no rly. you have never made a thread in this section as far as i can tell. and i really never see ANY serious response to the OP's from you.Doctor Strangelove wrote:
why do you come to this website?11 Bravo wrote:
why do you come to this section?Doctor Strangelove wrote:
Just how would a mechanic help on the island if there aren't any machines?
Also, the carpenter only has one tree to work with.
And there are not musical instruments of the musician to play.
So really only the doctor and prostitute would be of any use.
And his contribution to their society would be... what?Uzique wrote:
swap out the reader for 'philosopher' and see if you can still maintain the spurious argument.
(omg philosophers are sooo useless)
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
DST is so crap why bother posting seriously?11 Bravo wrote:
no rly. you have never made a thread in this section as far as i can tell. and i really never see ANY serious response to the OP's from you.Doctor Strangelove wrote:
why do you come to this website?11 Bravo wrote:
why do you come to this section?
hasnt always been that way. yet you never made a thread back then either. nor have you responded to the topic. you just pick someone out and attack them.Doctor Strangelove wrote:
DST is so crap why bother posting seriously?11 Bravo wrote:
no rly. you have never made a thread in this section as far as i can tell. and i really never see ANY serious response to the OP's from you.Doctor Strangelove wrote:
why do you come to this website?
Last edited by 11 Bravo (2011-03-04 08:10:10)
It has always been that way. I know, I was there.11 Bravo wrote:
hasnt always been that way. yet you never made a thread back then either. nor have you responded to the topic. you just pick someone out and attack them.Doctor Strangelove wrote:
DST is so crap why bother posting seriously?11 Bravo wrote:
no rly. you have never made a thread in this section as far as i can tell. and i really never see ANY serious response to the OP's from you.
i dont agree
Well, they you are wrong. DST has been shit since its inception. It's impossible to have a serious discussion on the internet.11 Bravo wrote:
i dont agree
ive had great discussions with people. what makes it fail is people come in and take random shots at people and head back to irc and tee hee.Doctor Strangelove wrote:
Well, they you are wrong. DST has been shit since its inception. It's impossible to have a serious discussion on the internet.11 Bravo wrote:
i dont agree
I don't agree at all with you. Some topics are shit, yes, but I've had some really good debates here and had my eyes opened on a number of subjects. You get out of anything what you put into it. Since you haven't put anything in, you haven't gotten anything out of it.Doctor Strangelove wrote:
Well, they you are wrong. DST has been shit since its inception. It's impossible to have a serious discussion on the internet.11 Bravo wrote:
i dont agree
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
I never said a debate on the arts is intellectual nonsense because there isn't an a or b answer (again with the faulty logical leaps). What irks me is the assumption by elitists that they are the only ones qualified to have an opinion on a subjective topic like the arts. You say yourself above that, so long as you can state why you have the opinion that you do on a given subject, it's fine. Yet you do not allow that when it comes to literature here...even though you've stated above there is no right or wrong answer. I guess unless it's your opinion, right? Because only you can have the correct opinion on a completely subjective topic, out of all the members here, simply because it's your chosen academic track.Uzique wrote:
oh and sure - this is essentially what i was trying to say in my "art takes specialisation, too!" post. i got the implication from your post re: literature and arts that you view it as a subject that is inaccessible merely only because you haven't been bothered to try and access it (not that there is any skill or discipline needed in the process of accessing). i was only arguing that art does take the same training and dedication that maths or science would-- not that there's anything inherently 'too difficult' about it for some. of course there's a degree in which certain human minds and types of intelligence are more adept at 'x' than 'y': the scientific rationalist or the logician is better suited to the hard, concrete subjects than the abstract and philosophical, for instance. but yes, i'm not arguing that intellectual 'talent' is anything other than years of cultivation and continued specialisation. i don't think i am godmode talented or a marvelous talent because i can read and decipher ulysses-- i should bloody be able to after spending most of my life reading the classics and the theory behind it! what i am arguing against is people that come in with the view that 'a book is a book' or that 'x' author is just as talented as 'y' author, with no qualification or technical understanding. a subjective opinion is one thing, but a qualifying statement is another. i can have an opinion on matters of science but they are grounded in little-to-nothing and are of no consequence; people should probably curb their temerity when it comes to passing similar judgements on books. instead they're dismissive of the 'academy' or whatever you want to call it, and assert that all critical opinion on books is tosh, because "it's just subjective!". that completely dismisses in one stroke everything i have said about art and the study of being a specialized field in itself. sure, there are no concretes or any absolutes - it's not suited to the scientific mind - but that doesn't automatically mean that every debate and discourse in the arts is intellectual nonsense for people with too much time, just because there isn't an 'a' or 'b' answer.FEOS wrote:
You're simply wrong. It's a matter of time, education, and training. For anyone. It's nothing special. Nor is high-level science or math. True, there are a few savants out there in any field, but for the vast majority of humans, success in any field of academic endeavor is just a matter of time and effort. Academics just like to think they're special because it's what they've chosen to do...just like many other people in other career fields like to make themselves feel special. Newsflash: nothing special there.
i hope that made it a little clearer. my patience is so thin on the matter after arguing about it for months on end with people like dilbert. i don't even bother trying to explain in any detail or with any lucidity anymore.
