Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

I Has a Bucket: Preventing bucket theft on Bleeding Hollow | FUBU: A better BH Forum
It is currently Tue Apr 22, 2025 5:35 am



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 264 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 ... 18  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 7:50 am  
User avatar

Kunckleheaded Knob
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 2:31 pm
Posts: 402
Offline

This thread has escalated to so much awesome I can't take it.

Hey Aestu, you are awesome dude. Seriously you are the smartest person I ever met. You are superior to all. Seriously. Your superior dialect is going to shape our society. You achievements will quell overflowing volcanoes. Your 146 mounts will carry all of China to safety during monsoons.

Edit: 146 mounts was just for lol sorry Aestu

You will cure world hunger with you overwhelming whit.

You ask others what their qualifications or achievements will get them when you put yourself on this pedestal of superiority. I could care less if you deflect everything I say and tell me I am just twisting what you say. Hey maybe I am, it could be my inferiority kicking in MY BADD.

I'll tell you what I can name three achievements that Callysta has given this world that will probably be a contribution you will never make. This assumption is based purely my opinion but let's be honest you are far too important to be worrying about kids. She has brought three children into this world. She has given this world the gift of three lives. She has continued to build our population.

You never know what if one of her kids cures cancer? Or something 'significant'. What are YOUR qualifications? What have you done that is so significant? I couldn't care less about our grading system or the way the educations system works.

Whoopeeeeeeeeeeeeee I scored highly on my SAT's so fucking what? That has no bearing on my life now. I graduated Suma Cum Barely haha. 2.something and I don't care.

My mediocrity is okay with me, except I don't think I am mediocre, in terms of REAL LIFE. I am 23, I just bought my first house. I am proud father and I have a beautiful wife and good job. That doesn't make me superior to someone.

Why worry so much about who is superior or who can do what. If you can do something, if you are capable fucking do it and quit telling everyone you can. I hope your infinite awesomeness does something good for this world and for you. Because you yourself has admitted to loneliness and no amount of qualifications or achievements can fill that void. Us mediocre bastards get happiness with our families and support systems.

I am no Einstein, I wouldn't say I am an idiot either. I have an inordinate amount of common sense and the ability to make money. I am already above the median income for most. I have had two promotions in two years so I would say no degree could have gotten me there. The piece of paper is meaningless without the experience. As you said people can memorize or remember things to get a grade. I applaud those that do well, I don't demean them to further my own self image.


85 Mage Bleeding Hollow Bored with game so I let sub expire......
85 LOLKnight Bleeding Hollow Bored with game so I let sub expire......
85 Shaman Bleeding Hollow Bored with game so I let sub expire......
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 8:11 am  
User avatar

Obama Zombie
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 1:48 pm
Posts: 3149
Location: NoVA
Offline

thegodslayer wrote:
She has burdened this world the gift of three human fillers. She has continued to dilute our population.

I said it for Aetsu, although I don't agree with this statement at all...
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 9:11 am  
User avatar

Obtuse Oaf
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 5:46 pm
Posts: 776
Location: Ontario
Offline

Aestu wrote:
2. Why is it that most of the most successful people in the world don't have qualifications equal to yours?


How are you defining "successful" here? I think it's safe to say that the most successful economists (measured by things like respect and impact in the profession, or membership on advisory councils and impact on government policy) would have PhDs, which would make them more qualified than Callysta currently is.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 9:35 am  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:19 pm
Posts: 8116
Offline

Laelia wrote:
Aestu wrote:
2. Why is it that most of the most successful people in the world don't have qualifications equal to yours?


How are you defining "successful" here? I think it's safe to say that the most successful economists (measured by things like respect and impact in the profession, or membership on advisory councils and impact on government policy) would have PhDs, which would make them more qualified than Callysta currently is.


To have an impact on the world.

Most of these "advisory councils" and "successful economists" do not change the world, they merely comment on it. Look at it this way: if so-and-such person did not exist, what would change? Does the void need filling?

Would not the world be a more stable place if these academics actually were able to construct viable and functionally effective models of how the world works?

