allison Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 Kanada Kev-I've never been described as ointment before.Um...thanks I guess!Luke-did you forget to take logic in your first year survey courses?You started this thread with a proclamation that HipHop was the new Rome and should it fall civilization as a whole would be jeopardized.You didn't prove that.Then you spat out that we are on the verge of a black apocalypse. Didn't prove that either, but managed to make those of us with any social consiousness/sensibility cringe.Well done white boy.Then you started knitting disparate elements-some factual-or atleast factual enough,but quite open to interpretation, into a broad ranging conspiracy theory, one that you didn't quite explain how the original premise(Hip Hop as Rome) fit into.Beyond the fact that conspiracy theories assume that people react logically along a linear line of causation AND respond collectively (untrue)...Beyond the fact, that none of your "facts" support your original "thesis"(I use that term VERY loosely)......now you are throwing this out....hip hop amongst a variety of spiritual practices is one method of fighting this last and most important internal battleSo now hip hop is a spiritual practice NOT a nation,nor an apocalypse,nor Rome?The true enemy is the self though.I'll agree to that, and a few other unnovel(if thats a word) newspaper and blog rapes.You know, you don't win the debate if everyone walks away because its too frustrating to deal with the format.It just means you are left at the table ,alone,with a head full of ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmoothedShredder Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 (edited) Word up! I'd love to see a Venn diagram of this logic! What is it that we are all talking about? It seems very racist. Not hateful, except for a little self-loathing, but confusing none-the-less. I'm going to fire up Visio and see if I can get my head around this! Edited April 10, 2007 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phishtaper Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 (edited) Edited April 10, 2007 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paisley Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 haha, nice avatar phishtaper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Evil_Mouse Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 Damn filters at school - I can't see the pic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanada Kev Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 Kanada Kev-I've never been described as ointment before.Um...thanks I guess!allison, from what I was trying to say, please take it as a big compliment. You're not just the cream that soothes the pain, you go beyond and start curing the problem . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradm Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 Perhaps we should call her "aloe-son"?Aloha,Brad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanada Kev Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allison Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 (edited) Thats' what the call me in the 8 mile throw down,and you can too if you adopt the rigourous spiritual discipline of hip hop, but I would prefer to not be "applied" to Luke.Safety first. Edited April 10, 2007 by Guest 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allison Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 20 ways to win this debate.(I didn't write this)Proof by Intimidation A: What do you think about objection X?B: That's silly!Proof by Loudness A: What do you think about objection X?B: That's VERY SILLY!!!Proof by Impressiveness A: What do you think about objection X?B: Well, I'm very smart, very well known, and respected, and I know much more than you, and I think you are silly.Proof by Obfuscation A: What do you think about objection X?B: Well, X is related to Y, Y is related to Z, and Z is often confused with W, which is considered to be very similar to Q, which is silly.Proof by Over-Running A: What do you think -B: About X? Well - A: No, Y. What about -B: You mean X. Well -A: No, Y and Z!B: But X is silly. Did you have another question?Proof by Ignoring A: What do you think about objection X?B: Don't be silly. That's not really related to my topic. Next question.Proof by 'Obvious' Generalization A: What do you think about objection X?B: Point Y, though very small and seemingly trivial, counters X. Obviously there are many others, thus you are silly.Proof by Bifurcation A: What do you think about objection X?B: There are two interpretations: one that says X is the ideal counterexample; another is that X, if we close one eye, stand on our heads and squint, it looks fine. The first option is silly.Proof by Name Dropping A: What do you think about objection X?B: Well, BigNamei, BigNamej, and BigNamek agree with me. LittleNamei might agree with you, if only they were that silly. Proof by Absentee Belittlement A: What do you think about objection X?B: Person C, who is not here to defend themselves, thinks that. They are silly. You are silly.Proof by Humility A: What do you think about objection X?B: You state that so forcefully. I could be wrong. You seem so sure of yourself. That is silly.Proof by Humiliation A: What do you think about objection X?B: Have you read Book Z, or Book Y, even Book W?A: Well, no.B: That explains why you asked such a question. Sit down silly person.Proof by Extremeification A: What do you think about objection X?B: That is an extreme case. Extreme cases are silly.Proof by Hypocritical Intuition A: What do you think about objection X?B: My position is intuitively obvious.A: But what about X?B: Can you explain X better?A: X is intuitively obvious.B: Intuitive obviousness is silly.Proof by Ignorance A: What do you think about objection X?B: I don't understand X.A: Let me try to explain X...B: That doesn't make sense to me. Please explain. What is X?A: X! X! It's very simple! X!B: I don't understand. You must be silly. Next question.Proof by Nit Picking A: What do you think about objection X?B: Could you expand on X1 and X2.A: Okay, X1 and X2 are like this...B: Could you expand on X1a, X1b, X1c, X2a, and X2b.A: Okay, I'll explain...B: Could you expand on X1ai, X1aii, X1bi, X1bii, X1biii, X1ci, X1cii, X2ai, X2aii, X2aiii, X2bi, X2bii, X2biii, X2biv, and X2bv.A: Never mind.B: Silly, silly.Proof by Notation of Death A: What do you think about objection X?B: Well, we must first introduce seventeen special symbols and make recourse to the Cyrillic and Greek alphabets. Are you silly enough to make me do all that? I will, you know.A: Okay, okay, I give.Proof by Untranslatability A: What do you think about objection X?B: Do you know Spanish?A: Más o menos.B: Do you know German?A: Jawohl.B: Do you know French?A: Un peu.B: Do you know Guaran�A: He'.B:Do you know Hawaiian?A: 'Ae.B: Do you know Polish?A: Tak.B: Do you know Chinese?A: B: Do you know Italian?A: Sì.B:Do you know Esperanto?A: Jes.B: Do you know Portuguese?A: Sim.B: Do you know Arabic?A: B: Do you know Cherokee?A: B: Do you know Old English?A: SlceB: Do you know Gaelic?A: Which kind?B: Irish?A: Tá beagán Gealige agam.B: Scottish?A: Tha beagan Gà idhlig agam.B: Manx?A: Ta beggan Gaelg aym.B: Do you know Hopi?A: Well, no, I don't.B: Well, the Hopi Language has a great word for my answer, but it doesn't translate well. Silly of you not to know Hopi, you know.Proof by Very Big Words A: What do you think about objection X?B: If we take the quasi-isomorphic tangential nucleotide sequence correlating asymptotically to the inverse pulmonic schizo-phrenicality index of that question, the answer is obvious.A: Huh?B: Silly person.Proof by Coma A: What do you think about objection X?B: Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Oh, you're unconscious. Silly you. I win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Im going home Donny Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 20 ways to win this debate.(I didn't write this)Proof by Intimidation A: What do you think about objection X?B: That's silly!Proof by Loudness A: What do you think about objection X?B: That's VERY SILLY!!!Proof by Impressiveness A: What do you think about objection X?B: Well, I'm very smart, very well known, and respected, and I know much more than you, and I think you are silly.Proof by Obfuscation A: What do you think about objection X?B: Well, X is related to Y, Y is related to Z, and Z is often confused with W, which is considered to be very similar to Q, which is silly.Proof by Over-Running A: What do you think -B: About X? Well - A: No, Y. What about -B: You mean X. Well -A: No, Y and Z!B: But X is silly. Did you have another question?Proof by Ignoring A: What do you think about objection X?B: Don't be silly. That's not really related to my topic. Next question.Proof by 'Obvious' Generalization A: What do you think about objection X?B: Point Y, though very small and seemingly trivial, counters X. Obviously there are many others, thus you are silly.Proof by Bifurcation A: What do you think about objection X?B: There are two interpretations: one that says X is the ideal counterexample; another is that X, if we close one eye, stand on our heads and squint, it looks fine. The first option is silly.Proof by Name Dropping A: What do you think about objection X?B: Well, BigNamei, BigNamej, and BigNamek agree with me. LittleNamei might agree with you, if only they were that silly. Proof by Absentee Belittlement A: What do you think about objection X?B: Person C, who is not here to defend themselves, thinks that. They are silly. You are silly.Proof by Humility A: What do you think about objection X?B: You state that so forcefully. I could be wrong. You seem so sure of yourself. That is silly.Proof by Humiliation A: What do you think about objection X?B: Have you read Book Z, or Book Y, even Book W?A: Well, no.B: That explains why you asked such a question. Sit down silly person.Proof by Extremeification A: What do you think about objection X?B: That is an extreme case. Extreme cases are silly.Proof by Hypocritical Intuition A: What do you think about objection X?B: My position is intuitively obvious.A: But what about X?B: Can you explain X better?A: X is intuitively obvious.B: Intuitive obviousness is silly.Proof by Ignorance A: What do you think about objection X?B: I don't understand X.A: Let me try to explain X...B: That doesn't make sense to me. Please explain. What is X?A: X! X! It's very simple! X!B: I don't understand. You must be silly. Next question.Proof by Nit Picking A: What do you think about objection X?B: Could you expand on X1 and X2.A: Okay, X1 and X2 are like this...B: Could you expand on X1a, X1b, X1c, X2a, and X2b.A: Okay, I'll explain...B: Could you expand on X1ai, X1aii, X1bi, X1bii, X1biii, X1ci, X1cii, X2ai, X2aii, X2aiii, X2bi, X2bii, X2biii, X2biv, and X2bv.A: Never mind.B: Silly, silly.Proof by Notation of Death A: What do you think about objection X?B: Well, we must first