That's what's annoying as hell.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
i never said that at all. the only thing i have found disagreeable about your 'opinion' is the complimenting of beck's prose style. there is no style to speak of. "what's annoying as hell" is when people extend the subjectivity and ambiguity of arts (i.e. no a or b definites) to defend completely egregious statements. beck's prose style is bland and didactic, shallow and transparent. in consideration of 'prose' as an artform, there is nothing to praise. your opinion on beck's fiction is, indeed, your inviolable opinion. people too often, though, use the subjectivity of the arts to make spurious and supposedly untouchable claims.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
Uzique wrote:
i never said that at all. the only thing i have found disagreeable about your 'opinion' is the complimenting of beck's prose style. there is no style to speak of. "what's annoying as hell" is when people extend the subjectivity and ambiguity of arts (i.e. no a or b definites) to defend completely egregious statements. beck's prose style is bland and didactic, shallow and transparent. in consideration of 'prose' as an artform, there is nothing to praise. your opinion on beck's fiction is, indeed, your inviolable opinion. people too often, though, use the subjectivity of the arts to make spurious and supposedly untouchable claims.
And what is your opinion of beautiful prose structure built upon?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
And when you read the book, you can make claims about it yourself. Until then, stfu. It's not your level of knowledge on literature in general that makes you unqualified to debate that book. It's the fact that you haven't read it. You simply read the first ten pages, assume the entirety of the book is identical to that (because ALL books are just that way, aren't they?), and proceed to rip the author and his work--which you haven't read--to pieces. And then defend it based on some notion of academic literary superiority, rather than experiencing the work for yourself. How very enlightened and not at all intellectually dishonest of you.Uzique wrote:
i never said that at all. the only thing i have found disagreeable about your 'opinion' is the complimenting of beck's prose style. there is no style to speak of. "what's annoying as hell" is when people extend the subjectivity and ambiguity of arts (i.e. no a or b definites) to defend completely egregious statements. beck's prose style is bland and didactic, shallow and transparent. in consideration of 'prose' as an artform, there is nothing to praise. your opinion on beck's fiction is, indeed, your inviolable opinion. people too often, though, use the subjectivity of the arts to make spurious and supposedly untouchable claims.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
as i said... unless beck is some postmodernist experimentalist... why would the prose style change? does his writing style alter significantly in the middle-part of the book? his vocabulary, sentence structure, syntax and narrative method? i highly doubt it. galt, who am i to build an opinion of 'beautiful' prose structure? i never brought 'beauty' into it-- beauty is subjective (although many art critics and theoreticians would try to disagree with that statement in itself, but i digress). i said it isn't accomplished or worth praise. how can you adduce that? prose writing is as much a mechanic process of linguistics as it is an artistic expression. you remember grade school where they taught you the fundamental grammatical difference between a simple, compound and complex sentence? the primary and subordinate clause? use of the semi-colon? things like that? you can assess prose in a pretty objective, rational sense along those lines, with little to no subjective value attributions.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
uzique, why haven't you written a book yet?
shut up nuk.
hubrisnukchebi0 wrote:
uzique, why haven't you written a book yet?
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
kys13/f/taiwan wrote:
shut up nuk.
how so?Uzique wrote:
hubrisnukchebi0 wrote:
uzique, why haven't you written a book yet?
Last edited by nukchebi0 (2011-03-04 09:46:55)
Well I suppose if you had read the book you would know, wouldn't you? Much easier to just sit back, make assumptions, and and be smug, I suppose...Uzique wrote:
as i said... unless beck is some postmodernist experimentalist... why would the prose style change? does his writing style alter significantly in the middle-part of the book? his vocabulary, sentence structure, syntax and narrative method? i highly doubt it.