You can take the school of knowledge of chemistry or physics or whatnot and make functionally effective innovations with them. If economists were able to do the same, the world would be a wealthier and more equitable place. It is not; our economic fate is controlled by the power balance in business and politics, not by what the economic theory says. Things like the S&L crisis, the dotcom boom, hedge funds, international diplomacy - that is what moves the world forward, and it's driven by those who do, not those who sit around and comment on it after the fact.

Earlier in this thread I gave the example of my professor at college who in fact often gives interviews about political matters and is very proud of his academic success. His most recent interview is on the front page of our campus site. That doesn't change the fact that he does not "do", he merely comments, and most of what he says is superficial and provably wrong. He could say he is successful; I would say he is superficial. If he did not exist nothing would change. Nothing he says or does really makes a difference than if someone else filled his shoes. He has institutional acceptance; he has not changed the world or made anything for himself; he is not even wealthy.

By contrast, I gave the example of that guy who owned a pawn shop. Perhaps someone else would satisfy the demand for a pawn shop if he did not build one, but that doesn't change the fact that he took nothing and made it into something. What he has, is of his own making, as opposed to someone who might simply manage someone else's franchise. To manage something someone else created is infinitely less significant than to create something for oneself even if the latter is quantitatively smaller - because in one case and not the other, the world has changed as a result.

Thegodslayer, considering that 6.3B people on this planet are the product of other people having children and the overwhelming majority will likely have children in turn, if having children had any bearing on worth as an individual, we would live in an incomparably better world than we do.


Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 9:42 am  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 3:18 pm
Posts: 7047
Offline

So what you're saying is there's do'ers and talkers?


aren't you a talker?


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 9:51 am  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:19 pm
Posts: 8116
Offline

Usdk wrote:
So what you're saying is there's do'ers and talkers?
aren't you a talker?

I haven't rocked the world, but it's undeniably true I've done things that reflect my ability to think independently and solve problems.

To my understanding, these last few pages have merely been debating the entirely specious issue of whether or not I am intelligent, and from there digressed into arguing whether Callysta is in a position to say that I am not.

My argument in turn is that Callysta may be intelligent but that her basis for saying that I am not is specious and that her and her friends' disdain of me for my "delusions of superiority" are hypocritical because she obviously places supreme importance in her capacity to see herself as superior to others.


Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 9:55 am  
User avatar

Kunckleheaded Knob
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 2:31 pm
Posts: 402
Offline

Aestu wrote:
and it's driven by those who do, not those who sit around and comment on it after the fact.


So by your own admission your contributions are worthless. You are a commenter not a do'er. You comment on how insignificant others are when you yourself are in the insignificant or mediocre field. Your whit or intelligence has served the world in no way.

Quote:
Earlier in this thread I gave the example of my professor at college who in fact often gives interviews about political matters and is very proud of his academic success. His most recent interview is on the front page of our campus site. That doesn't change the fact that he does not "do", he merely comments, and most of what he says is superficial and provably wrong. He could say he is successful; I would say he is superficial. If he did not exist nothing would change. Nothing he says or does really makes a difference than if someone else filled his shoes. He has institutional acceptance; he has not changed the world or made anything for himself; he is not even wealthy.


You say "probably". Is this based on opinion or fact? Is it your opinion of him that drives you to the conclusion that what he says is wrong?

I think you couldn't be more wrong. Each person touches so many lives in so many unique ways that cannot be replicated. His influence to one kid could be that one that does change the world. Or it could be to the detriment on the other hand. No life is insignificant. For someone like you to think otherwise is mind boggling.

Intelligence escapes you if you truly believe every person that is not making ground shaking discoveries or changes to the world can be replaced. You are wrong, dead wrong. It is all possible that those ground shakers were influenced by us human fillers. Those that teach are those that shape.

Quote:
Thegodslayer, considering that 6.3B people on this planet are the product of other people having children and the overwhelming majority will likely have children in turn, if having children had any bearing on worth as an individual, we would live in an incomparably better world than we do.


Without children there wouldn't be those changes. Again you are wrong. Having children has more bearing on the world than anything else. Without people who would make changes? In your frustration with this thread why would you make such a claim? It is completely and utterly stupid. The claim not you.


