Hi -- New here.

[evince]

You are, sock. Is that why you can't get another project?

pong

 

[Legion]

There are a great many of them, but the overarching theme is summed up easily enough in Kantian form as trying to act according to the maxims you would want people generally to follow. So, for example, if I wouldn't want to live in a world where everyone just dumps their garbage wherever they want, I shouldn't litter. It's basically just a somewhat more sophisticated formulation of the Golden Rule.

Who decides if you meet these self-imagined moral standards you claim to follow, sock?

 

[Oneuli]

There is a reason for it.... It's not what you tried to pretend it is, as far as anyone has stated, is it?

I didn't try to pretend it was for any particular reason. But, now that you bring it up, yes, I think there is a reason for it. I think the reason is that you hope to derail the substantive discussion, knowing that you'd be badly over your head. So, your hope is that if you throw enough insults my way, I won't get around to making arguments. But, so far, that hasn't worked out for you. Throughout this thread I've made a great many detailed arguments, including what (if I do say so myself) was a strong argument that the Mercatus Center estimates of the cost of "Medicare for all" were exaggerated for political effect.

 

[Legion]

is there some point in time you will actually add to a discussion or should I just say Ping

You should say LINK, racist, as you habitually do.

 

[Oneuli]

Cite the relevant text, and re-post the link.

I already did. Reread.

 

[evince]

Is there a specific fact you're disputing?



I'm not.

see why I play them like a ping pong ball


tiny

empty

harmless


and easy to smack arround

 

[evince]

I already did. Reread.

do you mean ping

 

[evince]

I didn't try to pretend it was for any particular reason. But, now that you bring it up, yes, I think there is a reason for it. I think the reason is that you hope to derail the substantive discussion, knowing that you'd be badly over your head. So, your hope is that if you throw enough insults my way, I won't get around to making arguments. But, so far, that hasn't worked out for you. Throughout this thread I've made a great many detailed arguments, including what (if I do say so myself) was a strong argument that the Mercatus Center estimates of the cost of "Medicare for all" were exaggerated for political effect.

oh man you sank that in my beer


my turn to chug the mug

 

[Legion]

I didn't try to pretend it was for any particular reason.

I disagree, sock. It appears to me that's exactly what you did.

But, now that you bring it up, yes, I think there is a reason for it. I think the reason is that you hope to derail the substantive discussion, knowing that you'd be badly over your head. So, your hope is that if you throw enough insults my way, I won't get around to making arguments.

Self-aggrandize much, sock?

Throughout this thread I've made a great many detailed arguments.

You have? Cite them, sock.

 

[Oneuli]

Post it.

You can find it in the thread. Just reread.

So much illogicality.

If you can spot something illogical about it, feel free to provide that specifically.

I don't see it....

That sounds like a personal problem. If you hadn't established this pattern of claiming not to see things that were plainly in the thread, I'd be inclined to help you out with it. But, as I explained, at this point I suspect you're either disingenuous or lazy, so I'll leave you to do your own work.

 

[Oneuli]

Who decides if you meet these self-imagined moral standards you claim to follow....

I do.

By the way, have you noticed how I answer your questions and you dodge mine? Why do you suppose that is?

 

[evince]

There are a great many of them, but the overarching theme is summed up easily enough in Kantian form as trying to act according to the maxims you would want people generally to follow. So, for example, if I wouldn't want to live in a world where everyone just dumps their garbage wherever they want, I shouldn't litter. It's basically just a somewhat more sophisticated formulation of the Golden Rule.

How about you? What morals do you possess?

he is among the moralless


which is why he doesnt know that cheating is not winning

 

[Legion]

I didn't try to pretend it was for any particular reason.

If my posting were very similar to some other poster, that would be a reason.

I'd be curious to know who it is I post like. She must be awfully smart.

 

[Legion]

I do.

Convenient.

 

[Oneuli]

...It appears to me that's exactly what you did...

Well, fortunately it's preserved in the thread, so anyone here is free to read back and find the truth of the matter.

Self-aggrandize much....

Probably a bit more than normal. You?

You have?

Yes. You can find them earlier in the thread.

 

[evince]

I do.

By the way, have you noticed how I answer your questions and you dodge mine? Why do you suppose that is?

small

empty

harmless

and easy to smack around

 

[Legion]

You can find it in the thread. Just reread.

You made the claim, sock. If you can't back it up by citing what you insist is the relevant text that bolsters your argument, I'll understand.

 

[Oneuli]

So, you spot your error, right? Surely you've noticed the "if" in that construction.

 

[Legion]

Well, fortunately it's preserved in the thread, so anyone here is free to read back and find the truth of the matter.

Or not, since you have a habit of pretending you've proven something you refuse to specify, sock.

 

[Oneuli]

Convenient.

Not really. It means I have to do both parts myself: the action and the self-examination to see if the action was righteous. It would be much easier if I could out-source the judgment part to some divine being, who could give me clear and faultless guidance, but since that job is vacant, I have to make the best of the situation on my own.