@Zimx02 I know what both words mean, and in terms of changing people by being mean sure, you can change people through multiple manners, take Polpot for example, he murdered 2million people to change the economic nature of his nation, and as a result I'm sure there were a lot of people who stopped going to school or getting an education out of fear. It's a dramatic example, but the point still stands that you can change people through many ways- but that doesn't make it right.
@Zimx02 I'm probably not going to reply after this, mainly due to my final exams aproaching, but I honestly don't think someone is an idiot for having a gap between their internal and external identities. I mean, if a man sees himself as a first and foremost a writer but at the same time is known for drawing comics his external identity projects him as an artist. "you're trying to refute a hyperbole" I know, I was doing this on purpose. And I'm not confusing virtuous for adeptness.
@anotherzombi If we're to assume your 3 identities notion, the only thing that truly matters is that having such a large and ridiculous gap between your internal and external identities makes you nothing less of an idiot.
You can be whoever you want (in potential), but that doesn't you ever will be without any genuine effort in that direction.
I seriously hope you don't think you're teaching me something or that you have a point. Stay in school so I don't have to clear your misconceptions.
@anotherzombi As counter-intuitive as this may sound, you can also change people through mean manners. I have several examples of people that have changed for the better on that basis. I don't know if you're acquainted with Kierkegaard's concept of dread.
Even if this buffoon is to never change and die a delusional autistic joke, my methods served my personal purpose.
@anotherzombi If you were to interpret "virtuosity" as "adeptness", I would say I'm pretty virtuous at being an asshole too.
So if you're taking the retard's side based on my lack of modesty, wouldn't that be completely hypocritical? I mean, did you even read the discussion? This person is not only flat-out unintelligent, uneducated, and helplessly imbecilic, but in his delusion he is unbearably pretentious, self-important, and overall tries to act like a cliched idiotic anime villain.
@anotherzombi I didn't say you said I was virtuous. I said that I was virtuous, which was a partially facetious claim.
You seem to think that virtuous means "adept" or something, but virtuosity in philosophy is often referred to the quality of an individual to work towards a common good and possessing moral standards. In more laymen's terms, it would be implying that I a good person and I am still an asshole.
Have you even seen this guy? How can claim that extent of delusion is harmless?
@anotherzombi I'm sorry, but you're trying to refute a hyperbole, a figure of speech. It could also be interpreted chronologically or it could be changed to "no one that matters is interested". Not all my claims are in equal ground, and this claim (not an argument, an argument is a different thing) is not part of the core of my arguments. So even if it were to hypothetically be wrong, trying to discredit my actual arguments from it would be a red herring.
@Zimx02 Modesty despite its unending, frustraiting premise, takes you to a far more closer sense of happiness as apposed to arrogance and anger in many ways what I'm trying to do is enlighten you into what I see and percieve, but I am not trying to tell you your place. You can be whoever you want to be, whoever you think you are- but when it comes down to it we have 3 identities, our internal identity (who we think we are), our external identity (Who we are) and our concience (Who we want to be)
Mago is sexy no homo
metallicat67 3 months ago
@anotherzombi If you know you're falling for a hyperbole, why do you even try to make an argument?
I also said a ridiculous gap between internal and external, aka being delusional.
Well, that doesn't necessarily make me wrong either.
Zimx02 5 months ago
@Zimx02 I know what both words mean, and in terms of changing people by being mean sure, you can change people through multiple manners, take Polpot for example, he murdered 2million people to change the economic nature of his nation, and as a result I'm sure there were a lot of people who stopped going to school or getting an education out of fear. It's a dramatic example, but the point still stands that you can change people through many ways- but that doesn't make it right.
anotherzombi 5 months ago
@Zimx02 I'm probably not going to reply after this, mainly due to my final exams aproaching, but I honestly don't think someone is an idiot for having a gap between their internal and external identities. I mean, if a man sees himself as a first and foremost a writer but at the same time is known for drawing comics his external identity projects him as an artist. "you're trying to refute a hyperbole" I know, I was doing this on purpose. And I'm not confusing virtuous for adeptness.
anotherzombi 5 months ago
@anotherzombi If we're to assume your 3 identities notion, the only thing that truly matters is that having such a large and ridiculous gap between your internal and external identities makes you nothing less of an idiot.
You can be whoever you want (in potential), but that doesn't you ever will be without any genuine effort in that direction.
I seriously hope you don't think you're teaching me something or that you have a point. Stay in school so I don't have to clear your misconceptions.
Zimx02 5 months ago
@anotherzombi As counter-intuitive as this may sound, you can also change people through mean manners. I have several examples of people that have changed for the better on that basis. I don't know if you're acquainted with Kierkegaard's concept of dread.
Even if this buffoon is to never change and die a delusional autistic joke, my methods served my personal purpose.
Zimx02 5 months ago
@anotherzombi If you were to interpret "virtuosity" as "adeptness", I would say I'm pretty virtuous at being an asshole too.
So if you're taking the retard's side based on my lack of modesty, wouldn't that be completely hypocritical? I mean, did you even read the discussion? This person is not only flat-out unintelligent, uneducated, and helplessly imbecilic, but in his delusion he is unbearably pretentious, self-important, and overall tries to act like a cliched idiotic anime villain.
Zimx02 5 months ago
@anotherzombi I didn't say you said I was virtuous. I said that I was virtuous, which was a partially facetious claim.
You seem to think that virtuous means "adept" or something, but virtuosity in philosophy is often referred to the quality of an individual to work towards a common good and possessing moral standards. In more laymen's terms, it would be implying that I a good person and I am still an asshole.
Have you even seen this guy? How can claim that extent of delusion is harmless?
Zimx02 5 months ago
@anotherzombi I'm sorry, but you're trying to refute a hyperbole, a figure of speech. It could also be interpreted chronologically or it could be changed to "no one that matters is interested". Not all my claims are in equal ground, and this claim (not an argument, an argument is a different thing) is not part of the core of my arguments. So even if it were to hypothetically be wrong, trying to discredit my actual arguments from it would be a red herring.
Your notions are logically fallacious.
Zimx02 5 months ago
@Zimx02 Modesty despite its unending, frustraiting premise, takes you to a far more closer sense of happiness as apposed to arrogance and anger in many ways what I'm trying to do is enlighten you into what I see and percieve, but I am not trying to tell you your place. You can be whoever you want to be, whoever you think you are- but when it comes down to it we have 3 identities, our internal identity (who we think we are), our external identity (Who we are) and our concience (Who we want to be)
anotherzombi 5 months ago