Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

Different classes use different forms vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, judgement and humor. Pls don’t continue to reinforce my argument for me. 😉 You only demonstrate it further with any retort. >Lorraine 😂Please don’t overcompensate..you sound like you’re trying very hard to sound articulate.. Boo >Curt lol…. please don’t psychologize. It’s an admission of inferiority. Did you know psychology and sociology are pseudosciences? Did you ever look at the IQ distributions of people who study psychology and sociology? 😉 lolz >Lorraine Uhhh? I happen to like psychology/sociology to analyze dopes like you. You must feel inferior because you keep using that word..i also love philosophy and your argument can be considered inductive but not very cogent🤔😉😜 >Curt Hmmm…induction doesn’t exist right? Deduction (axiom), Induction (guessing), abduction (wild guessing), and guessing (free association.) I mean, only someone of late medieval understanding would even imagine inductive arguments. Instead we’d use science: endlessly contingent. >Lorraine Whoop whoop! You are a genius >Curt Actually I am but my arguments should stand independent of my authorship. I mean, otherwise that would be a fallacy of appeal to authority. Right? >Lorraine No I believe it’s attacking the motive Well in this case I am prosecuting your attempt to use shaming, as a means of false preservation of your self image. Whereas, an intellectually, morally, honest person would simply ask, “is that greater time, calories, content, discipline and precision that I can offer?” And simply admit superiority or inferiority by that criteria. I know your motive. I’m trying to expose your theft and dishonestly (fraud) as any good prosecutor would. I mean, that’s the virtue of stoicism and aristotelianism over marxism/postmodernism/feminism. Stoics have no need or incentive to disapprove, shame, ridicule, gossip, rally and lie to protect a fallacious self image. —“Uhhh? I happen to like psychology/sociology”— I know you do because it is the grammar and semantics of using disapproval, shaming, ridicule, gossip, and rallying for the purpose of defending a fraud you desperately seek to preserve, because you lack the agency to discipline your emotions, such that ratio-scientific discourse is possible. Psychology and Sociology consist of a grammar and semantics of shaming. Thats all. A means of using the threat of ostracization as a means of imposing equalitarian conformity. it’s just soft violence.

Different classes use different forms vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, judgement and humor. Pls don’t continue to reinforce my argument for me. 😉 You only demonstrate it further with any retort. >Lorraine 😂Please don’t overcompensate..you sound like you’re trying very hard to sound articulate.. Boo >Curt lol…. please don’t psychologize. It’s an admission of inferiority. Did you know psychology and sociology are pseudosciences? Did you ever look at the IQ distributions of people who study psychology and sociology? 😉 lolz >Lorraine Uhhh? I happen to like psychology/sociology to analyze dopes like you. You must feel inferior because you keep using that word..i also love philosophy and your argument can be considered inductive but not very cogent🤔😉😜 >Curt Hmmm…induction doesn’t exist right? Deduction (axiom), Induction (guessing), abduction (wild guessing), and guessing (free association.) I mean, only someone of late medieval understanding would even imagine inductive arguments. Instead we’d use science: endlessly contingent. >Lorraine Whoop whoop! You are a genius >Curt Actually I am but my arguments should stand independent of my authorship. I mean, otherwise that would be a fallacy of appeal to authority. Right? >Lorraine No I believe it’s attacking the motive Well in this case I am prosecuting your attempt to use shaming, as a means of false preservation of your self image. Whereas, an intellectually, morally, honest person would simply ask, “is that greater time, calories, content, discipline and precision that I can offer?” And simply admit superiority or inferiority by that criteria. I know your motive. I’m trying to expose your theft and dishonestly (fraud) as any good prosecutor would. I mean, that’s the virtue of stoicism and aristotelianism over marxism/postmodernism/feminism. Stoics have no need or incentive to disapprove, shame, ridicule, gossip, rally and lie to protect a fallacious self image. —“Uhhh? I happen to like psychology/sociology”— I know you do because it is the grammar and semantics of using disapproval, shaming, ridicule, gossip, and rallying for the purpose of defending a fraud you desperately seek to preserve, because you lack the agency to discipline your emotions, such that ratio-scientific discourse is possible. Psychology and Sociology consist of a grammar and semantics of shaming. Thats all. A means of using the threat of ostracization as a means of imposing equalitarian conformity. it’s just soft violence.