85 Mage Bleeding Hollow Bored with game so I let sub expire......
85 LOLKnight Bleeding Hollow Bored with game so I let sub expire......
85 Shaman Bleeding Hollow Bored with game so I let sub expire......
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:02 am  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:19 pm
Posts: 8116
Offline

thegodslayer wrote:
So by your own admission your contributions are worthless. You are a commenter not a do'er. You comment on how insignificant others are when you yourself are in the insignificant or mediocre field. Your whit or intelligence has served the world in no way.


You are playing the elitist: to deny the gradient between extremes of success and failure. I have often shown resourcefulness in my affairs and my intelligence is recognized by others, and that is all I have sought to assert.

thegodslayer wrote:
Quote:
Earlier in this thread I gave the example of my professor at college who in fact often gives interviews about political matters and is very proud of his academic success. His most recent interview is on the front page of our campus site. That doesn't change the fact that he does not "do", he merely comments, and most of what he says is superficial and provably wrong. He could say he is successful; I would say he is superficial. If he did not exist nothing would change. Nothing he says or does really makes a difference than if someone else filled his shoes. He has institutional acceptance; he has not changed the world or made anything for himself; he is not even wealthy.


You say "probably". Is this based on opinion or fact? Is it your opinion of him that drives you to the conclusion that what he says is wrong?


I did not use the word "probably", so I'm going to guess you meant "provably". My statement is based on objective facts. For example, he at one point asked "Should children of illegal immigrants receive in-state tuition?", a question which betrays a provably incorrect understanding of the issue.

thegodslayer wrote:
I think you couldn't be more wrong. Each person touches so many lives in so many unique ways that cannot be replicated. His influence to one kid could be that one that does change the world. Or it could be to the detriment on the other hand. No life is insignificant. For someone like you to think otherwise is mind boggling.

Intelligence escapes you if you truly believe every person that is not making ground shaking discoveries or changes to the world can be replaced. You are wrong, dead wrong. It is all possible that those ground shakers were influenced by us human fillers. Those that teach are those that shape.

Without children there wouldn't be those changes. Again you are wrong. Having children has more bearing on the world than anything else. Without people who would make changes? In your frustration with this thread why would you make such a claim? It is completely and utterly stupid. The claim not you.


Malthus says hi.

If you believe that is the proper way to judge success, then isn't her mention of her academic qualifications hypocritical since they are not relevant to this? Or are you really going to argue that having a diploma makes you a fundamentally better parent? Doesn't that mean that people who are unable or unwilling to have children have failed at life? Or what about those who fail at life in other ways, or are morally bad people, but have children anyway and raise them all the same? What about people who for one reason or another choose, or face the necessity, of remaining single and/or childless their whole lives? Are they necessarily below the level of those who have had children?


Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:17 am  
User avatar

Obtuse Oaf
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 5:46 pm
Posts: 776
Location: Ontario
Offline

Aestu wrote:
To have an impact on the world.

Most of these "advisory councils" and "successful economists" do not change the world, they merely comment on it. Look at it this way: if so-and-such person did not exist, what would change? Does the void need filling?

Would not the world be a more stable place if these academics actually were able to construct viable and functionally effective models of how the world works?

You can take the school of knowledge of chemistry or physics or whatnot and make functionally effective innovations with them. If economists were able to do the same, the world would be a wealthier and more equitable place. It is not; our economic fate is controlled by the power balance in business and politics, not by what the economic theory says. Things like the S&L crisis, the dotcom boom, hedge funds, international diplomacy - that is what moves the world forward, and it's driven by those who do, not those who sit around and comment on it after the fact.

Earlier in this thread I gave the example of my professor at college who in fact often gives interviews about political matters and is very proud of his academic success. His most recent interview is on the front page of our campus site. That doesn't change the fact that he does not "do", he merely comments, and most of what he says is superficial and provably wrong. He could say he is successful; I would say he is superficial. If he did not exist nothing would change.

By contrast, I gave the example of that guy who owned a pawn shop. Perhaps someone else would satisfy the demand for a pawn shop if he did not build one, but that doesn't change the fact that he took nothing and made it into something. What he has, is of his own making, as opposed to someone who might simply manage someone else's franchise. To manage something someone else created is infinitely less significant than to create something for oneself even if the latter is quantitatively smaller - because in one case and not the other, the world has changed as a result.

