Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-03-2016, 05:54 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  But the argument was made theft requires the taking/using of something without permission and this has yet to be proven.
Proven multiple times.


(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  The information in question has been given permission to be used, taken, redistributed publicly because of its open source nature.
Tell me exactly what information you are talking about cause you have made a bunch of false claims about what I've accused you of plagiarizing.

(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Where is your rebuttal to this argument?
In each of the last dozen or more pages you cunt.

(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Is this how debates work? Refuse to rebut a valid point or even address it and call it a win?
Nope so it's a good thing I ain't done that. Is ignoring valid points and pretending they don't exist when it's uncomfortable for you how you debate? Is lying? Redundant question, of course it is.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2016, 06:09 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(13-03-2016 05:27 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  1. You continue to make claims of proving something but have yet to show me where you proved it.
Shown it multiple times, you have just ignored it. I'm just gonna copy+paste this from now on.

(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  When asked to do so you will refuse to show it.
No I refuse to show it AGAIN, especially when requested by a known liar when a record of ignoring the responses to his own requests.

(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It's the most circular logic I have seen in a very long time.
*sigh*
I'm not making a logical argument, and that's not even circular. I've told you that given your actions, past and current, your negative reputation, and your documented dishonesty I won't obey your demands, nor am I required to do so.

(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  What fallacious appeal to authority are you referring to?
See this is exactly what I am talking about. I literally JUST explained this and here you are asking me to explain it like I didn't just do that. It's exhausting. Just read my fucking responses already.


(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I'm an advocate of doubting all authority when there is good reason to doubt.
*sigh* You are the one making the appeal to authority you dumbass.... jesus-fucking-christ.

(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Someone that doesn't share your belief makes them an idiot?
You really don't have any reading comprehension skills do you?


(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  If you only knew how hard it is to make an Aspergers Syndrome case laugh you would be totally impressed by that.
I've worked and even lived with people on the Autistic spectrum including people with AS and I've never had any problem making them laugh. I don't think you have AS at all, i think you saw a smart guy on Big Bang Theory and now you want to pretend your like him.

And I don't care.

(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  4. I dint think I have misrepresented your arguments in any way, bur even if I did, you are still welcomed to prove it.
Again, I point out a strawman, I explain why it's a strawman, and you pretend like I haven't. I think Bucky has the right Idea, might be time to just add your deluded ass tot he ignore list. You are too dishonest to have even a casual conversation with.


(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  To bad your not a good sport at debates as you run so easily when faced with a willing opponent.
Said the lying plagiarist who continues to ignore anything he doesn't want to read.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2016, 06:10 PM (This post was last modified: 13-03-2016 06:18 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(13-03-2016 05:50 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(13-03-2016 05:19 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  1. You do not wish to continue the debate because I failed to address a question or 12 either in this debate or from another debate. Correct?
Wrong. This is not a debate, a debate requires both people to not lie their ass off all the time, this is me trying to educate a person who places no value in honesty and learning.
Your are also wrong, I'm happy to continue the debate if you will stop playing dumb and acting liek I haven't just been making claims the whole time. i have repeatedly and exhaustively, in multiple posts, across multiple days, cataloged and explained WHY and in what ways, and when you lie and committed plagiarism.

There is an entire post with each of your offenses labeled in brackets and each offense clearly and resoundingly explained and demonstrated. You chose to ignore the entire thing and bitch about my use of swear words. The fact you couldn't participate in the debate like a grown fucking man then does not mean I'm obligated to do a fucking thing for you now, you lost any right to that months ago.


(13-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  When the supposed perpetrator says they are willing to address the said question in an effort to continue the debate you refuse to state the unanswered question.
A claim you have made and then failed to live up to over a dozen times in 3 different threads, on multiple subjects. I've done it in this thread enough times to meet any civilized expectation, and i'm not gonna fall for you trolling lie again. Go look it up if you care to know, I don't owe a liar shit.

(13-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I get that you wont continue the debate until your previous questions have been answered.
Then you are an idiot cause that's not what I said.

(13-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  But what is stopping you from stating at least one of the unanswered questions?
The fact that every time I have you have ignored it, then at a later time tried to play the whole "if you don't do what i say I win" card, which you are trying to do again. Then when like a bloody idiot I DO repost it....you ignore it and the try to play the " do as I say or I win" card because you have the debate tactics of a 6 year old at recess.

(13-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Is there another reason why you wont repeat the question?
Yes there is actually: you are a dishonest evasive cunt currently lying about me having not proven it, which you did before when I had already proven it, and will do again if I prove it again. You will focus on the meaning of the meaning of the meaning of a word is a obscure context that doesn't apply, try to shift the conversation on to something entirely unrelated (murder for example) as a distraction and then a day or two later you will challenge me to prove the thing again because that is what you do. It's what you are doing now.

