Philosophical Quandry: Piracy

[Jack Simth]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Note how every single one of those possibilities are comments on the question? They are comments that serve different purposes, but all comments nonetheless.

Granted I'm commenting on the question when listing those possibilities; however, not all of the possible reasons listed for the original question require a responding comment to achieve the desired effect. Specifically, I listed three that don't:

teach someone else something

A person being taught does not necessitate that person taught comment on the question. The purpose of the question is to teach in such cases; comments are only desireable as a method of confirming the learning. They are not directly relevant to the question, and are not truely part of the purpose for the question.

insult someone via sarcasm or irony

Again, no comment is necessary (on the part of the target or anyone else, for that matter) for the insult to occur (although it may require some words preceeding the question, we are specifically discussing responses to the question here, so that is immaterial).

convince someone to take a particular course of action

If I ask you why you don't try something, then you try it, I have successfully convinced you to take a particular course of action, regardless of wether or not you comment on the question. For such cases, comments are irrelevant; it is the action that matters.

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Just pointing out that you made a vacuous statement.

Why the insult?

[Fyron]

Why the insult?

Insult? I see no insult. I merely labeled the sentence as what it is. Insulting would be if I called you vacuous, which I did not do. I guess if you want to take it personally it could be seen as an insult, but that is not how it was intended.

[Jack Simth]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Insult? I see no insult.

Then you aren't too terribly perceptive.

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
I merely labeled the sentence as what it is.

So are you maintaining that all listed possibilites have comments as their goal, without addressing my expansion of what I meant? That's odd.

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Insulting would be if I called you vacuous, which I did not do.

Not directly - but in calling a statement someone makes vacuous, you are saying that that person makes vacuous statements, which in turn implies that they are vacuous people.

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
I guess if you want to take it personally it could be seen as an insult, but that is not how it was intended.

You are saying it wasn't intended that way, but you aren't apoligizing either. Odd.

[Fyron]

So back to the regularly scheduled philosophizing...

[Jack Simth]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
So back to the regularly scheduled philosophizing...

And you neither defend nor rescind your statement that mine was vacuous when challenged. Odd. Nor do you apoligize when I explain how your statement was an insult. Also odd.

[ July 12, 2003, 09:02: Message edited by: Jack Simth ]

[Arkcon]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
The problem with that is that you are bending the word culture to suit your purposes. That is a sub-culture at best (probably not even that).

Well, I disagree with this point of yours, Imperator, even more strongly than I disaggree with the originial point of this discussion.

I don't know what the most rigid definition of a culture is, but an ideology that's held by even a few can spread, like a cultural virus. Linkont cross the memes.

I'm oh so tempted to list a specific case ... but I want to keep this thread civil.

[ July 12, 2003, 11:31: Message edited by: Arkcon ]

[Thermodyne]

Originally posted by Arkcon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
The problem with that is that you are bending the word culture to suit your purposes. That is a sub-culture at best (probably not even that).

Well, I disagree with this point of yours, Imperator, even more strongly than I disaggree with the originial point of this discussion.

I don't know what the most rigid definition of a culture is, but an ideology that's held by even a few can spread, like a cultural virus. Linkont cross the memes.

I'm oh so tempted to list a specific case ... but I want to keep this thread civil.

---

OK I took the test, and they really need to work on it a lot.

Viruses I do suffer from:
1) Junk food---NOT (Unless beer is junk food)
2) Sci fi---Oh ya, they got that one.
3) Politics---yep I guilty there
4) Environmentalism---Perhaps, but then we get fined if we put the wrong kind of trash in the wrong color bin

I (might) suffer from:
1) Linux 80%---NOT EVEN close
2) Religion 60%---NOT
3) British 85%---NOT
4) Windows 75%---True but a low number
5) freeBSD 90%---True but way high. I guess it was because I kenw it at all.
6) Brand Names 65%---True
7) Hippyism 65%---NOT EVEN Close

I would say it was a test of how much media you have been exposed to.

All in all, it needs work. And perhaps their parents should seek a refund from the uni

[ July 12, 2003, 13:54: Message edited by: Thermodyne ]