introduce seventeen special symbols and make recourse to the Cyrillic and Greek alphabets. Are you silly enough to make me do all that? I will, you know.A: Okay, okay, I give.Proof by Untranslatability A: What do you think about objection X?B: Do you know Spanish?A: Más o menos.B: Do you know German?A: Jawohl.B: Do you know French?A: Un peu.B: Do you know Guaran�A: He'.B:Do you know Hawaiian?A: 'Ae.B: Do you know Polish?A: Tak.B: Do you know Chinese?A: B: Do you know Italian?A: Sì.B:Do you know Esperanto?A: Jes.B: Do you know Portuguese?A: Sim.B: Do you know Arabic?A: B: Do you know Cherokee?A: B: Do you know Old English?A: SlceB: Do you know Gaelic?A: Which kind?B: Irish?A: Tá beagán Gealige agam.B: Scottish?A: Tha beagan Gà idhlig agam.B: Manx?A: Ta beggan Gaelg aym.B: Do you know Hopi?A: Well, no, I don't.B: Well, the Hopi Language has a great word for my answer, but it doesn't translate well. Silly of you not to know Hopi, you know.Proof by Very Big Words A: What do you think about objection X?B: If we take the quasi-isomorphic tangential nucleotide sequence correlating asymptotically to the inverse pulmonic schizo-phrenicality index of that question, the answer is obvious.A: Huh?B: Silly person.Proof by Coma A: What do you think about objection X?B: Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Oh, you're unconscious. Silly you. I winThankyou Allison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phishtaper Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 this thread is very impressive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanada Kev Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 It is as impressive as the last one was prior to premature deletion . Enjoy this one while you can since it may suffer the same fate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmoothedShredder Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 Proof by Coma A: What do you think about objection X?B: Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Oh, you're unconscious. Silly you. I winWith the MTVication of our attention spans, I've learned it doesn't take much to put people in a coma around here. I'm guilty of it now more than ever. Well in my two years around this place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guigsy Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 where's thorgnor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmoothedShredder Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 The burninator? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kung Posted April 10, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 Okay clearly you really are all damaged and deranged. I really couldn't give a shit. I promised the wifey I'd stay away from here and should have done so. No one is even remotely interested in having a dialogue, this isn't an argument it's a conversation.I am a far better dialectical debater than any single one of you. Frankly I was the best debater in Ontario when I was 17 and I have since went on to read all of the works of the Presocratic philosophers, all of Plato's dialogues, most of Aristotle's works and the Arabic Aristotelians like Averroes. All of the Greek Tragedians, all of the later commentators like Aristophenes whose work The Frogs is a seminal criticism of dialectics (Allison could do with reading even half of these books when she's NOT whacked on coke - I wasn't when I did). I am most like Apuleius who wrote The Golden Ass. I am The Golden Ass. I'm sorry folks I actually do believe that everyone has their own great gifts. Logic, rhetoric, dialogue and compassion don't happen to be up there around here. I didn't spend my teens in and out of bars playing with my dads bands like Deeps. I didn't tour the country like nero, Burt or JSB. I didn't plant a garden. I didn't throw a ball. I READ ALOT OF BOOKS. If you want me to apologize for spending about 6-10 hours of every day for the last 12 years of my life reading you're not going to get me to do that. I actually don't think I'm superior I just come off that way partly or largely because of a satirical style, the internet as a medium and the particularly low capacity for this boards membership to detect satire.I don't want to debate. I'm a Tibetan Debater. Stop.As for my rank in the organization I am a lowly hopper in the ROC. I am like a very old private who never moved up the chain of command because of his tendency to speak his mind. Still when the shit starts to fly there's nobody you'd rather be around in a firefight. That and you all know I can KILL every one of you suckers on a dancefloor and likely I could still kill you while dancing on my hands to give the thing a bit of an incentive for me viz a viz handicap.A battle is a really good way to cross liquid swords, no one gets hurt, and the haters get liquidated and maybe they start to love themselves cause that's why haters hate in the first place.Love on a Hater. That shit confuses the fuck out of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djmelbatoast Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 Okay clearly you really are all damaged and deranged. Ha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paisley Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 that Andy Kaufman knew how to treat a lady Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 What colour is the sky in your world? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allison Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 Allison could do with reading even half of these books when she's NOT whacked on cokeI've never even read even one book while "whacked" on coke Luke.A conversation requires listening to other people, absorbing what they are saying, giving it weight, seeing if it fits,augments or contradicts your own thoughts and trying to understand both where the other person is coming from AND where they want to go.It also ideally requires some basic human decency.This is not what you do.You deliver proclamations and then are seemingly astounded when people question what you are saying.And then, instead of calmly trying to explain yourself, you throw insults, dodge questions and start name dropping.Just answer the questions Luke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanada Kev Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 Okay clearly you really are all damaged and deranged. You are simply wayyyyyy too good for us deranged lowlifes. You are all over the map. Personally, i don't care about all the items you seem to feel that you have to quantify to us. Who cares how many hours/pages you read a day and for how long? Who cares about your Six Degrees of KungLukeZero that you continually write about? You seem to imply that your "shit on everyone here" nature is simply us chumps not understanding your intellectually superior satirical writings. Give me a break. If you are so well read, and such an amazing writer, your satire WOULD be understood. Instead you go all over the map in your rantings, and write disjointed and poorly spelled letters to politicians. You say you are the Asinus aureus? Well maybe you are. I would think that you would have a better understanding and compassion for us serfs though, if you were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guigsy Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 Okay clearly you really are all damaged and deranged. I really couldn't give a shit. I promised the wifey I'd stay away from here and should have done so. No one is even remotely interested in having a dialogue, this isn't an argument it's a conversation.i actually wanted to hear from thorgnor because i think he's a pretty smart dude with some insight into some of the cultures you're trying to correlate here... i think he'd have something of substance to add - i dont have much, but i like to learn.you're not the only one who likes to read.I'm sorry folks I actually do believe that everyone has their own great gifts. Logic, rhetoric, dialogue and compassion don't happen to be up there around here.thanks, buddy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradm Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 Here are some thoughts on the "Hip Hop: The New Rome" idea.I don't think hip-hop is the new Rome. Rome was a centrally managed, world-spanning empire. Hip-hop isn't: it's not centrally managed (has no "emperor" or government or laws), and doesn't span the world. If anything, Western countries (esp. the USA) are the new Rome (in other words, we're living in the new empire).I'm not a historian (nor do I play one on TV), but it seems as if most empires (e.g., Rome, Greece, Britain, the Dutch, and now the USA) have a life-span of a couple of (or several) hundred years. They begin to decline, often collapsing under their own weight ("getting too big for their britches"), often aided by other things (e.g., lead poisoning in the case of Rome). As they decline, it gives others the opportunity to take advantage of the decline and raise themselves up.In this sense, hip-hop is more analogous to the Goths, who attacked and harried the Roman empire; they were outside its control, were a thorn in its side for a long time, and hastened its decline. The best hip-hop functions this way (especially as socio-political commentary).I'm not sure "the American Empire" will collapse as (or as catastrophically as) Rome did. I think it's more likely that society will become more fragmented, especially as things like the internet become more pervasive, as pervasive connectivity gives each individual the opportunity to present a viewpoint. (See "The Third Wave" by Alvin Toffler, for example.) Hip-hop is part of that: it was created by individuals doing what they did for their own reasons (as opposed to a central authority having grand sweeping reasons to do something to people far away, as was/is the case with Rome and the USA), and grew up largely by bypassing the main avenues of distribution (e.g., on hand-copied mix tapes and independent record labels).(Note that Sturgeon's Law applies, however: 90% of everything (including hip-hop) is crud. BradM's Corollary To Sturgeon's Law also applies, however: if 90% of everything is crud, then 10% of everything is golden; the trick is to find that 10%.)Aloha,Brad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velvet Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 Narcissistic Personality Disorder DSM IV CriteriaA pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:(1) has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)(2) is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love(3) believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)(4) requires excessive admiration(5) has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations(6) is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends(7) lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others(8) is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her(9) shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now