Opinion Poll

[lms]

I agree with Celyn, on all counts.

[Talon]

Tom.. Tom.. Tom..

Do you actually have any opinions of your own or does everthing you have to say refer to some past incarnation of your obviously splendid self?

You seem wisend in some ways Tom and of course no-one could deny your a very well educated man..certainly not me..I am one of those sports bar patrons that you hold in such high reguard, so my view I am sure is beneath your acknowledgement.. but you do seem to be working very hard at proving yourself to people whom you continuously state, do not listen to you and deliberatly argue with you just to provoke you..

In my opinion it may stem from the fact that you really are very condescending when you explain things to people..I am sure you dont realise it though and this is were your evident uncertainty as to why you have been so badly treated.. Also you often try to link yourself by comparrison to the great minds of old, by insesently quoting them and using there statements as your own proof...even just here in your last posting you wrote...

"If a Zen Master is nearer the truth than myself, I look forward to his teaching, at my own expense."

How could someone hold the title Zen Master if they knew less than you?..surely by definition they would know more otherwise they would just be called Zen.... which is probably quite a kool name, in some circles at least

I am not agreeing nor dissagreeing with your various arguments, partly because I do not know enough of any of the subject matters to have an informed opinion and partly, because it just isnt that important to me...its only important how we each inside feel about them. I am just a wee guy who helps these days to build conservatories for our customers... its not a glorious job nor is enlightenment essential for the task.. but because you are more educated than me I do find it appauling that with all your teachings that you have such a low opinion of us the uneducated...However your not the only intellectual I have witnessed in my lifetime to share your views, so it is not surprising to me... You also wrote in some other thread I was reading that the less educated scorn the intellectuals and that you felt that was terrible and you urged we go out and educate ourselfs or we would be sorry...or words to that effect... maybe you said the words you did in anger or over dramatised to make a point, none the less, if I thought for a second that reading these books would turn me into an entity such as yourself I am sure I would feel the immediate compulsion to gouge out my eyes with a spoon..

You say my friend that this scotland.com is this and that.. that nobody likes you and all sorts of stuff... I over the years have posted on many of its forums and though you may feel mistreated I can assure you for the most part s.com is quite a remarkable little place with many kind souls.. and in ways, far beyond your present comprehension, I would be far more educated on its qualities and have a wider base of knowledge to draw from than you.. and in the arrogance you say others have in the subjects you discuss.. I see it in you on the subject of s.com .. so lets try to keep things relative my friend.. What you mean is this forum is not overly keen on you..and yes..I would find it hard to dissagree with you there on what I have seen so far..

Oh and I am sure now you will have a smashing little laugh to yourself about my spelling or inproper use of pronouns or something, and justify away my observations to the warbalised backfiring of my singular brain cell, but as far as I can see from all thats gone on here before this..your the poison, but fun, like a little toy to play with for the other well educated people in this forum...and for you my friend whom seems to sit highly..I can also ramble of quotes...although not from some 3000 year old immortal fossil...

"Comunnication is like a muscle, and like a muscle it must be excercised"--- Anthony Robbins (which is quite apt for you)

and
In answer to your half ersed Hulk threats

"You are the weak, and I am the tyranny of evil men"--- Sammual L. Jackson

Try to relax a little my friend and stop taking everything so serious...oh yes and move out you mummys house and get a job...sheesh how can you understand the world if you dont live in it....

[Talon]

I am not sure what kind of response I was expecting from you..actually I dont really even think I was expecting one at all..But that was put well, and it shows us that we all act differently from our natural state whenever we are being taunted..And in recognising our own flaws it shines a torch on the human condition that surrounds us. We are each our own key to the universe. Thankyou for keeping your words simple for me... and my backfiring cell.


Keep up the good fight.
Cause I am sure they wont ever tell you, possibly even deny it if confronted, but I am sure they are enjoying the divertion.

Its not the winning or losing that counts, but with the way you hold your own honour

[Davy651]

Originally posted by TomSawyer

3. (My use of the word 'braai' is not bad grammar. Braai means barbecue, and one can say "I am having barbecue" or "I am having a barbeque." Furthermore, why am I being attacked for making mention of meat? I said that I am going to the Cape and having braai. Braai is a speciality of the Afrikaners. Similarly, an Italian might talk about olive oil. So why the hostility? Are we only allowed to talk about kilts? Has intellecutal discrimination been replaced by cultural discrimination?)

As I said, much as you hate being corrected.

I cannot understand how you can perceive a correction of your grammar as being hostile towards either meat or the preparation thereof. As far as correctness is concerned, I am relatively sure that, having lived in South Africa for around thirty years now, I am better placed to advise on the correct usage of multilingual South African crossover words and/or phrases.

I won't go into your other misconceptions regarding the ethnicity of the braaivleis as an Afrikaner national pastime. Suffice it to say that it is the ONLY truly multicultural activity in the country.

This is another fine example of your debating technique: seize on the minutiae, misinterpret same, and then base your entire argument on a misconception and/or deliberate avoidance of the real issue. If you did not take yourself so seriously (obviously) you would be mistaken for a wind-up merchant, and a very good one at that.

As it is, your technique is indeed puerile and, to use an Americanism, you got your ass whooped in the previous debate for precisely that reason.

p.s. please feel free to correct my little attempt at American humour/humor. I promise I won't sulk.

Much.

[ScabbyDouglas]

There can be few things more sterile or futile than an argument about an argument. And yet here we find ourselves.

Tom, if you can't bring yourself to stay away, I do wish you'd stop flouncing out and banging the door - I'm sure it's going to come off the hinges next time. It also deprives your apparently inevitable return of some of the gravitas that you might wish for.

Top marks for spelling, this time round, though. I was most impressed.

Tom says of me: "He throws his weight around, making claim to "know" that Thales and I are the same. Then prove it, Scabby, you who demand proof all the time. Have you nothing better to do than worry about the psychology of twenty-four-year-olds? "

Tom, at the moment, I don't have anything better to do than turn my attention to your psychology. That's inaccurate, actually - there are things that I should be doing, but for now, I'm not doing them. For now, this is what I'm doing. I can hardly be accused of throwing my weight around, but I do regret saying that I "know" that you and Thales are the same person. Probably, I'm no more than 98 per cent convinced that you and Thales are the same person, but I do note that you make no denial of the assertion. What I can say is that whoever he was - your brother or you - he did make several patently false statements. So I'm disinclined to waste any more time considering the posts made under that name. But what an interesting psychology it is, to be sure. Why do you harp on about being a twenty-four-year old? If you feel disadvantaged by your lack of years, then maybe you should be arguing in Kindergarten.com, or BarneyTheDinosaur.com. Really you should be wiping the floor with us old fogeys, shouldn't you? But it's not happening, and if you can't manage it now, while you still have most of your brain cells, are you ever going to be able to achieve it?

I didn't mean to distress you, as I seem to have, by comments about your state of mind, I just thought that you would be able to handle the occasional cheap shot by me as you seem to have absolutely no compunction about dishing them out. Apparently not. Somewhere in there though, there may be a helpful hint for you: if you want people to take you seriously when you speak of having had "psychic" experiences, it's proabably not a good idea in almost the same breath to announce that you've had hallucinations as well - and that you can tell the difference. It's a credibility thing. People can be so cruel.

"To be great is to be misunderstood." you quote.
It's worth stating the converse - "to be misunderstood is not to be great".
And I think that's true, but it is also undeniably the case that "to be ordinary is to be misunderstood", too.


Being misunderstood is part of being human, part of being alive. It's inescapable. Just because you believe that you are misunderstood does not confer greatness upon you. As it happens, I would suggest that you are much better understood than you can begin to know. I may understand what you are trying to convey, but happen not to agree with it. And that appears to be what you cannot bear. Your "evidence" is repeatedly demonstrated to be threadbare, which must be upsetting, particularly since you must have spent a great deal of time reading it. In your situation, I'd certainly be getting upset, but then, I'd probably not get into that situation.

"You accuse me of the Ad Hominem Fallacy, of insulting my opponents rather than advancing my argument."
I can't remember the last time I mentioned the Ad Hominem fallacy - it was almost certainly several weeks ago, but yes, you do prefer to attack people rather than their arguments. If you doubt that to be the case, may I just quote you from the last couple of posts alone:
crude, ignorant, childish, mean
are epithets you have applied to me. Now, I don't really take those personally, as I know that you are not acquainted with the Real Me, and can't really appreciate the wonderful, warm, caring and intelligent person that I am. However, it does go some way to demonstrating your inability to leave personalities out of it, or to concentrate on substantive issues.

Why do you have to keep on coming back and telling us that we are unimportant to you, and that we are less than the dust beneath your shoe? It's getting less and less convincing every time you trail back in here. I'm beginning to think that you have a crush on someone. Is it me? CJ? Neil?

I won't presume to speak for CJ or Neil, but I'm happily married, Tom. It would never work.

[Davy651]

Welcome back Tommy

Overall I must admit to being impressed with the new and moderate Sawyer persona - I hope it lasts. Apparently your holiday was pleasant enough then, even with the mild Western Cape breezes (ha)?