Quote from Error 404:
Yeah, well Mav, you know that you cannot debate this issue rationally with GG.
I think GG is so carried away with his anti-religion campaign as to be questionable sane .....
Sort of like you with GWB
Both of you are bright guys. Both of you have level headed observations and opinions that you express here on ET. But not regarding your pet issues.
So while you and GG differ in your opinions here, the two of you really should have a lot of empathy for one another.
You both exhibit the exact same behavior. Just on different topics.
âThe definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.â
~ Albert Einstein
Will you, Mav, convince any of the "liberals" here to admire GWB?
Will GG convince any practicing Christians here to turn to atheism?
How's the weather in Chicago today? I heard it was pretty nice and had warmed up to about 40 degrees. It was 83 here today. I washed my car. Said no prayers, and voted for no one.
A fine Sunday afternoon. Hope yours was as well!!!
And don't take the insanity comment as an insult. It applies to us all equally. If ART or myself think we can get YOU to see what is so clear to us, then we are guilty of the same behavior. And equally "insane". Part of being an ET "netizen" I suppose. Welcome to the on-line Cuckoo's Nest.
Peace,
RS
RS,
I think you are reading too much into some of my posts. For one, I am not really trying to convince anyone of anything. someone once said, in all the years of civilization, an argument has never been won. I believe this to be true.
I like to poke fun of a lot of guys on ET just because its fun. I can tell a lot of people get rattled by some of the things I say and it's fun to watch them jump back at me and get upset. ahhh, one of the guilty pleasures of an anonymous internet message board.
You know the funny thing is, and I have said this a few times, but I think people think I am joking when I say this, I am not the right wing extremist people like to think I am, although I have to admit it's fun to play that role on here because I know it drives guys like ART crazy. Yes, I am a republican, and I would like to think a fairly moderate one. I am liberal on some issues believe it or not and yes, I find many many faults with GWB.
However, having said all that, the nature of message boards is for people to be extreme. Such as people claiming they took 40 pts out of the NQ's on Friday, or someone claiming they are daytrading TASR for easy gains every day, or that they have verifiable proof that there is no God, whatever. It's all the same. I think it's entertaining for people.
But I also think in terms of politics, that people tend to take the extremes on here because its more fun to argue the extremes then the middle of the road. So when ART starts pushing his socialist America routine, it forces me to go way off to the right as well.
If you want to go back to game theory, its the same logic. When two people are arguing, there is an optimal outcome for both sides. Obviously both sides want to win the argument completely but this can't happen. Let me show you why. Say we assign a value of 0 to 10 based on one's political views with 0 being the far left and and 10 being the far right. The optimal strategy for both parties is to argue the extreme, say me being the 10 and ART being the 0, that way, the outcome ends up being in the middle for a 5 with both of us eventually conceding some points to the other. However, lets say I give in and try to be nice and argue a 5 trying to be a moderate. Now ART could also argue a 5 but that is not his optimal choice, his best choice is still to argue 0, that way he wins and the result is 2.5. Same scenario if ART tried to be nice and give a moderate argument and does a 5, then for me, the optimal response is still to argue a 10, that way I win with a 7.5.
So what you have here, if both players make the right moves, both should argue the extremes because they have to assume their opponent will do what is best for them. That is why I always argue a 10 and ART always argues a 0. It's not that I really feel that a 10 is where my real argument should be, it's just that that is the best strategy for me. Is this making any sense?
Truth is, if we are discussing this at a bar over drinks, you would find me to be a lot more moderate then you would imagine. But like I said, don't expect me to do that on here. LOL.
BTW, RS, what subject do you teach?