comment, so what faults I derived from it were no longer applicable, assuming I took your revised intentions as truth. You said you wanted to share an uncommon fact, so what faults were there to find? If that was your true meaning, it's not necessarily a controversial comment.

So now you end our discussion with another cop-out. Good job.

Well, sir I was questioning if you understood the subtle hint I was giving you: I do not care.
I do not care if if you take any word for it.
I wanted a good show and you failed me.
Why would I care if you are cynical or not? And what does cynicism have to do with anything? Cynicism is not equal to heavy doubt or disbelief.
I am extremely tired and have sadly tried to my best efforts engage you. which was wasted efforts indeed.
I suppose i'm copping out, but It's not because of the comment..it is because I'm simply bored of you and wish to rid myself of you.
like i said, I wanted a good show and you failed me.
I never cared how you took my revised version of the comment's intention. I gave you it and left you to your own devices. what you do is what you do.

Cynicism means distrust. I am distrusting of you when you make claims that I can't know from empirical information, only by taking your word for it. I understand that it's impractical to expect observable truth of your claims. I'd have to know you in the real world. Therefore, it's up to me to decide whether to give you the benefit of the doubt or be cynical. I chose cynical in this instance and there's a reason for it.

You keep telling me you wanted to engage me, but as I explained in my last comment, had I taken your word that you had meant only to share a "fun fact," there would be little with which to engage, especially when I told you I didn't take your "fun fact" as an uncommon or interesting fact whatsoever. I maintained my cynicism because my original argument was hinged on you lying about not trying to be contradictory in your first comment. It isn't necessarily illogical to maintain that doubt either, since as I said, there's no way for me to see any observable information to know either way for certain, so it becomes a simple matter of which way I'd rather conduct myself. Had I chosen to trust you, what would I have done there? Shared more "fun facts"? That doesn't sound fun.

Forget what I said about cynicism, I failed to realize you were using the contemporary meaning.

Then what one did you originally think I had meant?

well it is a philosophy that states that the purpose of life was to live a life of Virtue in agreement with Nature. This meant rejecting all conventional desires for wealth, power, sex, and fame, and by living a simple life free from all possessions. I know you weren't going to take my word(i've dealt with your type before) so I assumed it was going to add for fuel to your flame, which didn't achieve what I had hoped. I suppose you are right on various matters. Sadly due to the deprivation tugging at me, I haven't really thought about any of your comments and feel as though I've failed you as well. You were an unexpected occurrence, which I hoped would drag me out of my stupor and energize me. In the end I don't really care what you would of done if you took my word.

Funny, that's almost how it's phrased in the first paragraph of the Wikipedia page covering cynicism.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynicism

You'd have to be out-of-touch to assume that's what someone meant by "cynicism," especially when the context clearly implied the contemporary definition.

You dig yourself deeper as far as the reason you continue with this discussion. Last time, you were telling me you had expected me to draw out the faults of your original comment to initiate a debate. I explained that to derive any faults you'd accept would mean taking your word on your intentions for that first comment, since otherwise I'm pointing out faults that don't exist within the context you claim. If you knew I wouldn't take your word on those intentions, why would you ever say, "I thought I was going to be properly engage by a truly smart fellow that would show me up and rightly explain the faults in my comment"? I would have to take your word to meet that expectation. So there's again a contradiction between what you claim to desire and what is actually feasible.

Cynicism isn't my type. Reread the second paragraph of my last comment. I'm not always cynical, but in this instance, it is not irrational of me to conduct myself in that way and it's arguably been better for continuing this debate.

What had you hoped to achieve by adding fuel to my fire?

Again, you're explaining away your poor attempts at debating with unobservable claims. You could be wide awake and trying to slink out of a conversation for all I know. I realize that is more cynicism. However, you shouldn't keep putting out claims that hinge on facts I can't know for certain. Debate in terms we can both observe. And if you're really tired, go to bed. It's hard to believe you're too tired to critically think when you keep commenting.

Why? why should I debate with observable claims? I have no respect or care for what you wish or want. Or what you chose to believe. I hoped i was going to get a good show like i said the first time.My curiosity of what you might say outweighs going to bed. It isn't that hard to believe, actually. My claims are my claims, do with them what you want, but don't think I really care. What do you honestly want, boy? A toy? A book? Some cards? I am truly amazed that you continue to talk, despite knowing the other person simply does not care?Whatever your purpose is, you do have quite the determination. My own reasoning is simply my own, You are a tool and a test for me. your usefulness ran out...run along now

Now you've dropped all efforts to have an intelligent discussion and are trying to demean me, which is really embarrassing when you write like a twelve-year-old who memorized the words for his next vocabulary test but still can't manage sixth grade grammar.

I don't care if you think I'm an amusement. I like to debate. It's mentally stimulating, good for strengthening neural connections and forming new ones. However, it's not me who's been used up, but rather you who can't reason your way out of the hole you've dug yourself.

Objectively, I don't believe that you had initially meant to just bait me because you wanted a show. You're ten posts into this conversation. You wanted to prove a point about which you thought yourself right, but couldn't keep up with my counterarguments, so now you're copping out with the excuse that you were only trying to amuse yourself.

That's what I'm choosing to believe based on the evidence before me. You can deny it all you want and honestly, even if it was true it wouldn't bother me that I was an amusement for you. I got the mental stimulation I wanted from this discussion. You're the one depriving yourself of that exercise and you'll be worse for it. Dialectic made Socrates' dick rock hard. It's the reason we remember him thousands of years later. You're not looking cool or wiser by rage-quitting. It makes you look like the fat kid in gym class who quits running the mile because he's out of shape, but laughs at everyone who keeps running and pretends he's too good for it.

What? Yes of course I've dropped all efforts child. And of course I'm trying to demean you, you act as if i was trying to be clever about it! I'm a stubborn man yes, but I know when I've dug a hole or not. I stated you were unexpected , so how would i have baited you, fool? I'm ten posts in this because i'm trying to give piss-poor excuses that might allow you see that you've achieved what ever you wanted and can now move on. I'm copping out because you are a worm squirming in my brain and I've decided to get rid of it. What kind debate is this? You clearly are a fool-hardy man itching to go against things facing a bored man with ill will in his heart. I do not care what you think of me, you sad sack of shit. You'e had your fun, yes? Good, i'll go look for mine. Now run along and take that dick out your mouth. I didn't want to look cool or smarter....is that your purpose? to impress someone, to make yourself feel smarter? shame. I don't care about your counterarguments, and i don't care about you. You are really dense aren't you. I don't care what you believe, you were amusement. sadly it didn't turn how i planned.....you are used up. go be a pain elsewhere......please? I'm begging you, just shut up and go on

You're really laying the moronic intellectual character on thick, aren't you? It doesn't make you sound wiser to call me a "fool" or "child." If you're old enough to call me a child, you should be embarrassed your writing is so poor. Also, your attempts at sophisticated insults just sound awkward.

I don't need to run along. I'm content to keep talking if you keep replying, though if you quit, I could find a new conversation elsewhere, but if this one continues, I can very much partake in both at once. It really doesn't even frustrate me that you're making these cheap digs. If you don't have any interest in replying, quit posting. If you want to continue, I'll indulge you, even if the content is sophomoric like that of your last several comments.

I expressed my purpose already: to debate for the sake of mental stimulation. The brain might be an organ, but it can be exercised like a muscle. Even writing out these sentences is good work for my brain, so though your contribution to the discussion has grown lackluster, it still takes some effort to compose all these criticisms. The real disappointment here is that you don't seem to value that same exercise. Instead of forcing this shallow character to make yourself seem above the conversation, you could have continued the debate on objective terms and benefited your mind. I don't think there's as much stimulation to be derived from spewing lame insults.

Okay.

Even if you apologized for your .gif being harsh, if you didn't think you'd come off as contradictory rather than inform people of a "fun fact" you're delusional. Contradicting one another, debating, rhetoric, is normally the atmosphere of the FunnyJunk comment section, specifically for content alluding to controversial issues. However, I don't take your word that you had only meant to share your trifling "fun fact," and I reiterate that phrase begrudgingly because that alternate definition is not "relatively unknown" nor is it a surprise to anyone. I think you're copping out because your original comment was dumb.

A) I apologized because this was the only relevant "educating" .gif I have, but in the end slightly rude(simply because i'm calling people stupid shits)
B)I'm not the average funnyjunker, and uninvertedly haven't you including yourself in Contradicting one another, debating, rhetoric atmosphere?
C)I don't care if you take my word for it, I posted this same exact comment(.gif as well) on a different post pertaining to feminism.
D)If I thought it was dumb, i would've deleted it.
I thought I was going to be properly engage by a truly smart fellow that would show me up and rightly explain the faults in my comment....sadly you are just part of the uncommon(but not rare) "smart junkers" who are able to put up well-worded refutes but in the end are just like the average rash and rude funnyjunker.
goodbye my lackluster friend, my patience begins to grow weary.

A.) I understand that, I was explaining how you should have still expected to come off as contradictory.

B.) I hadn't meant to exclude myself. This is obviously a debate. I was pointing out the atmosphere to show how it's not unreasonable for someone to assume you're being contradictory.

C.) I don't care if you don't care if I take your word for it. I'm not always cynical, but in this instance I am of your intentions.

D.) That again demands I take your word. I've already established I won't.

I did explain the faults in your comment as I originally perceived it. However, you changed the intention of your comment, so what faults I derived from it were no longer applicable, assuming I took your revised intentions as truth. You said you wanted to share an uncommon fact, so what faults were there to find? If that was your true meaning, it's not necessarily a controversial comment.

So now you end our discussion with another cop-out. Good job.

Well, sir I was questioning if you understood the subtle hint I was giving you: I do not care.
I do not care if if you take any word for it.
I wanted a good show and you failed me.
Why would I care if you are cynical or not? And what does cynicism have to do with anything? Cynicism is not equal to heavy doubt or disbelief.
I am extremely tired and have sadly tried to my best efforts engage you. which was wasted efforts indeed.
I suppose i'm copping out, but It's not because of the comment..it is because I'm simply bored of you and wish to rid myself of you.
like i said, I wanted a good show and you failed me.
I never cared how you took my revised version of the comment's intention. I gave you it and left you to your own devices. what you do is what you do.

Cynicism means distrust. I am distrusting of you when you make claims that I can't know from empirical information, only by taking your word for it. I understand that it's impractical to expect observable truth of your claims. I'd have to know you in the real world. Therefore, it's up to me to decide whether to give you the benefit of the doubt or be cynical. I chose cynical in this instance and there's a reason for it.

You keep telling me you wanted to engage me, but as I explained in my last comment, had I taken your word that you had meant only to share a "fun fact," there would be little with which to engage, especially when I told you I didn't take your "fun fact" as an uncommon or interesting fact whatsoever. I maintained my cynicism because my original argument was hinged on you lying about not trying to be contradictory in your first comment. It isn't necessarily illogical to maintain that doubt either, since as I said, there's no way for me to see any observable information to know either way for certain, so it becomes a simple matter of which way I'd rather conduct myself. Had I chosen to trust you, what would I have done there? Shared more "fun facts"? That doesn't sound fun.

Forget what I said about cynicism, I failed to realize you were using the contemporary meaning.

Then what one did you originally think I had meant?

well it is a philosophy that states that the purpose of life was to live a life of Virtue in agreement with Nature. This meant rejecting all conventional desires for wealth, power, sex, and fame, and by living a simple life free from all possessions. I know you weren't going to take my word(i've dealt with your type before) so I assumed it was going to add for fuel to your flame, which didn't achieve what I had hoped. I suppose you are right on various matters. Sadly due to the deprivation tugging at me, I haven't really thought about any of your comments and feel as though I've failed you as well. You were an unexpected occurrence, which I hoped would drag me out of my stupor and energize me. In the end I don't really care what you would of done if you took my word.

Funny, that's almost how it's phrased in the first paragraph of the Wikipedia page covering cynicism.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynicism

You'd have to be out-of-touch to assume that's what someone meant by "cynicism," especially when the context clearly implied the contemporary definition.

You dig yourself deeper as far as the reason you continue with this discussion. Last time, you were telling me you had expected me to draw out the faults of your original comment to initiate a debate. I explained that to derive any faults you'd accept would mean taking your word on your intentions for that first comment, since otherwise I'm pointing out faults that don't exist within the context you claim. If you knew I wouldn't take your word on those intentions, why would you ever say, "I thought I was going to be properly engage by a truly smart fellow that would show me up and rightly explain the faults in my comment"? I would have to take your word to meet that expectation. So there's again a contradiction between what you claim to desire and what is actually feasible.

Cynicism isn't my type. Reread the second paragraph of my last comment. I'm not always cynical, but in this instance, it is not irrational of me to conduct myself in that way and it's arguably been better for continuing this debate.

What had you hoped to achieve by adding fuel to my fire?

Again, you're explaining away your poor attempts at debating with unobservable claims. You could be wide awake and trying to slink out of a conversation for all I know. I realize that is more cynicism. However, you shouldn't keep putting out claims that hinge on facts I can't know for certain. Debate in terms we can both observe. And if you're really tired, go to bed. It's hard to believe you're too tired to critically think when you keep commenting.

Why? why should I debate with observable claims? I have no respect or care for what you wish or want. Or what you chose to believe. I hoped i was going to get a good show like i said the first time.My curiosity of what you might say outweighs going to bed. It isn't that hard to believe, actually. My claims are my claims, do with them what you want, but don't think I really care. What do you honestly want, boy? A toy? A book? Some cards? I am truly amazed that you continue to talk, despite knowing the other person simply does not care?Whatever your purpose is, you do have quite the determination. My own reasoning is simply my own, You are a tool and a test for me. your usefulness ran out...run along now

Now you've dropped all efforts to have an intelligent discussion and are trying to demean me, which is really embarrassing when you write like a twelve-year-old who memorized the words for his next vocabulary test but still can't manage sixth grade grammar.

I don't care if you think I'm an amusement. I like to debate. It's mentally stimulating, good for strengthening neural connections and forming new ones. However, it's not me who's been used up, but rather you who can't reason your way out of the hole you've dug yourself.

Objectively, I don't believe that you had initially meant to just bait me because you wanted a show. You're ten posts into this conversation. You wanted to prove a point about which you thought yourself right, but couldn't keep up with my counterarguments, so now you're copping out with the excuse that you were only trying to amuse yourself.

That's what I'm choosing to believe based on the evidence before me. You can deny it all you want and honestly, even if it was true it wouldn't bother me that I was an amusement for you. I got the mental stimulation I wanted from this discussion. You're the one depriving yourself of that exercise and you'll be worse for it. Dialectic made Socrates' dick rock hard. It's the reason we remember him thousands of years later. You're not looking cool or wiser by rage-quitting. It makes you look like the fat kid in gym class who quits running the mile because he's out of shape, but laughs at everyone who keeps running and pretends he's too good for it.

What? Yes of course I've dropped all efforts child. And of course I'm trying to demean you, you act as if i was trying to be clever about it! I'm a stubborn man yes, but I know when I've dug a hole or not. I stated you were unexpected , so how would i have baited you, fool? I'm ten posts in this because i'm trying to give piss-poor excuses that might allow you see that you've achieved what ever you wanted and can now move on. I'm copping out because you are a worm squirming in my brain and I've decided to get rid of it. What kind debate is this? You clearly are a fool-hardy man itching to go against things facing a bored man with ill will in his heart. I do not care what you think of me, you sad sack of shit. You'e had your fun, yes? Good, i'll go look for mine. Now run along and take that dick out your mouth. I didn't want to look cool or smarter....is that your purpose? to impress someone, to make yourself feel smarter? shame. I don't care about your counterarguments, and i don't care about you. You are really dense aren't you. I don't care what you believe, you were amusement. sadly it didn't turn how i planned.....you are used up. go be a pain elsewhere......please? I'm begging you, just shut up and go on

You're really laying the moronic intellectual character on thick, aren't you? It doesn't make you sound wiser to call me a "fool" or "child." If you're old enough to call me a child, you should be embarrassed your writing is so poor. Also, your attempts at sophisticated insults just sound awkward.

I don't need to run along. I'm content to keep talking if you keep replying, though if you quit, I could find a new conversation elsewhere, but if this one continues, I can very much partake in both at once. It really doesn't even frustrate me that you're making these cheap digs. If you don't have any interest in replying, quit posting. If you want to continue, I'll indulge you, even if the content is sophomoric like that of your last several comments.

I expressed my purpose already: to debate for the sake of mental stimulation. The brain might be an organ, but it can be exercised like a muscle. Even writing out these sentences is good work for my brain, so though your contribution to the discussion has grown lackluster, it still takes some effort to compose all these criticisms. The real disappointment here is that you don't seem to value that same exercise. Instead of forcing this shallow character to make yourself seem above the conversation, you could have continued the debate on objective terms and benefited your mind. I don't think there's as much stimulation to be derived from spewing lame insults.

Okay.

There isn't a single "current" definition. Sometimes definitions die out, but any one word can still have multiple definitions. There are 424 definitions of "set" in the English language, which you might have seen on interesting fact comps on here. Nevermind what you get when you quick search a definition on Google. If you use a dictionary or its online counterpart, you can find tons of definitions for one word, many of which currently in use. It's about the context.

What would have been the point in saying "femininity" instead? As far as I can tell, your intention was to undermine the political movement that is feminism by trying to say that isn't the definition of feminism, even though that's incorrect as I've already explained. Had you defined femininity, which is not used as the term for the political advocacy of women's rights, you would have still proven nothing and wouldn't have even had the same premise to your comment.

And then that is where you misread me. I was not trying to undermine the movement, but simply state a rather unknown definition, nor prove anything.I was just providing the good people with a little fun fact. Like you just stated : " any one word can still have multiple definitions." Once again I've used the wrong word, Popular was the word I was going for..not current, sadly I have no real excuse for why the wrong word was used.
I was thinking about replacing the chosen word with femininity because the definition fits more....snugly with that word. And thus avoid this scenario...

Even if you apologized for your .gif being harsh, if you didn't think you'd come off as contradictory rather than inform people of a "fun fact" you're delusional. Contradicting one another, debating, rhetoric, is normally the atmosphere of the FunnyJunk comment section, specifically for content alluding to controversial issues. However, I don't take your word that you had only meant to share your trifling "fun fact," and I reiterate that phrase begrudgingly because that alternate definition is not "relatively unknown" nor is it a surprise to anyone. I think you're copping out because your original comment was dumb.

A) I apologized because this was the only relevant "educating" .gif I have, but in the end slightly rude(simply because i'm calling people stupid shits)
B)I'm not the average funnyjunker, and uninvertedly haven't you including yourself in Contradicting one another, debating, rhetoric atmosphere?
C)I don't care if you take my word for it, I posted this same exact comment(.gif as well) on a different post pertaining to feminism.
D)If I thought it was dumb, i would've deleted it.
I thought I was going to be properly engage by a truly smart fellow that would show me up and rightly explain the faults in my comment....sadly you are just part of the uncommon(but not rare) "smart junkers" who are able to put up well-worded refutes but in the end are just like the average rash and rude funnyjunker.
goodbye my lackluster friend, my patience begins to grow weary.

A.) I understand that, I was explaining how you should have still expected to come off as contradictory.

B.) I hadn't meant to exclude myself. This is obviously a debate. I was pointing out the atmosphere to show how it's not unreasonable for someone to assume you're being contradictory.

C.) I don't care if you don't care if I take your word for it. I'm not always cynical, but in this instance I am of your intentions.

D.) That again demands I take your word. I've already established I won't.

I did explain the faults in your comment as I originally perceived it. However, you changed the intention of your comment, so what faults I derived from it were no longer applicable, assuming I took your revised intentions as truth. You said you wanted to share an uncommon fact, so what faults were there to find? If that was your true meaning, it's not necessarily a controversial comment.

So now you end our discussion with another cop-out. Good job.

Well, sir I was questioning if you understood the subtle hint I was giving you: I do not care.
I do not care if if you take any word for it.
I wanted a good show and you failed me.
Why would I care if you are cynical or not? And what does cynicism have to do with anything? Cynicism is not equal to heavy doubt or disbelief.
I am extremely tired and have sadly tried to my best efforts engage you. which was wasted efforts indeed.
I suppose i'm copping out, but It's not because of the comment..it is because I'm simply bored of you and wish to rid myself of you.
like i said, I wanted a good show and you failed me.
I never cared how you took my revised version of the comment's intention. I gave you it and left you to your own devices. what you do is what you do.

Cynicism means distrust. I am distrusting of you when you make claims that I can't know from empirical information, only by taking your word for it. I understand that it's impractical to expect observable truth of your claims. I'd have to know you in the real world. Therefore, it's up to me to decide whether to give you the benefit of the doubt or be cynical. I chose cynical in this instance and there's a reason for it.

You keep telling me you wanted to engage me, but as I explained in my last comment, had I taken your word that you had meant only to share a "fun fact," there would be little with which to engage, especially when I told you I didn't take your "fun fact" as an uncommon or interesting fact whatsoever. I maintained my cynicism because my original argument was hinged on you lying about not trying to be contradictory in your first comment. It isn't necessarily illogical to maintain that doubt either, since as I said, there's no way for me to see any observable information to know either way for certain, so it becomes a simple matter of which way I'd rather conduct myself. Had I chosen to trust you, what would I have done there? Shared more "fun facts"? That doesn't sound fun.

Forget what I said about cynicism, I failed to realize you were using the contemporary meaning.

Then what one did you originally think I had meant?

well it is a philosophy that states that the purpose of life was to live a life of Virtue in agreement with Nature. This meant rejecting all conventional desires for wealth, power, sex, and fame, and by living a simple life free from all possessions. I know you weren't going to take my word(i've dealt with your type before) so I assumed it was going to add for fuel to your flame, which didn't achieve what I had hoped. I suppose you are right on various matters. Sadly due to the deprivation tugging at me, I haven't really thought about any of your comments and feel as though I've failed you as well. You were an unexpected occurrence, which I hoped would drag me out of my stupor and energize me. In the end I don't really care what you would of done if you took my word.

Funny, that's almost how it's phrased in the first paragraph of the Wikipedia page covering cynicism.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynicism

You'd have to be out-of-touch to assume that's what someone meant by "cynicism," especially when the context clearly implied the contemporary definition.

You dig yourself deeper as far as the reason you continue with this discussion. Last time, you were telling me you had expected me to draw out the faults of your original comment to initiate a debate. I explained that to derive any faults you'd accept would mean taking your word on your intentions for that first comment, since otherwise I'm pointing out faults that don't exist within the context you claim. If you knew I wouldn't take your word on those intentions, why would you ever say, "I thought I was going to be properly engage by a truly smart fellow that would show me up and rightly explain the faults in my comment"? I would have to take your word to meet that expectation. So there's again a contradiction between what you claim to desire and what is actually feasible.

Cynicism isn't my type. Reread the second paragraph of my last comment. I'm not always cynical, but in this instance, it is not irrational of me to conduct myself in that way and it's arguably been better for continuing this debate.

What had you hoped to achieve by adding fuel to my fire?

Again, you're explaining away your poor attempts at debating with unobservable claims. You could be wide awake and trying to slink out of a conversation for all I know. I realize that is more cynicism. However, you shouldn't keep putting out claims that hinge on facts I can't know for certain. Debate in terms we can both observe. And if you're really tired, go to bed. It's hard to believe you're too tired to critically think when you keep commenting.

Why? why should I debate with observable claims? I have no respect or care for what you wish or want. Or what you chose to believe. I hoped i was going to get a good show like i said the first time.My curiosity of what you might say outweighs going to bed. It isn't that hard to believe, actually. My claims are my claims, do with them what you want, but don't think I really care. What do you honestly want, boy? A toy? A book? Some cards? I am truly amazed that you continue to talk, despite knowing the other person simply does not care?Whatever your purpose is, you do have quite the determination. My own reasoning is simply my own, You are a tool and a test for me. your usefulness ran out...run along now

Now you've dropped all efforts to have an intelligent discussion and are trying to demean me, which is really embarrassing when you write like a twelve-year-old who memorized the words for his next vocabulary test but still can't manage sixth grade grammar.

I don't care if you think I'm an amusement. I like to debate. It's mentally stimulating, good for strengthening neural connections and forming new ones. However, it's not me who's been used up, but rather you who can't reason your way out of the hole you've dug yourself.

Objectively, I don't believe that you had initially meant to just bait me because you wanted a show. You're ten posts into this conversation. You wanted to prove a point about which you thought yourself right, but couldn't keep up with my counterarguments, so now you're copping out with the excuse that you were only trying to amuse yourself.

That's what I'm choosing to believe based on the evidence before me. You can deny it all you want and honestly, even if it was true it wouldn't bother me that I was an amusement for you. I got the mental stimulation I wanted from this discussion. You're the one depriving yourself of that exercise and you'll be worse for it. Dialectic made Socrates' dick rock hard. It's the reason we remember him thousands of years later. You're not looking cool or wiser by rage-quitting. It makes you look like the fat kid in gym class who quits running the mile because he's out of shape, but laughs at everyone who keeps running and pretends he's too good for it.

What? Yes of course I've dropped all efforts child. And of course I'm trying to demean you, you act as if i was trying to be clever about it! I'm a stubborn man yes, but I know when I've dug a hole or not. I stated you were unexpected , so how would i have baited you, fool? I'm ten posts in this because i'm trying to give piss-poor excuses that might allow you see that you've achieved what ever you wanted and can now move on. I'm copping out because you are a worm squirming in my brain and I've decided to get rid of it. What kind debate is this? You clearly are a fool-hardy man itching to go against things facing a bored man with ill will in his heart. I do not care what you think of me, you sad sack of shit. You'e had your fun, yes? Good, i'll go look for mine. Now run along and take that dick out your mouth. I didn't want to look cool or smarter....is that your purpose? to impress someone, to make yourself feel smarter? shame. I don't care about your counterarguments, and i don't care about you. You are really dense aren't you. I don't care what you believe, you were amusement. sadly it didn't turn how i planned.....you are used up. go be a pain elsewhere......please? I'm begging you, just shut up and go on

You're really laying the moronic intellectual character on thick, aren't you? It doesn't make you sound wiser to call me a "fool" or "child." If you're old enough to call me a child, you should be embarrassed your writing is so poor. Also, your attempts at sophisticated insults just sound awkward.

