by rem 41 Replies latest jw friends
Hey FMZ I have an idea lets start a sex clinic for sexually deprived nerds who can't get girls because they are so boring....We could make millions just off rem, bradley & co. What say you my friend????
Xena, this sounds like a great idea... but there is one problem. We would lose money on this venture in the long run, as we would have to pay the poor girls who have to do these guys millions. Thus negating the profit margin. Unless we drug them... now THAT is feasible.
You're on...
FMZ
rem,
too late! the homeopathy market is already controlled by the big pharmacy companies!
funny ... in the department for pharmacy at the vienna university they teach a class on homeopathy. the prof actually tells the students: "we know its bullshit but with this market demand we have to give a class about it".
Good deal, Rem! I like Placebonol best. Has a nice ring to it and sounds officially druggy. But we ought to to some research in a homeopathic medicine store and get some ideas for the most New Agey touchy feely name we can find.
Let's sell a bottle to Einstein here. Maybe it'll calm him down.
AlanF
FMZ,
First of all, I was attacking ideas, not people. Secondly the word imbecilic was originally put in the mouth of non-believers on another thread: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/70651/6.ashx. I was recycling the term for humor.
As far as asking whether it's possible that people who believe in imbecilic things are mentally handicapped, etc., I see no problem with it. It is just one possible explanation among many that I thought was worth discussing. I never claimed that anyone who had these imbecilic beliefs actually were mentally handicapped. I don't see any reason to restrict the discussion to your politically correct views.
Take care! :)
rem
Edited.
franky,
if i find the time i will look up the study tomorrow.
if i remember it correctly in the study people were told that subluminal pictures of faces are hidden in a set of test paintings. the people had to spot the hidden faces. people with a high level of the neurotransmitter identified many faces that were not really there.
Astrology is an imbecilic belief -PRECISELY - NO DISCUSSION NEEDED
Let's sell a bottle to Einstein here. Maybe it'll calm him down.
AlanF... [deleted]. When did this become about intelligence and not about beliefs / sarcasm. Stick to the point [deleted] and maybe you'll have my attention for more than a nanosecond. As far as the calming down bit goes, that wont happen until my daughter is out of hospital.
Rem... My children do this same kind of thing. When one of them whines in the back seat of the car that the other one is invading their space, they will start sneaking their hands across just enough to piss each other off. CHILDISH BEHAVIOUR....
[deleted].
FMZ
Personally, I couldn't give a flip if somebody believes in astrology or whatever. I don't see the point of resorting to name calling over something like this. It makes me wonder where the "intelligent adults" have gone off to.
And now for our daily fallacy lesson. Which one below (a-j) applies to the following statement ?
How can supposedly intelligent adults actually believe (and waste any time) on this astrology crap? Are they mentally handicapped? Is it genetic? Memetic? Are they the blind follower type that fall for any type of New Age mumbo-jumbo?
a. Fallacies of presumption are unsound arguments because of unfounded, or unproven embedded assumptions.
b. Fallacies of relevance are arguments in which the premises do not bear upon the drawn arguments even though they may appear to do; therefore, this makes them irrelevant.
c. Poisoning the Well: an attempt to preclude discussion by attacking the credibility of an opponent; ?this expression goes back to the Middle Ages, when waves of anti-Jewish prejudice and persecution were common. If a plague struck a community, the people blamed it on the Jews, whom they accused of?poisoning the wells.?
d. Hasty Generalization: drawing conclusions from too little of evidence and often relying on stereotypes.
e. Personal Attack: committed by attacking a person for making an argument, rather than the argument itself.
f. Abusive ad Hominem: a direct attack on a person's character rather than focusing on his or her arguments.
g. Common Sense: an argument is held to be true because of practical truths and common sense. Common sense is sometimes correct, but all too many times all too commonly incorrect.
h. Bandwagon: supporting a claim by stating that ?everyone? believes or acts a particular way.
Let's settle the rhetoric and language down