Oh, and then there's the whole part where I've already told you the answer to that question. Multiple times. That damn reading comprehension problem keeps cropping up for you, Zeek. Must be a real bitch for a lit major.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
i haven't even read half of the great literature that i want to read, yet, let alone absorbed their ideas and their technique and style. why would a 21 year old have the sheer hubris to try and write a 'worthy' book at this age? some precociously talented, 'born-writer' type geniuses can and have done it, no doubt... but i'm under no pretentions. i can't take myself seriously enough to try and write a book - and why should i? i'm a student of this art. i'm still learning... and not even learning the craft of writing, either, keep that shitty 'creative writing' nonsense away. plus i've never been particularly 'driven' to write: it's a creative urge that one has to possess. criticism, philosophy and theory are more my interests, at the moment. in the future? perhaps. there's too much to learn and i feel as though one has to climb the mountain before erecting his own flag.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
im a straight 1:1 first-class student and haven't dropped a grade in 3 years of study. my dissertation proposal is shortlisted for a one of the academic rewards/prizes that my department gives out. funnily enough, it's a hermeneutic study of marcel proust's masterpiece that focusses heavily on a new aesthetic theory of art and the interpretive process of reading. so yeah, given that, reading interpretation is a real bitch. do you want to talk at length about it? because i could write you 10,000 words on the linguistic and symbolic processes of reading signs and signifiers.FEOS wrote:
Must be a real bitch for a lit major.
im always humoured, though, when one of you deigns to make a comment about 'eng major' and 'reading'.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
I'm sure mommy's proud. That and an application will get you a minimum wage burger-flipping gig at Mickie Dee's. Have fun with that.Uzique wrote:
im a straight 1:1 first-class student and haven't dropped a grade in 3 years of study. my dissertation proposal is shortlisted for a one of the academic rewards/prizes that my department gives out. funnily enough, it's a hermeneutic study of marcel proust's masterpiece that focusses heavily on a new aesthetic theory of art and the interpretive process of reading. so yeah, given that, reading interpretation is a real bitch. do you want to talk at length about it? because i could write you 10,000 words on the linguistic and symbolic processes of reading signs and signifiers.FEOS wrote:
Must be a real bitch for a lit major.
im always humoured, though, when one of you deigns to make a comment about 'eng major' and 'reading'.
You'd think--if you were really that skilled--that keeping track of a running discussion on an Internet forum wouldn't be such a challenge for you. I guess I should've switched to iambic pentameter with allusions to Chin dynastic elements halfway through to make it more challenging and send you into a whirligig of analysis.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
yeah because iambic pentameter has a lot to do with prose novels! i would salute beck if he could keep scansion for an entire novel-length work!
and thanks, my parents are very proud. who mentioned a job? you attacked me as an 'eng lit' major in an academic capacity. great that you feel the need to somehow insult my job prospects though... a fully adult man making snide comments to a college undergraduate. cute. who says i'm interested in what i'm doing for the job prospects? talk about 'logical leaps'. nobody does an arts degree for a job. i study it because it's my passion. im sorry you didn't have the same opportunities.
and thanks, my parents are very proud. who mentioned a job? you attacked me as an 'eng lit' major in an academic capacity. great that you feel the need to somehow insult my job prospects though... a fully adult man making snide comments to a college undergraduate. cute. who says i'm interested in what i'm doing for the job prospects? talk about 'logical leaps'. nobody does an arts degree for a job. i study it because it's my passion. im sorry you didn't have the same opportunities.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
What do you mean by dropping a grade? You haven't got anything but a 1:1 in your entire academic career at university?
What makes you think I didn't? I'm sorry for you that with all the opportunity you've been handed in life, you still have to make a choice between what you study and what you will eventually do for a living. I happened to study what I always wanted to study, which is also what I always wanted to do later in life. It's sad that your passion and your likely vocation don't coincide. It's a recipe for bitterness and regret...which should make for good writing, if you don't OD first.Uzique wrote:
yeah because iambic pentameter has a lot to do with prose novels! i would salute beck if he could keep scansion for an entire novel-length work!
and thanks, my parents are very proud. who mentioned a job? you attacked me as an 'eng lit' major in an academic capacity. great that you feel the need to somehow insult my job prospects though... a fully adult man making snide comments to a college undergraduate. cute. who says i'm interested in what i'm doing for the job prospects? talk about 'logical leaps'. nobody does an arts degree for a job. i study it because it's my passion. im sorry you didn't have the same opportunities.
I didn't "attack" you, Zeek. I only "insulted" your job prospects to bring your pointless boasting into some perspective. Yes, I'm a grown man. I've got as much real-world experience as you have years of life. But keep on telling me how things work. I love to hear it. It reminds me of when I knew everything.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular