should have taken a trade! Tons of trades earn a ton of coin, yet you prattle on and on and on about being a scientist and not earning enough money. guess what sugar i went to community college got a 2 year diploma in a science tech trade and now
i make 3 and a half times what your fancy triple university edu gets you. can u take a bit more school? go to technical college! —college is for the smart kids
This article appears in Sep 19-25, 2013.
Hey back off! Someone wrote this just to take a shot at community colleges. Look at the terrible spelling & grammar, nscc wouldn’t give a diploma to someone that low on the smarts scale.
ob is right, tho…
“Do what you love, and the money will follow”
My parents used to say that to me. What a couple of fucking maroons they are.
It’s so sad to see the disillusioned kids coming away from university with a useless degree and a ton of debt… they suck them in and steal their precious cash only to have them learn that they need a masters degree… and then it’s a PhD… poor stupid bastards!
“I make 3 and a half times what your fancy triple university edu gets you.” College is for smart kids
You’re right about those who whine about university if they care only about jobs and money but wrong about “college” being for “smart kids” because they – and you – are clearly unable to distinguish education from training. They are totally distinct. I won’t bother attempting to explain that to you because, clearly, you are too stupid to understand.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
I don’t see any actual spelling errors. some punctuation lapses.
some things you do for love of the doing. some things you do to get money to do the things you love .
universities now are business.
Although I agree that too many kids are pursuing useless degrees under the guise of their “passion” (can we please stop the BS?) – your argument is fundamentally flawed.
The current situation is a result of an entire generation or two being told to go to university. If everyone goes into the trades, there will be a shortage of work for skilled labor. Furthermore, the wage scale is not reflective of the real “supply and demand” model since markets are generally distorted by various groups and interests.
Like many others, I was also told by my boomer parents that if I worked hard and was good at something, I would do well. Although this was true for them, it no longer holds much truth in today’s market. If you have money to start with, and don’t get yourself in debt, and know the right people, and can bullshit your way to the top by walking all over others, you might do well in certain fields of work.
We need both trades and university professionals (engineers, architects, doctors, lawyers?, researchers, scientists, etc.) – not so much the other degrees although they have their place in the world.
Also don’t forget; the job market is often a reflection of a country’s investments in the future. For example, Canada might eventually decide to push for a highly technological economy, which would require a lot more university grads. Right now it’s not the case. Things change.
J
The problem is these students are not researching the career choice before taking the class.
Well now, not understanding the difference between training and education doesn’t mean that a university degree is better, now does it? I’m pretty certain that most university and college students can indeed distinguish between the differences…
We need those working in university frameworks to acknowledge the errors of their ways so the universities can alter their models to be reflective of today’s changing needs.
Yes, they have changed over the years. But the problem is that they changed so as to further enrich their pockets, not the minds of the young….
Montrealman makes the mistake of assuming one cannot get an education from a college. He is correct only in that a college is for training and a university is for education (in their respective, fundamental goals), but attending one institution does not mean you don’t receive the benefits that the other institution offers.
The Captain received some of his training from NSCC, but he was also educated in the process of receiving this training. Conversely, there are many university graduates who remain entirely uneducated.
So ultimately a University is for taking your money, while a College provides you with tools (both physical and mental) for making money.
Go to college, kids, if you want to make money and get a job without going into debt. When you’re older and more capable of absorbing information, you go to university with all the money you’ve been able to save.
Nicely put Cap…..and I also think Meaty nailed this one–wow both of you educated AND trained, lol. Seriously guys, well said.
When I was young, I had a choice of paying to go to a school or getting paid to go to school with the military. I’ll take paid to learn any day of the week.
If less people went to university maybe tuition would finally go down to what it was 25 years ago!
And with that education you still couldn’t master the fine art of finding the Shift Key?
Ex bro in law, 3 degrees, jazz musician and teaches concerto piano now at University.
Ex GF’s brother 3 degrees, works at a call center, doesn’t know what to do with a Psy major, and Eng Lit. Hmm… no kidding.
Me, Community College 2 years, now in the Aircraft Industry. Keeping my Ex wife happy in funds.
The Scientiest was only ranting..has anyone here in this thread ever ranted?
lol
RSVP
: Captain (09/19/4:31PM)
:Montrealman makes the mistake of assuming that one cannot get an education from a college.” Captain
Well no, Captain’s first sentence is incorrect since it makes the mistake of assuming that Montrealman assumed that one cannot get an education from a college, but Montrealman never assumed this. What Montrealman claimed is that the purpose of a university and college are not the same, that the former aims (or should aim) at the cultivation of the mind – that’s called “education” – where the purpose of the college is to prepare the student for the job market – that’s called “training.”
However, Captain’s second sentence – “a college is for training and a university is for education (in their separate, fundamental roles)” – is correct but, sadly, the second part of Captain’s second sentence – “but attending one institution does not mean that you don’t receive the benefits that the other institution offers” – is incoherent in view of the fact that Montrealman was talking about the different purposes at the institutional level, not at the individual level. Does the college student receive the benefits that the university student receives? Who knows? He may or he may not, but the fact remains that the purposes of the two institutions are distinct. So any coherence Captain might claim rests on an analysis of what he takes these identical “benefits” to be. So what are they?
Well, we don’t know. Captain states that he received some of his training at NSCC “but he was also educated in the process of of receiving his training.” But can Captain specify just what involved in his being educated while in the process of receiving his training? If the two concepts are distinct as Captain claimed above, in what manner are they now to be understood as being identical? Indeed, if Captain was also educated in the process of receiving his training then he should be able to specify how his mind, as distinct from just acquiring his skills, was cultivated. Sadly, however, Captain is unable to do this. He now moves from empty incoherence to mindless, unsupported generalizations.
Captain’s next assertion, that “there are many university graduates who remain entirely uneducated,” is an unsupported, off-the-top-of-his-head generalization. How did Captain know this? How many university graduates remain “entirely uneducated?” Did Captain conduct a survey? Does Captain have any sources which support his claim? No, I didn’t think so. You see, since Captain has failed to give the concept of education some substantive content, his entire argument is specious. Well, what’s next? What’s next is a total collapse of any pretense to basic reasoning is next. That’s what’s next.
Captain’s next assertion – “So ultimately a University (sic) is for taking your money” – does not follow from Captain’s previous assertions. In other words, Captain cannot be educated as he claims since he has failed the test of logical thinking – a conclusion must follow from its premises – which, of course, is a minimum requirement for those who would claim to be educated. But, given the foregoing, Captain will never be able to understand this.
Captain’s final assertion was little more than empty irrelevant advice. It is irrelevant since it has nothing to do with the issue at hand, i.e., the distinction between education and training. Montrealman hopes that Captain’s training at NSCC was better than his “education.” Now, Captain must go away.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
Do try to keep up with the conversation, montrealman. Stopping everything to go back and explain things to you is laborious and usually fruitless. But as they say in America, “No Philosopher left behind!”
We’ve already stated that education and training are different, but you can keep repeating yourself if that’s the sort of mental masturbation you prefer. Basically the only point you’ve effectively stated in your post @ 9:10am was that education and training are different, and you took far too many words to just get that one point across.
My education received from college? How to critically think, problem solving skills, what logic is and how to use it, how to think objectively, as well as many subjects taught at University such as History, Language, and Creative Arts. What you group under the umbrella of what constitutes ‘Education and the Cultivation of the mind’ is found everywhere, including in someones home, their social circles, and on the internet. You want examples? Life experience is education. Plain and simple.
I personally know University graduates who are uneducated. They do not have possession of their mental faculties. That’s all the support for my post that I need to offer up in this forum.
“If the two concepts are distinct as Captain claimed above, in what manner are they now to be understood as being identical?” I didn’t say they were identical. Your reading comprehension is terrible. I said the separate institutions could offer identical outcomes, as in… A College student can become educated while they are being trained (engineering and mathematics would be training which breeds logic and reasoning skills that would form the education aspect). A University student would be educated, and in the process become trained at certain tasks (writing papers is a form of training, but the purpose of writing the papers, and the outcome of writing the paper, is the education aspect).
Since the point of my post wasn’t to define education or training, I haven’t failed at anything as you claim. In fact, your accusations of such are incoherent. My final assertion was on point, despite what you believe, because the point of this thread was regarding the pursuit of money and how College, rather than University, would be the best option for this pursuit. Your comparisons of education vs training were off topic, not it’s time for montrealman to go.
Have a nice day, lil’ buddy, and be careful leaving your bubble, it’s a dangerous world out there.
I also copied this from the Oxford English Dictionary…
education
Pronunciation: /ɛdjʊˈkeɪʃ(ə)n/
[mass noun]
1the process of receiving or giving systematic instruction, especially at a school or university:a course of education
the theory and practice of teaching:colleges of education
[count noun] a body of knowledge acquired while being educated:his education is encyclopedic and eclectic
information about or training in a particular subject:health education
2 (an education) an enlightening experience:Petrus is a good workman—it is an education to watch him
How odd….. ‘Training’ appears in the definition of education. They wouldn’t happen to be synonyms, would they? I was looking for something that mentioned ‘cultivation of the mind’, but alas, it’s not to be found.
RSVP
: Captain (09/20, 10:12AM)
Paragraph 1. I suppose the best way to reply to your comment is to be brief since I have been charged with “mental masturbation” and using too many words. I note that you have used a few yourself. Would that count as mental masturbation as well? No, probably not, so your opening paragraph is empty.
Paragraph 2. To repeat, ad nauseam, I was talking about the institutional purpose of college which is training for a job, unlike that of a university is the cultivation of the mind. Therefore listing the courses you took is irrelevant to the point I was making. Further confusion arises where you confound formal and informal education. The latter, but not the former, consists of “life experience, plain and simple” and so, once again, your comment is irrelevant to the point I was making.
Paragraph 3. You should acquire new friends if they do not have possession of their mental faculties as you claim. But no, you are wrong to suppose that that is all the support you need to offer up on making such a scurrilous claim on a forum like this, at least not where Montrealman is involved. You must do better.
Paragraph 4. Your reading comprehension is terrible. The purposes of college and university are distinct. The emphasis on the former is on training, on the latter it is on the mind.
Paragraph 5. Since my post was a response to the bitch which claimed that jobs and money was the purpose of education – I rejected that claim and aimed at distinguishing training in college from education university – your post was a reply to my post and your last paragraph was, as a consequence, irrelevant to the issue at hand.
(12:15AM)
I use dictionaries as a departure point for further analysis, not slavishly copying from them as you suggest. The reason for this is that dictionary definitions are tautologies. Perhaps you might want to look that up in a dictionary.
Time to go Captain, time to go.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
“Since my post was a response to the bitch which claimed that jobs and money was the purpose of education” – No it didn’t. It claimed that college would make you more money than university. The original post mentioned nothing of the purpose of attending either, only that college was the more lucrative route. The only reason there was a discussion about the ‘purpose’ of college or university was because you purposefully directed the conversation away from others points, and towards a subject that only you care to discuss. Are you trying to be incoherent?
“The purposes of college and university are distinct” – No way?! Really?! I never knew… Find somewhere where I said the purpose of university and college are the same. Can’t? That’s because I didn’t. I specifically noted their difference. Their purpose of each is different, but their outcomes can be similar. Still following? The purpose of something, and the outcome of something are two different things. Can you grasp that? University and College have different purposes, but they both have the capability of producing educated and trained individuals.
You’re inferring a lot from material you frequently describe as incoherent. If something is incoherent, and then you use this incoherent material to form theories and suppositions about people and things, doesn’t that make everything you say incoherent? Yes, it does.
I would give Captain the praise he deserves for that previous point but I’m pretty sure he’s just as pompous as montrealman.
Now I suppose one of you will point out that the above statement immediately gives Captain praise and that I’m being self defeating.
Nope, I’m simply saying what is on my mind, not trying to make a point, just an emotional expression. Once it hits the keyboard and you read it there are secondary implications of what will happen with the simple nature of it being said that are obviously different than my motivations, and that is the nature of the beast of the statement.
Both of you (although completely dead on with your points and I am especially impressed with Captain even though I’ve had a bad literary scent from him), haven’t seemed to aknowledge that the original poster’s point is really mostly an emotive distaste to the lack of practicality that an expensive university degree yields. I interprited the bringing up of the community college training as further illustrating the point through the practical contrast of the degree compared to the training, and NOT one vs the other in an ultimate conceptual duel.
I’m also not a mind reader so what was even my point of bringing that up!
IRL The Keptin is the least pompous person you could ever hope to meet. He makes a cogent and well thought out argument with humour and wisdom which is far preferable to the stream of convoluted victimization and laboured attempts at erudition that pour forth from the Keyboard of El-Ibrahim. And I ain’t joking.
Also – Lily Collins’ agent called. She needs her eyebrows back for the London premiere of “Mortal Instruments”, and they’d better be pressed and dry-cleaned or you can kiss your $200 damage deposit buh-bye (Okay – that was a joke.)
RSVP
: Captain (09/20, 3:25PM)
Of course, the bitch clearly implied that money and jobs was the purpose of education. My point was (and is) quite simple: That money and jobs is not the purpose of education but rather of training. Far from being “incoherent” the distinction is fundamental in a society, particularly on this site, where money and jobs for many are indeed the sole criterion of worth.
Your claim that “separate institutions could offer identical outcomes” (09/20, 10:12AM) gives the lie to your latest claim that “their outcomes are similar.” No they’re not. But I did find your assertion that “The purpose of something and the outcomes of something are two different things” interesting. Really? It seems to me rather that if the outcomes of something fail to achieve the purpose of that something then that something has, um, failed in its purpose. Still following? Can you grasp that?
You are right about my inferring a lot from material which, with reasons I have given, I have describe as incoherent. I can tell you it wasn’t easy but, in the interests of spreading philosophical insight and enlightenment on this site, I think my efforts should receive the plaudits they so richly deserve.
But I see that your confusion and consequent incoherence is complete. Far from using such material which I claim to be incoherent to “form my theories and suppositions about people and things” which you then claim, astonishingly, render my own insightful analyses themselves incoherent, it is rather you who have descended downward into a double incoherency. In other words, you have become incoherent about your own incoherence, an inverted and contorted “tour de force” if you like. One can only stand in awe at the depth of your incoherence.
Please don’t slam the door when you leave.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
Ivan
He thinks grammar mistakes can be a reliable indicator of someone’s intelligence, and then when I finally show some rigorous insight he accused me of plagerizing.
He’s pompous, just as you obviously are from you’re comment. Do the two of you meet for dinner?
OK
That was too harsh, I don’t actually know either of you or you’re motivations. I can see where this is going. Ivan will continue with the same boring trolls because he is jealous of how legendary my eyebrows have become.
Fear not, Daniel Eyebrowham, for The Captain is a figment of you imagination. All that Ivan says is true, in person I’m a humble soul who doesn’t upset anyone, not some raving lunatic who’s modus operandi is to continuously ‘rock the boat’. The Captain is a self-declared arsehole, and I would think it obvious that someone deliberately speaking in the third person wasn’t taking themselves completely seriously. The Captain is honorable in the sense that he attempts to be blatantly obvious when trolling.
And speaking of trolling…
“My point was (and is) quite simple” – You bet it is! So simple, yet you feel the need to keep repeating yourself over, and over again. THAT’S mental masturbation. And
you’re really starting to make a mess… it’s a little gross.
“Your claim that “separate institutions could offer identical outcomes” (09/20, 10:12AM) gives the lie to your latest claim that “their outcomes are similar.” No they’re not.” – Yes, they could. A College and a University could each produce an individual that was equally as trained and educated as the other. It makes no difference that the fundamental purpose of each institution is different, and it wouldn’t matter if either institution ‘failed’ at their purpose, the point is that they could produce similar outcomes in a graduate. (which, BTW, remains a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT POINT than the one the original post attempted to make. It solely focused on the monetary gains that could be expected from attending either institution. Nothing at all, until you chimed in, was mentioned about the purpose of one attending a college versus a university)
“…my inferring a lot from material which, with reasons I have given, I have describe as incoherent” – As well, with reasons I have provided, we can describe your material as incoherent.
“I think my efforts should receive the plaudits they so richly deserve. ” – Yes! They certainly do, montrealman. Someone should get you a gold star! Only the best rewards for someone who can repeat themselves endlessly, start debates and declare others automatic losers, and completely ignore (without exception) any logic put forward by someone with an opposing view.
“Please don’t slam the door when you leave.” – Oh god, you are just TOO funny! What an epic sign off. You’re so witty and cool montrealman, I can see why all the women love you.
– And Daniel, grammar IS an indication of intelligence… If someone makes an intelligent post but doesn’t apply proper grammar, then you can sometimes assume (depending on the individual post) that a person isn’t fully applying their knowledge (in this case their knowledge of grammar), and is exhibiting mental laziness. Sure, they know how to apply proper grammar, but they don’t. Do you see how that can be an intelligence indicator?
Captain
Please site something I’ve said specifically, and explain the circumstances for my motivations. Sounds to me like you draw conclusions about people and then can’t change them because you are un adaptive, lack experience, and a sense of humour. As for what you are obviously are citing as to be my behaviour I did that because I was being ganged up on for citing what I felt was racism before I “got to know the people on this site”:) At a certain point i didn’t care about what i posted because I was being mobbed by a clique. If my impression is that you are pompous than you should futhermore not be bothered.
I hope you think what I’m saying is sincere because it is.
Daniel Abraham
The guy who actually has the name to the picture because I am not afraid, and I DO like your posts. No joke.
My favourite post by you was on this thread you hit it dead on. Montreal man countered by clearifying what he meant but that was good.
El-Ibrahim speaks truthishly. The Keptin and I have met for dinner (brunch) on numerous occasions. And, since my own brows resemble a pair of tiger moth caterpillars in the last stages of chemotherapy who decided to enact a suicide pact on my forehead – I am duly chastened.
RSVP
: Captain (09/21, 11:04PM)
Ah, the hour grows late and the mind grows dim. Oh well, back to work. What’s the latest from Captain?
His assertion that he is “a declared arsehole” was certainly a first. Congratulations. I see that NSCC did manage to impart some “education” if only in the form of a minimally reflective self-awareness. But the insight was sadly only momentary since Captain is back on his masturbation kick again. He must be a serious devotee in the service of Onan, making another mess.
Next we find that Captain engages in groundless speculation to show that university and college are the same in that each provides education and training. But note the move from the assertive to the conditional mood, i.e. – the constant use of “could” in formulating his spurious claims. So we learn that a college and a university “could” each produce an individual, that the point is that they “could” produce similar outcomes, etc.etc. Well, yes, I suppose they could, but my point was never about what either the university or the college “could” produce in individual cases but rather about the purpose of the respective institutions themselves, a point which Captain, in spite of its continued assertion, clearly failed to grasp. So I’m glad I did “chime in” on the original bitcher – I’ve forgotten his name – since his pragmatic materialism distorted the entire post-secondary picture of education and, in Captain’s case, “education.”
Of course unlike me, Captain has completely failed to reveal just how my reasoning was incoherent but, given the difficult time he has had with the concept, I think it best to put it to one side. However, I’m glad that he thinks I deserve a gold star but the (sarcastic) reasons he gave for bestowing it, as usual, lacked substance. Montrealman would not give Captain a gold star or one of any other colour, for that matter. And I”m surprised that Captain noticed how all the women love me. Of course I already knew this since one must never underestimate the attractive power of intelligence to the other sex. It is, of course, the prospect of acquiring superior genetic material for their offspring which is decisive in their mating selection. Where the female is concerned her body, and by extension her offspring, take precedence.
Captain’s final paragraph relating the proper use of grammar to intelligence was, unlike the rest of his post, intelligent. As the face is the mirror of the soul, as the old saying goes, so language is the mirror of the mind. Indeed, in reading both bitches and comments on this site, Montrealman never just reads words and sentences but rather he is attends from such language use to the quality of the mind which animates and shapes them. It is what is called “intelligent reading.” Admittedly, in many cases if not most, the mind is not there. It is an “empty concept,” little more than unsubstantiated bluster. Most of Captain’s present post, for example, fell into that category.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
I find it interesting how on a thread weeks ago I was arguing that there isn’t any correlation between facial features and intelligence. Montrealman brought up that I would have to define intelligence as part of my plan in setting up a means of researching in my study to proove that facial features and intelligence have no correlation. Now he is loosely using the word “intelligence” in a comment where he both mentions that the woman on this site “love him” because he is intelligent and, that the Captain has made only a few intelligent insights. Do either of you remember me bringing up pompineity as well??
“Ah, the hour grows late and the mind grows dim… ” – 11:00pm is late?! What time is lights out at the seniors home, montrealman, 8:00pm? Do they tuck you in and give you bed-meds before the sun goes down?
“His assertion that he is “a declared arsehole” was certainly a first” – That definitely wasn’t the first time I’ve called myself an arsehole. That means that there’s an outright lie within the first few sentences of your post, montrealman… this doesn’t bode well for the rest of your posts contents.
“So we learn that a college and a university “could” each produce an individual, that the point is that they “could” produce similar outcomes, etc.etc. Well, yes, I suppose they could…” – Exactly! That’s what I’ve been saying the whole time! It’s nice to see that you’re finally catching on…
“…but my point was never about what either the university or the college “could” produce in individual cases but rather about the purpose of the respective institutions themselves…” – Oh no… we’re back to square one, montrealman! And you were finally starting to show some progress… But, it looks like your compulsive need to redress this topic over and over has overwhelmed any hope that your mind might be able to entertain more than a single idea at any time.
“As the face is the mirror of the soul, as the old saying goes, so language is the mirror of the mind” – And so we can surmise that montrealman’s mind is a single faceted entity, capable only of repeating itself for the sole purpose of pleasing itself.
Care to re-hash your point again? Go ahead, keep repeating yourself. I never said your point about the purpose of university or college was wrong, and despite your opinion you haven’t disproved my original point. Both institutions are capable of producing trained and educated graduates, AND College is the best option when the sole purpose is to make money quickly.
“Captain
Please site something I’ve said specifically” – Well, no…. You said I accused you of plagiarism and being unintelligent, so find where and when I said that and I’ll address it. I’m not reading back though hundreds of lines of my own text just to see if I said something that may have upset you.
We’ll just say that i should have stayed out of this; how’s that.
RSVPS
: Daniel Abraham (09/22, 5:03PM)
Yes Daniel, I would gladly have brought up “pompineity” if I knew what it meant.
: Captain (5:34PM)
Well yes, Captain, I do need my beauty sleep in order to keep the females lusting after my body but no, I wasn’t aware that you had previously called yourself an “arsehole.” I must say that it certainly is an accurate denotative use of the language. However, you must struggle to understand the subjunctive mood, that is, the use of the word “could.” It refers to possibility, not to fact and is therefore irrelevant to the present discussion. It’s true that I’ve never left “square one” since there was no need to, beyond, that is, your failure to grasp its meaning. I would, of course, be delighted to entertain “more than one idea at a time” but, sadly, you never provided another one. Well no, Montrealman’s language reflects the fact that, far from being a “single faceted entity,” it is in fact, subtle, complex and profound. On the other hand … But no, I don’t care to “re-hash my point again” since the futility of doing so, at least in your case, is patent. I’m not sure what you could possibly mean by my “disproving” your original point – the issue is not one of mathematical logic – but rather one of connotation, the meaning of terms. It may be the case that both universities and colleges are “capable” of producing educated and trained individuals but, oh dear, the “purpose” of the former is the cultivation of the mind while the “purpose” of the latter is training the individual for employment. Don’t forget to turn off the lights and lock the door as you leave the building.
(6:00PM)
Are you talking to me or just conducting a soliloquy? Anyway, that should be “cite” and not “site.” A “site” is a noun usually referring to a place at which a significant activity took place whereas “to cite” is a verb meaning to make reference to a particular source. A “source” in the present context, of course, refers to a book, a journal article or a previous comment on Bitch but not to a place of origin as in the “source” of the Nile. Language use, Captain, is indeed the mirror of the mind.
: Daniel Abraham (6:03PM)
Yes Daniel, that would be best.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
That’s six times now in one thread (not counting the number of times you’ve brought this topic up on other threads) you’ve said the exact same point, apparently assuming that I haven’t grasped the point you’re attempting to make. Wanna try for seven? Go ahead, it’s fun to troll you into making pointless posts.
“I would, of course, be delighted to entertain “more than one idea at a time” but, sadly, you never provided another one.” – This sentence effectively illustrates your comprehension of, and participation in, the conversation. The point has sailed completely over your head.
“Don’t forget to turn off the lights and lock the door as you leave the building.” – Clearly this task wasn’t neglected when you abdicated your mind… There’s no lights on, and nobody’s home.
ONE OR TWO POINTS
RSVP
: Captain (09/23, 10:03AM)
But how can I have “said exactly the same point” on the one hand and, on the other, I have been trolled “into making pointless posts?” How, in other words, can the same point become pointless? Is there incoherence here?
Then I find that your claim that your point “sailed completely over my head” puzzling. How was this so? Did your point sail completely over my head after my “same point” became “pointless” or did your point encounter my same point, firmly in place, but which might account for your point glancing upward over my head? What point are you making here?
I found your last sentence – wait for it – incoherent. What can the relationship between your not neglecting to turn off the lights and lock the door on the one hand and my “abdicating my mind” on the other possibly be? Are you abdicating your mind?
There’s no need to turn and wave as you trudge down the darkened street.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
“I find that your claim that your point “sailed completely over my head” puzzling.” – That’s not surprising.
“how can I have “said exactly the same point” on the one hand and, on the other, I have been trolled “into making pointless posts?”” – Because I’ve trolled you into repeating the same material over and over. Is the material in your post relevant? Sure. Is there a purpose to you repeating your material? No. I needed no clarification, nor do I think anyone else needed or desired clarification from you on the topic. So the act of you posting on the subject repetitively, in this apparent debate with The Captain, was lacking in purpose; pointless.
“I found your last sentence – wait for it – incoherent.” – I’m genuinely starting to worry about you, montrealman. You seem to encounter incoherency where ever you look. I know that confusion and inability to focus are early signs of dementia… when was the last time you saw a doctor? Honestly, for someone as educated as you apparently are, to exhibit such little comprehension of simple material is worrying, to say the least.
RSVP
: Captain (09/23, 1:09PM)
Well Captain, if you “trolled me into repeating the same material over and over” then it seems to me so that my “act of posting on the subject repeatedly” was clearly your fault. While was making an honest attempt to bring enlightenment to you, you – you naughty fellow – were perversely trolling me. For shame, Captain, for shame.
Well no, Captain, I don’t “encounter incoherency everywhere I look” as you claim but only in your posts – well maybe a few others – so, in addition to shamelessly trolling me you proceed to utter a complete falsehood. For shame Captain, for shame. But I do appreciate your concern for my mental health which, as a point of information, is in robust condition.
Will you be catching a bus when you have finished trudging down that darkened street? No need to wave. Just get on board. Give my regards to the other inmates of the asylum when you get off.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
“…my “act of posting on the subject repeatedly” was clearly your fault” – Yes. I even told you I was trolling you. Of course, you didn’t catch on…. but did we really expect you to? No, no we didn’t.
“For shame, Captain, for shame.” – Has The Captain upset you, montrealman? You seem weepy.
“Will you be catching a bus when you have finished trudging down that darkened street? No need to wave. Just get on board. Give my regards to the other inmates of the asylum when you get off.” – It’s when you begin to regale us with these vivid hallucinations that The Captain seriously considers staging an intervention. Clearly you’re losing your grip on reality. I’m a troll; I’m not presently, or will be in the foreseeable future, going anywhere.
RSVP
: Captain (09/23, 9:35PM)
Well no Captain, the expression “for shame!” is not a sign of anyone becoming weepy or upset but simply to say that you should feel, um, shame, for your neurotic behaviour. The expression is quite common in literate circles to which, of course, you appear to be a stranger.
I believe they have a trollers’ wing in the asylum dedicated to those suffering a severe form of that neurosis. Give my regards to them all when you settle in.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
“the expression “for shame!” is not a sign of anyone becoming weepy” – No, it isn’t… you have a penchant for stating the obvious. You making the exclamation, “for shame!” is a clear indicator of your deteriorating emotional state, that’s what I meant by weepy.
“I believe they have a trollers’ wing in the asylum dedicated to those suffering a severe form of that neurosis. Give my regards to them all when you settle in.” – Well, it appears that you’ve uttered a complete falsehood, montrealman. Noting that you’ve recently called me out for uttering falsehoods, I believe I know the correct response to your latest incoherent statement, “For shame montrealman, for shame!”
Neurosis:
A relatively mild mental illness that is not caused by organic disease, involving symptoms of stress (depression, anxiety, obsessive behavior, hypochondria) but not a radical loss of touch with reality.
Obsession:
An idea or thought that continually preoccupies or intrudes on a person’s mind.
So what you’re really saying is that your obsession with repeating your material, over and over again, on this thread was a form of neurosis? This, coupled with the depression you are now clearly exhibiting, sounds to The Captain like a call for help.
It’s okay montrealman, cheer up!
Help! Help!