Random
Source Code
Random
So much of our current social and political discourse is based on proving the other wrong i.e. winning the argument. We don't demonstrate enough empathy to understand where the "other" is coming from and the merits of their point. A black and white world is a construct of our own imagination and our desire to imprint our views on to others. It ignores the beauty that the synthesis or fusion of diverse ideas enables.
John had made a life out of proving people wrong. He took pride in being able to argue against any position and win. He was a talk show host. One night when he was grilling a guest who was making a point around having improved gun controls in place. John, barely let she finish her sentences, was adversarial and was not listening. At the end of the segment the guest said; "John, do you want to win the argument, or make a difference".
A future Nobel-prize winning, best selling book. With over 10 authors, including Matsuda, Richard, Lucy, Seymour, Alli, and TRK, this crazy group of debators takes on the task of answering such unanswerable questions as: "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?""Why did that chicken cross the road in the first place?", and "What is the plural of butter?" This crazy group of intelligent beings go head to head in this back and forth book of debates. The debators combine fact, personal opinion, and senseless rambling to prove their cases. This book WILL be published by 2011. And it WILL become a best-seller by 2013. People will love this book, and this is a first hand-sneak preview of what the future holds. This will be talked about on Oprah. They will make a movie out of it. Answers to Unanswerable Questions Through Countless Arguments and Stupid Statements by Stupid People is the product of evolution/creation debates in Lab Biology, other stupid arguments in Geometry, and exreme boredom.
Oprah Winfrey: Ok, folks, now I would like to welcome the main authors of the best-selling book Answers to Unanswerable Questions Through Countless Arguments and Stupid Statements by Stupid People: Mike, Randy, and JJ!!!
Crowd: Wooooo!!!
30👍 1👎
Argumental Crossfire is a word used to describe a person (he/she) caught in the crossfire of a two-way argument.
The victim is constantly neutral but is also being pulled by the two sides, in other words, your playing for both sides.
Today, I was caught in an Argumental Crossfire with my two brothers who want me to support both of them.
Lewd/Argument is a extremely swaggy legend. He is also extremely cute and extra swag.
WOW! Lewd/Argument is such a swag demon!! I wish i was like him.
The cosmological argument is the notion that God created the universe and that there is always a cause and an effect. The three main parts to the cosmological argument is the uncaused cause, unmoved mover and possibility and necessity/possibility and contingency. There are 5 ways in Aquinas's version of the cosmological argument, however I'm only discussing the 3 that I stated as they are the main parts of the argument as urban dictionary only let's me type a limited quantity of characters.
Uncaused cause (4 premises and a conclusion)
• Everything has a cause
•Every cause has a cause
• This cannot go back forever
•Therefore there must be an uncaused cause which doesn't have a cause.
•The uncaused cause is what we understand as God
Unmoved mover (2 premises and a conclusion)
•Everything that has been moved by something and that mover has been moved by something else.
•This chain cannot go back forever or movement would not have started in the first place.
•Therefore there must be an unmoved mover which isn't itself moved. This unmoved mover must be God
Possibility and necessity/possibility and contingency:
This one is simple. A contingent being is a being which needs a cause and a necessary being is the opposite meaning a being doesn't need a cause. It is believed that God is the necessary being who created the world.
Now that you know the fundamentals of the cosmological argument, read up the teleological argument (the argument from design)
An argument in which a person with an absurdly high IQ taunts another person, whose IQ is slightly (but significantly) lower, until the latter person cracks and storms out in a fit of anger (usually takes all of 30 seconds)
Fiona: Man, did you see Jono storm out of here before?
Hannah: Yeah, don't worry about that, we just had a Jono Argument
"nice argument. unfortunately, fill in the blank"
if you're in the middle of a disagreement online, sending a message in this format will immediately ruin the recipient's argument, and most likely their life. use only as a last resort. examples below
nice argument. unfortunately, 192.168.1.45
nice argument. unfortunately, your mother is obese
nice argument. unfortunately, I have a grenade launcher
nice argument. unfortunately, you probably eat at Burger King for lunch every day