Thegodslayer, considering that 6.3B people on this planet are the product of other people having children and the overwhelming majority will likely have children in turn, if having children had any bearing on worth as an individual, we would live in an incomparably better world than we do.


I would object to your definition for two reasons. First, even if we agree that "having an impact on the world" is what it takes to be successful, you have defined success in that field in an incredibly narrow manner (and are begging the question when you ask Callysta how she's successful, since you seem to have already concluded that neither economists nor mothers can be successful by definition). Economists and other academics do have an impact on the real world (although not as great as they would like, of course). The US stimulus package, which was an enormous outlay of money, was implemented based on advice from economists, and governments routinely design tax schemes and implement monetary policy based on economic theory. Effective city planning is based on work by academics on traffic flows, networking theories, crowd psychology, etc. Fishing quotas, which determine the course of a fisherman's livelihood, are based on science-based population and ecological models. I could go on indefinitely, but suffice it to say that you have a very shallow understanding of what academics actually do. Some, or even much, of the advice these people offer may be flawed, but they still have real impacts. I fail to see how the work of these people who "merely comment" is less important in the world than the guy who owns a pawn shop down the street.

Second, your definition of success is not shared by everyone, and I suspect not even by a majority of people. Nobody deliberately sets out to be unsuccessful, but yet people routinely pursue life paths that will never reach the level of impact you think is required for success. Some people value making lots of money or building a successful business, others look for rewarding and interesting careers, others want to provide a comfortable life for their families or raise well-adjusted, happy children. People can be successful at any of these goals without having what you would call a major impact on the world; if they succeed at their aims in life, then they are successful, regardless of your assessment of the worth of those goals.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:24 am  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:19 pm
Posts: 8116
Offline

Laelia wrote:
I would object to your definition for two reasons. First, even if we agree that "having an impact on the world" is what it takes to be successful, you have defined success in that field in an incredibly narrow manner (and are begging the question when you ask Callysta how she's successful, since you seem to have already concluded that neither economists nor mothers can be successful by definition). Economists and other academics do have an impact on the real world (although not as great as they would like, of course). The US stimulus package, which was an enormous outlay of money, was implemented based on advice from economists, and governments routinely design tax schemes and implement monetary policy based on economic theory. Effective city planning is based on work by academics on traffic flows, networking theories, crowd psychology, etc. Fishing quotas, which determine the course of a fisherman's livelihood, are based on science-based population and ecological models. I could go on indefinitely, but suffice it to say that you have a very shallow understanding of what academics actually do. Some, or even much, of the advice these people offer may be flawed, but they still have real impacts. I fail to see how the work of these people who "merely comment" is less important in the world than the guy who owns a pawn shop down the street.


But what really drove the package or the conditions that necessitated it? Whatever anyone may think of the proposal, do politicians really need academics to tell them to throw money at an issue?

What if it doesn't work? Do we say that the academics didn't know what they were talking about it or do we rationalize it the way we do when the gypsy with the crystal ball is wrong again? Do we hold their opinion superior to those who saw what was going on and laughed all the way to the bank - who were able to "figure it out"?

Laelia wrote:
Second, your definition of success is not shared by everyone, and I suspect not even by a majority of people.


You can't be so foolish as to actually claim that majority opinion is a credible judge of truth. Besides, if it were, wouldn't that be self-invalidating since most people are not successful and it is human nature to want to have a positive view of oneself?

To define success was never even the argument to begin with; the argument was whether this person has reason to believe she is existentially superior.


Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:28 am  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 3:18 pm
Posts: 7047
Offline

Quote:
Whatever anyone may think of the proposal, do politicians really need academics to tell them to throw money at an issue?


Are you dense, or so cynical that you believe politicians could throw a dart at a wall and decide where to throw money with the same results as in the current system?


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:30 am  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:19 pm
Posts: 8116
Offline

Usdk wrote:
Are you dense, or so cynical that you believe politicians could throw a dart at a wall and decide where to throw money with the same results as in the current system?


Which of these three do you believe will be most decisive in deciding where the money goes:

A. The dartboard
B. Academics
C. Political reality

The WoW forums has Palehoof, Churchill had Keynes, and Bush had Podhoretz. Is that academics discerning reality or is it that powerful interests will always find a way of institutionalizing their beliefs? So do we say institutional success is a good judge of wisdom or worth?

In the Soviet Union you could get a degree in Marxism and be an "authority". Of course it was all malarkey - as we know - but until the day the wall fell these academics had a pretty high opinion of themselves. They had equal disdain for Western degrees in market economics. If Callysta were born in the Soviet Union, she'd probably have such a degree and be very proud of it. Would she be right in having a high opinion of herself?


Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:44 am  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 3:18 pm
Posts: 7047
Offline

If you're a success in your soceity, you're a success, so yes she would be right.

Political reality does have too much influence, but academics have more influence than you give them credit.

I imagine if you were making a 4.0 you wouldn't have such a disdainful view of academics, but then again you're aestu.


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:47 am  
User avatar

Obtuse Oaf
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 5:46 pm
Posts: 776
Location: Ontario
Offline

Aestu wrote:
But what really drove the package or the conditions that necessitated it? Whatever anyone may think of the proposal, do politicians really need academics to tell them to throw money at an issue?

What if it doesn't work? Do we say that the academics didn't know what they were talking about it or do we rationalize it the way we do when the gypsy with the crystal ball is wrong again? Do we hold their opinion superior to those who saw what was going on and laughed all the way to the bank - who were able to "figure it out"?


Sticking to the example of the stimulus bill, why it was implemented or whether it worked or not is basically irrelevant. The US government increased its debt by $787 billion on the advice of economists - any way you look at it, that is an enormous impact.

Quote:
You can't be so foolish as to actually claim that majority opinion is a credible judge of truth. Besides, if it were, wouldn't that be self-invalidating since most people are not successful and it is human nature to want to have a positive view of oneself?

To define success was never even the argument to begin with; the argument was whether this person has reason to believe she is existentially superior.


There is no empirical truth about what constitutes success in life, only value judgements. You have a definition based your own values, other people may agree or disagree; I was pointing out that many people, apparently including everyone you're arguing with here, probably disagree with your definition. If you want to have a meaningful argument about the matter, you have to agree on definitions, or at least acknowledge that you're arguing about different things. I agree that the definition of success wasn't the core of the argument, but when you asked the question I felt it needed clarification in order to be answerable in any useful way.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:51 am  
User avatar

Obtuse Oaf
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 12:38 pm
Posts: 967
Location: Resisting the urge to giggle uncontrollably!
Offline

Aestu wrote:
Ok.

1. So what impact will you make in this world proportionate to your qualifications?


I have about 64 more years left to make a proportionate impact (assuming that I don't succumb to an early death.) At the moment, I think I am doing just fine :)

Quote:
2. Why is it that most of the most successful people in the world don't have qualifications equal to yours?


You've given me no evidence to believe this to be true.

Quote:
3. If it is not your goal to put yourself above others, then why seek membership in organizations whose only purpose is to be exclusive?


I was 6. :roll:

A few things:

1. I don't know Fantastique. We've never spoken, played in game, etc. Calling me his "friend" because he agrees with my position betrays your own delusional stance.

2. I was unaware of the hordes of people that despise me. What on Earth gave you this idea?

3. Calling someone an elitist when they disagree with you or "put you down" is hypocritical, considering who it is coming from. I haven't spent the past 5+ years that I've played this game waxing on about how "superior" I am. You have. It gets old.

4. A good defense is a great offense. You've shown that. If you didn't get such terrible grades, you could probably be a decent lawyer.


Callysta of Reverence
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 264 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 ... 18  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

World of Warcraft phpBB template "WoWMoonclaw" created by MAËVAH (ex-MOONCLAW) (v3.0.8.0) - wowcr.net : World of Warcraft styles & videos
© World of Warcraft and Blizzard Entertainment are trademarks or registered trademarks of Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. in the U.S. and/or other countries. wowcr.net is in no way associated with Blizzard Entertainment.
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group