Jesus fucking Christ you can't stop doing it. It is a compulsion for you or something.
And dude, I have a BA in communications with majors in journalism and creative writing and I am a published author. I understand every word you have written and know it to be shitty writing. It is full of intellectual ego, overly stuffy discourse that is pretentiousness personified, and repetition of the of the most imbecilic and mindless semantic point about something ultimately unimportant, and you just can't get past the fact that someone does not find you smart, just pretentious. The inevitable follow on from this is that you dump wall after wall of dick-headed, verbose nonsense to make you appear smart only to completely fail to recognise the simpleton who wrote the first smart arse comment. That would be you sir.
I still cannot believe you are arguing the point that I have already said you were correct on. Why the actual fuck are you still arguing? If you were wondering why I am calling you a fucking retard, it is because of that. Dumb arse cunt arguing a point over and over that he has already won. Fucking moron.
Jesus fucking Christ you can't stop doing it. It is a compulsion for you or something.
What was that about "hypocrisy" that you were accusing that other guy of? That's not meant as a personal attack bro, just pointing it out.
And dude, I have a BA in communications with majors in journalism and creative writing and I am a published author.
Ok. Neither journalism, creative writing, nor being an author require particularly strong knowledge of formal logic, so I don't blame you for misperceiving my writing style as being pretentious or egotistical. That's also not meant as a dig at you.
I understand every word you have written and know it to be shitty writing.
Please listen: my goal hasn't been "good writing", it's been logical writing.
Try to imagine, just for a second, try to entertain the hypothetical existence of a person who doesn't "argue" emotionally. Who genuinely, fundamentally thinks and communicates, to the best of their ability, according to the rules of formal conceptual logic. That person would speak precisely, to minimize definitional misunderstandings. They would formulate thoughts according to a logical progression. They would not resort to name-calling or personal attacks, but would do their best to remain as objective as possible in all their communications. They may as a result write more like a robot than the majority of emotionally-informed people allow themselves to.
If you will allow yourself to let your guard down and go back and read what I've written again- without the presumption of malicious intent on my part- you will see that THAT is what I've been doing. And that is why I sincerely invited you, from the very beginning, to explain what precisely you disagreed with in my reasoning. Because that's how sound, logic-based discourse works: establish well-defined premises, and deduce them to valid conclusions; then if another party disagrees, they point to the specific premise(s) they disagree with, and explain why. Though I unfortunately doubt you're capable of interpreting my words that way, since you've already seemingly gotten so emotionally invested in your anger at me.
But again, I don't care if you or anyone else thinks I'm smart. No one's perception of my intelligence is relevant, what is relevant is the truth or falsehood of the specific points I've made. In an effort to efficiently and respectfully make those points, it's been necessary for me to talk like an expert in logic, which I am; not like a creative writer, which I'm not (or at least don't profess to be).
If your first comment had been "oh, wait you're right, those don't mean different things" (instead of personal insults), then I literally would not have left you another single reply. This comment I'm replying to now was the first one in which you explicitly acknowledged that my original point was correct. I sincerely appreciate you acknowledging that. Although, to be clear, as I said in my last two replies, the primary reason I continued to respond was not to continue arguing my original point, but to defend myself against your mean-spirited personal attacks, by justifying that my original comment was 1-logically correct and 2-not meant to offend you. If you acknowledge that my original point was sound, then all I can do is hope that you'll accept that my original comment was not meant to offend you. Because I'm not angry at you, and never was.
0
u/OuthouseRedback 17d ago
Jesus fucking Christ you can't stop doing it. It is a compulsion for you or something. And dude, I have a BA in communications with majors in journalism and creative writing and I am a published author. I understand every word you have written and know it to be shitty writing. It is full of intellectual ego, overly stuffy discourse that is pretentiousness personified, and repetition of the of the most imbecilic and mindless semantic point about something ultimately unimportant, and you just can't get past the fact that someone does not find you smart, just pretentious. The inevitable follow on from this is that you dump wall after wall of dick-headed, verbose nonsense to make you appear smart only to completely fail to recognise the simpleton who wrote the first smart arse comment. That would be you sir. I still cannot believe you are arguing the point that I have already said you were correct on. Why the actual fuck are you still arguing? If you were wondering why I am calling you a fucking retard, it is because of that. Dumb arse cunt arguing a point over and over that he has already won. Fucking moron.