Walker wrote: ↑Thu Sep 13, 2018 3:06 pm
I was going to try out the most important question but I figured just saying “How?” to people could be misinterpreted in this PC climate and someone might think I’m imitating a TV native American aboriginal, a mouthful that may, or may not, be the proper PC label these days.
So I asked “How are you?”
Like you, everyone said fine, and some asked me how I am.
And of course I said I’m fine, too.
The question doesn’t seem very important.
Do you think I'm using the question the wrong way?
Ah, I see. You are asking "How is it that I am (i.e. have come to be)", correct?
So, very honestly, I am not interested in such a question, myself. All I know is that I am here. In that way, I belong and I am a part of what is.
Walker wrote: ↑Thu Sep 13, 2018 3:06 pmyou're impolite if you're referencing me in the third person what with me being here and all
So, Walker, you're playing your stupid head games (that somehow appeal to you), and being an ass (which you can't seem to help), so this discussion has devolved into nonsense within your playpen, which I have no interest in.
Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Sep 13, 2018 3:24 pm
So, Walker, you're playing your stupid head games (that somehow appeal to you), and being an ass (which you can't seem to help), so this discussion has devolved into nonsense within your playpen, which I have no interest in.
I'm trying to see if there's more than nonsense to the mirror.
Walker wrote: ↑Thu Sep 13, 2018 3:26 pm
I'm trying to see if there's more than nonsense to the mirror.
You pre-suppose you can tell non-sense from truth.
How do you foresee yourself escaping Dunning-Kruger if I were in fact more knowledgeable than you?
Straight honest dialogue is all that's required.
You're missing it with your inspector assumption and your lack of comprehension as displayed via feedback of content, and that's the objective crack in your mirror, to match the other one, where you're been talking out of.
(Pretty good if I do say so. Can you mirror that?)
Walker wrote: ↑Thu Sep 13, 2018 3:33 pm
You're missing it with your inspector assumption and your lack of comprehension as displayed via feedback of content, and that's the objective crack in your mirror, to match the other one, where you're been talking out of. (Pretty good one. What have you got?)
To match (recalibrate?) myself to the other one I first need to calculate the knowledge-differential. Then I need to adopt your language (which means translate in my head). Then I need to figure out your criteria for success/failure.
Without knowing what your goal is I can't pass judgments of "right" or "wrong". I only know "better" or "worse".
And so - that is why insist on such transparency. Otherwise it is futile babble.