I don't need to run along. I'm content to keep talking if you keep replying, though if you quit, I could find a new conversation elsewhere, but if this one continues, I can very much partake in both at once. It really doesn't even frustrate me that you're making these cheap digs. If you don't have any interest in replying, quit posting. If you want to continue, I'll indulge you, even if the content is sophomoric like that of your last several comments.

I expressed my purpose already: to debate for the sake of mental stimulation. The brain might be an organ, but it can be exercised like a muscle. Even writing out these sentences is good work for my brain, so though your contribution to the discussion has grown lackluster, it still takes some effort to compose all these criticisms. The real disappointment here is that you don't seem to value that same exercise. Instead of forcing this shallow character to make yourself seem above the conversation, you could have continued the debate on objective terms and benefited your mind. I don't think there's as much stimulation to be derived from spewing lame insults.

Okay.

feminism: The advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.

Undermining the concept of feminism by associating it with a different definition (words can have tons of definitions and connotations) is a piss-poor attempt at semantics.

"feminism: The advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men. "

Women want to be superior to men not equals. If they wanted equality they would call themselves equalists "or some shit".

How is it an objective counterargument to give me a cheap generalization of feminist agendas? My comment wasn't even advocating the feminist movement (though I do support it, both in that I want society to be more respectful of women and I want women to seek out true equality without relying on the double standards from which they benefit), it was pointing out the flaw in his criticism, in that he was trying to argue semantics by suggesting feminism isn't defined as a political movement, even though the word can have many definitions and connotations.

My dearest apologies my fine sir, i had no idea that i stumbled upon a discussion by harvard students backed up only by fine words and dictionaries (two can play that game.)

Although if you observe the general community / content of this website i think you met my comment with wrongful expectations.

Picture describes this entire discussion in just 5 words.

Ignoring your hyperbole, the conversation was indeed, "backed only by fine words and dictionaries." That's the premise of the discussion. We're talking about semantics, the meaning of language, so yeah, our comments mostly concern dictionary definitions and the logical ability to place them in the correct context. It's not a criticism to point that out.

This website isn't new to me. Not that I keep up with my account's ranking, but my blueish username indicates I've been here long enough to have mustered some understanding of this community. I've had as many conversations involving genuinely intrigued minds as I have inept trolls or people who act like trolls because their rationale is unveiled as a poorly-conceived mess. I'd say you're the third.

The Internet is the most expansive medium through which to exchange ideas and broaden our perspectives, but you're going to belittle me for having a conversation? The brain, though technically an organ, is exercised somewhat like a muscle. The more you keep it active, the more you strengthen your neural connections or form new ones of grey matter. Criticizing me for having a debate with someone is like criticizing me for jogging. I'm not saying the debate's perfect, though neither is jogging. Just as there are more efficient ways to exercise, there are better ways to debate and I can't say this has been one of them. However, like jogging, it's still better than nothing.

If you're not able to display your point simply then you don't know your point well enough

My original point was two sentences long. It was expanded because the guy I was talking to tried to point out flaws in response. If all points were made simply (not that a few paragraphs is complex), we wouldn't have essay writing. Points can't always be simple because the concepts they address are not simple. When we discuss legalizing marijuana, for instance, we don't only say, "Marijuana should be legalized because it's beneficial to the community." That could be thesis of an essay, upon which you expand because that simple statement arouses questions in response that must be addressed with subsequent claims and evidence to support those claims. We do have concepts that are so well understood they exist as simple phrases, but to say we have an inherent understanding of those ideas takes for granted all the effort earlier thinkers put into taking the complex and whittling it down into simple truisms.

your attracting the wrong kind of attention by writing essays on this site. People do not want to read large paragraphs, your not helping your cause. just let it go.

What cause? I'm debating. I debate because I like to. Hopefully people learn from me and I learn from them, but if not, at least I'm exercising my brain.

What attention? I've had a few people reply with dissenting opinions, to which I've replied. Dialectical responses is exactly the kind of attention I want. Though it does make me very sad two of my comments were thumbed down.

I suppose you are correct, though I've learned this definition through understanding the word feminine, while also using the sensible fact that feminism's current definition is rather recent seeing how the words feminine and femininity have been here for quite a long time. A word's meaning changes through out time, and Google only lists one definition(usually the current one)
But since in the end you are right, I have nothing really useful to say.I suppose I should have replaced feminism with femininity.
but whatever.

There isn't a single "current" definition. Sometimes definitions die out, but any one word can still have multiple definitions. There are 424 definitions of "set" in the English language, which you might have seen on interesting fact comps on here. Nevermind what you get when you quick search a definition on Google. If you use a dictionary or its online counterpart, you can find tons of definitions for one word, many of which currently in use. It's about the context.

What would have been the point in saying "femininity" instead? As far as I can tell, your intention was to undermine the political movement that is feminism by trying to say that isn't the definition of feminism, even though that's incorrect as I've already explained. Had you defined femininity, which is not used as the term for the political advocacy of women's rights, you would have still proven nothing and wouldn't have even had the same premise to your comment.

And then that is where you misread me. I was not trying to undermine the movement, but simply state a rather unknown definition, nor prove anything.I was just providing the good people with a little fun fact. Like you just stated : " any one word can still have multiple definitions." Once again I've used the wrong word, Popular was the word I was going for..not current, sadly I have no real excuse for why the wrong word was used.
I was thinking about replacing the chosen word with femininity because the definition fits more....snugly with that word. And thus avoid this scenario...

Even if you apologized for your .gif being harsh, if you didn't think you'd come off as contradictory rather than inform people of a "fun fact" you're delusional. Contradicting one another, debating, rhetoric, is normally the atmosphere of the FunnyJunk comment section, specifically for content alluding to controversial issues. However, I don't take your word that you had only meant to share your trifling "fun fact," and I reiterate that phrase begrudgingly because that alternate definition is not "relatively unknown" nor is it a surprise to anyone. I think you're copping out because your original comment was dumb.

A) I apologized because this was the only relevant "educating" .gif I have, but in the end slightly rude(simply because i'm calling people stupid shits)
B)I'm not the average funnyjunker, and uninvertedly haven't you including yourself in Contradicting one another, debating, rhetoric atmosphere?
C)I don't care if you take my word for it, I posted this same exact comment(.gif as well) on a different post pertaining to feminism.
D)If I thought it was dumb, i would've deleted it.
I thought I was going to be properly engage by a truly smart fellow that would show me up and rightly explain the faults in my comment....sadly you are just part of the uncommon(but not rare) "smart junkers" who are able to put up well-worded refutes but in the end are just like the average rash and rude funnyjunker.
goodbye my lackluster friend, my patience begins to grow weary.

A.) I understand that, I was explaining how you should have still expected to come off as contradictory.

B.) I hadn't meant to exclude myself. This is obviously a debate. I was pointing out the atmosphere to show how it's not unreasonable for someone to assume you're being contradictory.

C.) I don't care if you don't care if I take your word for it. I'm not always cynical, but in this instance I am of your intentions.

D.) That again demands I take your word. I've already established I won't.

I did explain the faults in your comment as I originally perceived it. However, you changed the intention of your comment, so what faults I derived from it were no longer applicable, assuming I took your revised intentions as truth. You said you wanted to share an uncommon fact, so what faults were there to find? If that was your true meaning, it's not necessarily a controversial comment.

So now you end our discussion with another cop-out. Good job.

Well, sir I was questioning if you understood the subtle hint I was giving you: I do not care.
I do not care if if you take any word for it.
I wanted a good show and you failed me.
Why would I care if you are cynical or not? And what does cynicism have to do with anything? Cynicism is not equal to heavy doubt or disbelief.
I am extremely tired and have sadly tried to my best efforts engage you. which was wasted efforts indeed.
I suppose i'm copping out, but It's not because of the comment..it is because I'm simply bored of you and wish to rid myself of you.
like i said, I wanted a good show and you failed me.
I never cared how you took my revised version of the comment's intention. I gave you it and left you to your own devices. what you do is what you do.

Cynicism means distrust. I am distrusting of you when you make claims that I can't know from empirical information, only by taking your word for it. I understand that it's impractical to expect observable truth of your claims. I'd have to know you in the real world. Therefore, it's up to me to decide whether to give you the benefit of the doubt or be cynical. I chose cynical in this instance and there's a reason for it.

You keep telling me you wanted to engage me, but as I explained in my last comment, had I taken your word that you had meant only to share a "fun fact," there would be little with which to engage, especially when I told you I didn't take your "fun fact" as an uncommon or interesting fact whatsoever. I maintained my cynicism because my original argument was hinged on you lying about not trying to be contradictory in your first comment. It isn't necessarily illogical to maintain that doubt either, since as I said, there's no way for me to see any observable information to know either way for certain, so it becomes a simple matter of which way I'd rather conduct myself. Had I chosen to trust you, what would I have done there? Shared more "fun facts"? That doesn't sound fun.

Forget what I said about cynicism, I failed to realize you were using the contemporary meaning.

Then what one did you originally think I had meant?

well it is a philosophy that states that the purpose of life was to live a life of Virtue in agreement with Nature. This meant rejecting all conventional desires for wealth, power, sex, and fame, and by living a simple life free from all possessions. I know you weren't going to take my word(i've dealt with your type before) so I assumed it was going to add for fuel to your flame, which didn't achieve what I had hoped. I suppose you are right on various matters. Sadly due to the deprivation tugging at me, I haven't really thought about any of your comments and feel as though I've failed you as well. You were an unexpected occurrence, which I hoped would drag me out of my stupor and energize me. In the end I don't really care what you would of done if you took my word.

Funny, that's almost how it's phrased in the first paragraph of the Wikipedia page covering cynicism.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynicism

You'd have to be out-of-touch to assume that's what someone meant by "cynicism," especially when the context clearly implied the contemporary definition.