I won't play a game with a boy I know cheats.


(13-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  What if Agnostic Shane honestly does not know which question he failed to answer and honestly tries to find it but cannot (for whatever reason).
I won't consider it at all because it's patently false. You know the questions because you have repeated responded to the posts that contain them even deliberately cutting them out of the quote at one point. So either you are a liar or an idiot who can't read, neither of which put a burden on me to lift, and if you can't find something repeated in nearly every post of a thread then you are definitely an idiot so why should I waste my time?
Why should I waste my time so a pathological liar doesn't have to waste his?


(13-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Do you think this is the mature way to conduct a debate?
Said the liar and bigot.Rolleyes


You want a question? Here is one: You claimed to have asked a person knowledgeable in the laws pertaining to plagiarism and that this person, and in fact the whole of common legal thought, agreed with you that it must be official. Given that this was entirely false, that there are NO laws and that you fabricated the entire story, and when given an opportunity to provide a citation for your assertions you have refused, my question is thus: Why did you lie about that, and why do you continue to pretend that I haven't pointed this out a dozen times or more.
1. The guy asked what this was about. You summary seems to be centered around a debate between me and you only, with everyone else as just passing notes. This isn't quite accurate and even if you think the debate is over between me and you (which requires a bit of omniscience) I don't think it's finished between me and the rest. So my statement that the debating is still on going is still true regardless of your desire to add to it. Also when you allude to the point that things have been proven and I object stating that the debate is still ongoing it also refers to the fact that there are many unanswered rebuttals in this thread which you have failed to address. Eg. The theft accusation vs my permission given rebuttal.
2. Each time you reply to me regarding anything relevant to the discussion it proves you haven't really left the debate as you are claiming. You have only departed from answering my rebuttals without actually leaving the debate. It only goes to show that just because you say you did something doesn't mean it is actually the case. Is it any wonder this is the most commonly repeated statement you have made throughout this entire thread? Are you of the opinion that repeating it enough times will eventually make it true without ever having to actually give some proof?

3. Are you now suggesting that AS cases are not plagued with a more depressing view of the world? I didn't say we "cant laugh". Why do you misconstrue your arguments to debate something which your opponent was never against? How many misguided debate tactics are you going to throw at me before you finally stop? I should hope someone could study this thread to learn the tactics used by desperate debaters when losing an argument. At least it will help future debaters know what not to do at the very least.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2016, 06:16 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(13-03-2016 05:41 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I don't mean to burst your bubble but the debate isn't just between me and you.
I was speaking for myself you idiot, if you want to engage in distracts go do it with some who is interested in it.

(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Exactly how does a persistent request for you to repeat the rebuttals and the questions you claim I have ignored qualify as me ignoring the questions and rebuttals.
You wouldn't have to ask for them if you had read or not ignored them the first 12 times. Fairly simple to follow.


(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  If there was a spectrum of ignorance I would be attempting reduce the ignorance by asking you to repeat the question/rebuttal for me to address it.
If and only if you did not have a documented history of doing the opposite, which you do. Read it the first 12 times or don't be butt hurt cause I won't catch you up. No one else has had any problem keeping up, you might have noticed a couple people supporting my claim that it's already been proven. Why is that? Lolconspiracy?


(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I don't posses the power to read your mind.
Or the power to read my posts apparently.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2016, 06:24 PM (This post was last modified: 13-03-2016 06:32 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(13-03-2016 06:16 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(13-03-2016 05:41 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I don't mean to burst your bubble but the debate isn't just between me and you.
I was speaking for myself you idiot, if you want to engage in distracts go do it with some who is interested in it.

(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Exactly how does a persistent request for you to repeat the rebuttals and the questions you claim I have ignored qualify as me ignoring the questions and rebuttals.
You wouldn't have to ask for them if you had read or not ignored them the first 12 times. Fairly simple to follow.


(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  If there was a spectrum of ignorance I would be attempting reduce the ignorance by asking you to repeat the question/rebuttal for me to address it.
If and only if you did not have a documented history of doing the opposite, which you do. Read it the first 12 times or don't be butt hurt cause I won't catch you up. No one else has had any problem keeping up, you might have noticed a couple people supporting my claim that it's already been proven. Why is that? Lolconspiracy?


(13-03-2016 05:24 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I don't posses the power to read your mind.
Or the power to read my posts apparently.
You make quite a lot of assumptions based on your own personal biases. This isn't exactly the scientific method for validating a claim now is it?

