: What part of "FOUND THIS AND THOUGHT I'D SHARE" didn't you understand?
Q: What part of a joke don't you understand? A: The joke part, apparently.
: *I* am not saying anything, I just found it an interesting observation.
If you post a long description of why certain people are better than others, it's pretty reasonabe to conclude you agree with the sentiment.
-- Andy Barss
I will try to explain this, and for you, Andy, I will do it slowly.
I found an article. I found it interesting.
If I find a 1937 German Mark and I show it to you, does that mean I agree with the price of fish?
Damnit... I've been waiting on the answer now for a while, and now I have to leave.
I'm on pins and needles.... does it or doesn't it?
STILL.. LMOA
Enjoyed the post, BTW.
Robert
: If "X" were, "Seven Reasons Why Dogshit Tastes Better Than Cheerios", : and I prefaced this with, "Found this and thought I'd share:", would : you be entitled to conclude that I had a preference for one over the : other as a breakfast food?
With a title like that, it'd most likely be a humor piece, so I'd conclude you thought it was funny. See how it works now?
The OP's forwarded piece wasn't a humor piece. It was a ploddingly earnest opinion piece.
So, I conclude that Robotoy agrees with it (and thus found his "who? me?" reply to Rick Samuel upthread to be so disingenuous).
See how it works now?
: As to your diminution of his attribution by the use of the term, : "allegedly", did you think before doing so to use, "7 Things that : separate lesser human beings from their betters", as the search terms : in Google? I did, and found several prior references.
Eh, fine. So he's an agreer, as I originally surmised.
-- Andy Barss
Non Sequitur.
Dicto Simpliciter.
Naturalistic fallacy.
Regards, Tom.
Thos. J. Watson - Cabinetmaker
{Snip}
Thank-you for sharing, Robatoy.
I disagree with the sediment contained in those statements. I strongly reject the tone of the arguments and the choice of the words used to present the arguments. Whoever the author is, the author wrapped his ideas within a socially, culturally, and maybe even an ethnic point of view. A point of view that demonstrates a cultural chauvinism bent on social Darwinism bordering on racism.
From my point of view, those statements are an attempt at a description of a social / cultural norm that is instilled into a person starting at childhood. My impression of those statements (the intended idea) are they are culturally linked to the dominate Western European cultural ancestral heritage of the USA.
My point: If one grew up in a Wealthy Suburb of a Major Metropolitan city, then a young adult would have more exposure to such personal habits as described, and that young person would (could be expected to?) assimilate such in their own behavior.
(There are of course other social classes that would teach these ideal behaviors to their children; but more likely, IMHO, it would be left to an individual family and less across the board.)
However, people who grew up in other economic, social, and cultural environments would not necessarily be exposed everyday to real roll models who exhibited behaviors such as described in the statements. Or in other words, if you grew up where it is the norm behavior of adults to occasionally ride in the back of a Pickup Truck drinking whiskey as the pickup truck barrels down the highway, well you can draw your own conclusions as to the behavior of such a child at adulthood.
There may be some grain of truth in those statements. However, the social and cultural "My-Culture-Is-The-One-and-Only-Correct-Society" that oozes from those specific statements, as worded, makes them solely a preaching-to-the-choir set of statements. If you believe in those statements, they are good arguments to continue your believe, and maybe hold those beliefs in more emphatic esteem. As worded and presented, those statements will not convince anyone else; No One.
By The Way: Even using the words 'Better' and 'Lesser' becomes code words (intended or not) to evoke the worst sort of thoughts of social Darwinism. Social Darwinism is a short step away from a rigid class society that inhibits upward mobility for all.
Phil
There was sediment? Was it like from a compost pile or rust in the toilet bowl?
I disagree.
r
My bad, I should have selected sentiment from the spell checker list.
I actually thought 'sediment' was more interesting.
As though it was the residue of failed ideas.
Sometimes spielchuck is more sophisticated than we give it credit for.
Regards, Tom.
Thos. J. Watson - Cabinetmaker
Sounds suspiciously like the dogma of the Church of the Random Variable.
Oh, and WTF is a roll model? The opposite of the slide model?
querulously yours, jo4hn
Roll model: An attractive woman tasked to lure drunks into an alley preparatory to a mugging.
"J. Clarke" wrote
Presumably wearing roller skates.
Yeah, we're all essentially equal. That's they the Green Bay Packers are offering me $25 million to never come to training camp again...
:>
:> Eh, fine. ?So he's an agreer, as I originally surmised. :>
:> ? ? ? ? -- Andy Barss
: I disagree.
I very much doubt that.
-- Andy Barss
What do you doubt I disagree with?
Robatoy wrote: : On Aug 10, 8:54?pm, Andrew Barss wrote: :> Robatoy wrote: :>
:> : On Aug 9, 10:30?pm, Andrew Barss wrote: :>
:> :>
:> :> Eh, fine. ?So he's an agreer, as I originally surmised. :> :>
:> :> ? ? ? ? -- Andy Barss :>
:> : I disagree. :>
:> ? ? ? ? I very much doubt that. :>
: What do you doubt I disagree with?
The original essay you posted.
- AB
Again, I found an article. I found it interesting. No more, no less. For you to insist that I am in agreement with that article, is just plain wrong. You have absolutely nothing upon which to base that opinion. Whether I agree with the article or not. I have also not said that I disagree with the article, just with you.
Roll model....think love-handles...
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.