You dig yourself deeper as far as the reason you continue with this discussion. Last time, you were telling me you had expected me to draw out the faults of your original comment to initiate a debate. I explained that to derive any faults you'd accept would mean taking your word on your intentions for that first comment, since otherwise I'm pointing out faults that don't exist within the context you claim. If you knew I wouldn't take your word on those intentions, why would you ever say, "I thought I was going to be properly engage by a truly smart fellow that would show me up and rightly explain the faults in my comment"? I would have to take your word to meet that expectation. So there's again a contradiction between what you claim to desire and what is actually feasible.

Cynicism isn't my type. Reread the second paragraph of my last comment. I'm not always cynical, but in this instance, it is not irrational of me to conduct myself in that way and it's arguably been better for continuing this debate.

What had you hoped to achieve by adding fuel to my fire?

Again, you're explaining away your poor attempts at debating with unobservable claims. You could be wide awake and trying to slink out of a conversation for all I know. I realize that is more cynicism. However, you shouldn't keep putting out claims that hinge on facts I can't know for certain. Debate in terms we can both observe. And if you're really tired, go to bed. It's hard to believe you're too tired to critically think when you keep commenting.

Why? why should I debate with observable claims? I have no respect or care for what you wish or want. Or what you chose to believe. I hoped i was going to get a good show like i said the first time.My curiosity of what you might say outweighs going to bed. It isn't that hard to believe, actually. My claims are my claims, do with them what you want, but don't think I really care. What do you honestly want, boy? A toy? A book? Some cards? I am truly amazed that you continue to talk, despite knowing the other person simply does not care?Whatever your purpose is, you do have quite the determination. My own reasoning is simply my own, You are a tool and a test for me. your usefulness ran out...run along now

Now you've dropped all efforts to have an intelligent discussion and are trying to demean me, which is really embarrassing when you write like a twelve-year-old who memorized the words for his next vocabulary test but still can't manage sixth grade grammar.

I don't care if you think I'm an amusement. I like to debate. It's mentally stimulating, good for strengthening neural connections and forming new ones. However, it's not me who's been used up, but rather you who can't reason your way out of the hole you've dug yourself.

Objectively, I don't believe that you had initially meant to just bait me because you wanted a show. You're ten posts into this conversation. You wanted to prove a point about which you thought yourself right, but couldn't keep up with my counterarguments, so now you're copping out with the excuse that you were only trying to amuse yourself.

That's what I'm choosing to believe based on the evidence before me. You can deny it all you want and honestly, even if it was true it wouldn't bother me that I was an amusement for you. I got the mental stimulation I wanted from this discussion. You're the one depriving yourself of that exercise and you'll be worse for it. Dialectic made Socrates' dick rock hard. It's the reason we remember him thousands of years later. You're not looking cool or wiser by rage-quitting. It makes you look like the fat kid in gym class who quits running the mile because he's out of shape, but laughs at everyone who keeps running and pretends he's too good for it.

What? Yes of course I've dropped all efforts child. And of course I'm trying to demean you, you act as if i was trying to be clever about it! I'm a stubborn man yes, but I know when I've dug a hole or not. I stated you were unexpected , so how would i have baited you, fool? I'm ten posts in this because i'm trying to give piss-poor excuses that might allow you see that you've achieved what ever you wanted and can now move on. I'm copping out because you are a worm squirming in my brain and I've decided to get rid of it. What kind debate is this? You clearly are a fool-hardy man itching to go against things facing a bored man with ill will in his heart. I do not care what you think of me, you sad sack of shit. You'e had your fun, yes? Good, i'll go look for mine. Now run along and take that dick out your mouth. I didn't want to look cool or smarter....is that your purpose? to impress someone, to make yourself feel smarter? shame. I don't care about your counterarguments, and i don't care about you. You are really dense aren't you. I don't care what you believe, you were amusement. sadly it didn't turn how i planned.....you are used up. go be a pain elsewhere......please? I'm begging you, just shut up and go on

You're really laying the moronic intellectual character on thick, aren't you? It doesn't make you sound wiser to call me a "fool" or "child." If you're old enough to call me a child, you should be embarrassed your writing is so poor. Also, your attempts at sophisticated insults just sound awkward.

I don't need to run along. I'm content to keep talking if you keep replying, though if you quit, I could find a new conversation elsewhere, but if this one continues, I can very much partake in both at once. It really doesn't even frustrate me that you're making these cheap digs. If you don't have any interest in replying, quit posting. If you want to continue, I'll indulge you, even if the content is sophomoric like that of your last several comments.

I expressed my purpose already: to debate for the sake of mental stimulation. The brain might be an organ, but it can be exercised like a muscle. Even writing out these sentences is good work for my brain, so though your contribution to the discussion has grown lackluster, it still takes some effort to compose all these criticisms. The real disappointment here is that you don't seem to value that same exercise. Instead of forcing this shallow character to make yourself seem above the conversation, you could have continued the debate on objective terms and benefited your mind. I don't think there's as much stimulation to be derived from spewing lame insults.

Okay.

how do you pronounce that?

AH-dee-han

I've liked that shit forever.

when I did parkour my life changed, you could try that, the best things for depression are excercise and sleep, this is all I can tell you, or you could try to volunteer at a childrens hospital or something, what you should understand is you have to work for this there is no magic spells, it will be long and hard but as long as you are trying you will never fail as failing is when you stop trying

I suppose you are right.