Assuming that I have read a particular rebuttal and chose to ignore it is an assumption.
Did you consider you are shot gunning you arguments at your opponent and it would eventually result in some of your valid objections being overlooked?
If the above were true:
Did you consider that the best way to rectify this might simply to be state each point one at a time and have your opponent address them individually from this point onwards.
Do you blame your opponents for being unable to adequately respond to your shot gun arguments? If yes then I finally see where our problem lies.

You just admitted to posting multiple rebuttals in a single post. This qualifies as a shot gun argument and is subject to the disadvantages that come with them.
Posting another argument before previous ones have been rebutted or addressed is another form of shot gun arguments which you may well have been guilty of.
If you have other none shot gun type arguments that have been ignored please state them but try not to refer to the obvious shot gun arguments (if there really are any) in defense of your claim of your opponent ignoring you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2016, 06:30 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
You see this Shane:
(13-03-2016 05:50 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  You want a question? Here is one: You claimed to have asked a person knowledgeable in the laws pertaining to plagiarism and that this person, and in fact the whole of common legal thought, agreed with you that it must be official. Given that this was entirely false, that there are NO laws and that you fabricated the entire story, and when given an opportunity to provide a citation for your assertions you have refused, my question is thus: Why did you lie about that, and why do you continue to pretend that I haven't pointed this out a dozen times or more.
That was from what you just quoted. You asked me for a question and I gave you one, an example of your lying and dishonesty. I said repeatedly and in advance that if I did so you would quote whatever I gave you and ignore it. Lets look at your response:



(13-03-2016 06:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  1. The guy asked what this was about. You summary seems to be centered around a debate between me and you only, with everyone else as just passing notes. This isn't quite accurate and even if you think the debate is over between me and you (which requires a bit of omniscience) I don't think it's finished between me and the rest. So my statement that the debating is still on going is still true regardless of your desire to add to it. Also when you allude to the point that things have been proven and I object stating that the debate is still ongoing it also refers to the fact that there are many unanswered rebuttals in this thread which you have failed to address. Eg. The theft accusation vs my permission given rebuttal.
2. Each time you reply to me regarding anything relevant to the discussion it proves you haven't really left the debate as you are claiming. You have only departed from answering my rebuttals without actually leaving the debate. It only goes to show that just because you say you did something doesn't mean it is actually the case. Is it any wonder this is the most commonly repeated statement you have made throughout this entire thread? Are you of the opinion that repeating it enough times will eventually make it true without ever having to actually give some proof?

3. Are you now suggesting that AS cases are not plagued with a more depressing view of the world? I didn't say we "cant laugh". Why do you misconstrue your arguments to debate something which your opponent was never against? How many misguided debate tactics are you going to throw at me before you finally stop? I should hope someone could study this thread to learn the tactics used by desperate debaters when losing an argument. At least it will help future debaters know what not to do at the very least.
Not a fucking thing. Not one goddamn motherfuckin' thing. You quote it, and ignore it, and wonder why I won't repeat myself to a person that's just gonna go play pretend inside his own empty skull. I have made this point 12+ times before and you ignored it, I made it a 13th time and you ignored it again. Like I said you would. Not only do you fail to address the one thing you repeatedly said you wanted to address, that you demanded a chance to address, you instead bring in points from other posts that aren't even part of that quote.


You're a dishonest, immoral, vile, lying bigot and I've had enough of it from one person. Welcome to ignore you stupid cunt.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2016, 06:35 PM (This post was last modified: 13-03-2016 06:40 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(13-03-2016 06:30 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  You see this Shane:
(13-03-2016 05:50 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  You want a question? Here is one: You claimed to have asked a person knowledgeable in the laws pertaining to plagiarism and that this person, and in fact the whole of common legal thought, agreed with you that it must be official. Given that this was entirely false, that there are NO laws and that you fabricated the entire story, and when given an opportunity to provide a citation for your assertions you have refused, my question is thus: Why did you lie about that, and why do you continue to pretend that I haven't pointed this out a dozen times or more.
That was from what you just quoted. You asked me for a question and I gave you one, an example of your lying and dishonesty. I said repeatedly and in advance that if I did so you would quote whatever I gave you and ignore it. Lets look at your response:



(13-03-2016 06:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  1. The guy asked what this was about. You summary seems to be centered around a debate between me and you only, with everyone else as just passing notes. This isn't quite accurate and even if you think the debate is over between me and you (which requires a bit of omniscience) I don't think it's finished between me and the rest. So my statement that the debating is still on going is still true regardless of your desire to add to it. Also when you allude to the point that things have been proven and I object stating that the debate is still ongoing it also refers to the fact that there are many unanswered rebuttals in this thread which you have failed to address. Eg. The theft accusation vs my permission given rebuttal.
2. Each time you reply to me regarding anything relevant to the discussion it proves you haven't really left the debate as you are claiming. You have only departed from answering my rebuttals without actually leaving the debate. It only goes to show that just because you say you did something doesn't mean it is actually the case. Is it any wonder this is the most commonly repeated statement you have made throughout this entire thread? Are you of the opinion that repeating it enough times will eventually make it true without ever having to actually give some proof?

3. Are you now suggesting that AS cases are not plagued with a more depressing view of the world? I didn't say we "cant laugh". Why do you misconstrue your arguments to debate something which your opponent was never against? How many misguided debate tactics are you going to throw at me before you finally stop? I should hope someone could study this thread to learn the tactics used by desperate debaters when losing an argument. At least it will help future debaters know what not to do at the very least.
Not a fucking thing. Not one goddamn motherfuckin' thing. You quote it, and ignore it, and wonder why I won't repeat myself to a person that's just gonna go play pretend inside his own empty skull. I have made this point 12+ times before and you ignored it, I made it a 13th time and you ignored it again. Like I said you would. Not only do you fail to address the one thing you repeatedly said you wanted to address, that you demanded a chance to address, you instead bring in points from other posts that aren't even part of that quote.


You're a dishonest, immoral, vile, lying bigot and I've had enough of it from one person. Welcome to ignore you stupid cunt.
Good. Thank you. We are finally engaging in a proper debate (sort of). Please refrain from posting other argumente until we properly address the one you have now raised.

No more shot guns please. When I can no longer defend my claims I will be forced to accept my failure and admit I am wrong.
Here goes:
Please quote where I have stated that the whole of common legal thought sides with me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-03-2016, 08:40 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(13-03-2016 04:06 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  What in the actual fuck even is this conversation
^^^
Most intelligent post in this entire damned thread.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Paleophyte's post
13-03-2016, 09:16 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(13-03-2016 02:13 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I wasn't in doubt about the definition due to it's unquestionably common wording. I was in doubt about the original authors. Are you saying when in doubt about the original author cite any author?

No, simply cite the source that you used. If that source failed to cite the original author then that's their problem. Though you might want to consider a more reliable source.

Quote:Did you miss the other points or started replying before I edited them in?

OK, some quick pointers:

(1) We frequently get evangelists who will gleefully copy-N-paste entire damned walls of text as if it were their own. As you can imagine, this gets a wee bit tiresome and is well and truly frowned upon. As a result, you're posting in a community where it's considered poor form to copy-N-paste without proper attribution. That's simply the zeitgeist. Technically what you did is plagiarism, but this is an internet forum not an institution of higher learning. Nobody is going to be calling the TTA ethics police to chop off your hands. This is small potatoes and should barely have warranted a comment.

(2) Stop using the damned edit function. We also get very dishonest fundies who get trapped in contradictions, lies, etc. and go back to edit out the inconvenient bits. As a result, the edit function should be used exceptionally sparingly. Spelling errors, skipped words that fundamentally change the meaning of your statement and those damned misformatted BBCodes. Then only if you catch it relatively quickly. Do not use it to flesh out a post. That makes it damned near impossible to reply to anything you say. If you need to add to what you've said then make another post.

(3) Learn to admit when you're wrong. We all make mistakes, we all get called on them. I've made more than my share and had to make some apologies to go with some of them. If you don't own up to them then you just look dishonest and worse, you don't learn from them.

(4) Try not to escalate. Shrieking as loud as the loudest baboon in the pack just makes everybody want to hit you both with a stick to shut you up. Posting a calm and reasoned reply lets the shrieky one look like a fool and gets all the thumping. Having posted on several theist boards, I can tell you the value of de-escalation. There's a funny story about a board that a friend and I actually got shut down by being too damned polite.

(5) Learn to walk away. We're 28 pages into this and climbing fast. Ask yourself: "Is this thread going anywhere?" "Is it likely to?" "Am I getting anything out of this?" "Is anybody?" This thread is going nowhere except perhaps to the Viper's Pit.

On that note, I'm out of here. Reply if you like but don't expect a response.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Paleophyte's post
14-03-2016, 12:33 AM (This post was last modified: 14-03-2016 01:14 AM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(13-03-2016 09:16 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  
(13-03-2016 02:13 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I wasn't in doubt about the definition due to it's unquestionably common wording. I was in doubt about the original authors. Are you saying when in doubt about the original author cite any author?

No, simply cite the source that you used. If that source failed to cite the original author then that's their problem. Though you might want to consider a more reliable source.

Quote:Did you miss the other points or started replying before I edited them in?

OK, some quick pointers:

(1) We frequently get evangelists who will gleefully copy-N-paste entire damned walls of text as if it were their own. As you can imagine, this gets a wee bit tiresome and is well and truly frowned upon. As a result, you're posting in a community where it's considered poor form to copy-N-paste without proper attribution. That's simply the zeitgeist. Technically what you did is plagiarism, but this is an internet forum not an institution of higher learning. Nobody is going to be calling the TTA ethics police to chop off your hands. This is small potatoes and should barely have warranted a comment.

(2) Stop using the damned edit function. We also get very dishonest fundies who get trapped in contradictions, lies, etc. and go back to edit out the inconvenient bits. As a result, the edit function should be used exceptionally sparingly. Spelling errors, skipped words that fundamentally change the meaning of your statement and those damned misformatted BBCodes. Then only if you catch it relatively quickly. Do not use it to flesh out a post. That makes it damned near impossible to reply to anything you say. If you need to add to what you've said then make another post.

(3) Learn to admit when you're wrong. We all make mistakes, we all get called on them. I've made more than my share and had to make some apologies to go with some of them. If you don't own up to them then you just look dishonest and worse, you don't learn from them.

(4) Try not to escalate. Shrieking as loud as the loudest baboon in the pack just makes everybody want to hit you both with a stick to shut you up. Posting a calm and reasoned reply lets the shrieky one look like a fool and gets all the thumping. Having posted on several theist boards, I can tell you the value of de-escalation. There's a funny story about a board that a friend and I actually got shut down by being too damned polite.

(5) Learn to walk away. We're 28 pages into this and climbing fast. Ask yourself: "Is this thread going anywhere?" "Is it likely to?" "Am I getting anything out of this?" "Is anybody?" This thread is going nowhere except perhaps to the Viper's Pit.

On that note, I'm out of here. Reply if you like but don't expect a response.
It's not that I don't yield in light of indisputable logic that refutes a claim I made. I have done it before on these forums. Peebothul pointed out my use of US when I was describing attempted suicide victims reasons for living. It appeared that i was applying it to everyone when I should have been using it in reference to attempted suicide victims only and then testing the claim to see if it would be applicable to all. I was wrong to assume everyone has the same motivation based on a unique control group.

1. I don't always communicate my thoughts quite clearly (it comes with the disorder) but I do my best to rectify it when pointed out (no easy task)
2. Aspergers cases are very prone to suicidal thoughts. Hence my ability to relate to them & I found my motivation for living a long time ago. It's curiosity and doubt which gives me hope. The world seems to always be trying to push me further down the spectrum for survival. It's naturally against us, but we have evolved to survive in this world. It really wasn't intelligently designed for our survival. I'm saying us here but it could just be me.
3. What you consider shrieking I see as a defense rooted in logic and an insatiable desire to question the validity of every claim to avoid being misled by hidden agendas and personal biases of others. It's my own personal bias based on personal experience that guides me. It's a built in defense mechanism brought about by years of observation in the way everyone I know is always hiding their true agendas and feelings. Aspergers cases see the world as naturally immoral and cruel. I see dishonesty in everyone, it's probably a by product of evolution that has helped us survive, so you will have to forgive me if I don't believe everything you say will always be true.
Have a look at the video on the science of Lying by scishow host Hank Green.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MX3Hu8loXTE
4. Why would I want to walk away from an unanswered question? The more someone objects to a claim is the more I want to understand their objection. It's not within my nature to walk away from a question if it peaked my interest. I will break it apart into as many parts as logic would permit and then rebuild it from the core up to validate their conclusion. If the process of validating the claim is flawed I will object to the conclusion. It's probably not usual for people to do that but it's very common among Aspergers cases and it's really not such a bad thing when you consider how much society has benefited from Aspergers aside from a few bad eggs.
5. I don't see my disorder as negative and something I should work on suppressing.
I have often been told I have a natural gift for envisioning multiple processes at once. It's why I became a builder. Give me any construction related problem and I can deduce the flaws and solutions within seconds. Solve a rubix cube in under 4 mins each time. Predict certain things about someone just by watching what they wear, drive, live, eat, talk and use. I see patterns and algorithms in everything and if I follow them I sometimes find answers to questions I never asked. It's not always a liked thing though. People don't like it when you know certain things about them they prefer to keep hidden.
6. I think Aspergers isn't a disorder but rather evolution doing what it does best. Finding an alternative solution by slowly changing the what we deem as normal.
7. I love the edit button but I won't edit a post if it has already been replied to, unless in error.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: