Conquer Club

Posted: **Tue Oct 02, 2012 4:33 am**

BigBallinStalin wrote:How about having a poll on whether or not your joke was funny?

Maybe the winner of the poll can get a years supply of condoms, which in your case, would be four.

I dont particularly care whether you find that funny or not.

Posted: **Tue Oct 02, 2012 4:53 am**

BigBallinStalin wrote:
fadedpsychosis wrote:
Symmetry wrote:I doubt you've ever been a lover of wisdom, BBS, so the appeal to philosophy seems redundant. If you want a poll, make one. If you want to say that you don't find a pun funny, then I think you've already done that.

The rest is just sound and fury.

I admit it... I loled

It was okay, but I'll admit that it was better than his Romneyshambles joke. I liked the 'sound and fury' part so much that I had to use it!

I didn't get the redundant part, so maybe you could explain it for me:

. If I'm not a lover of wisdom, then how is appealing to philosophy redundant? Rather, the appeal would be baseless (i.e. based on nothing cuz I'm not a lover of wisdom/philosopher). If I was a lover of wisdom, then appealing to philosophy may seem redundant. I think Sym may have gone wrong in his logic on this one.

in my view he's saying that you're not a philosopher, you're a sophist. as far as the redundancy goes: from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/redundant
1. characterized by verbosity or unnecessary repetition in expressing ideas; prolix: a redundant style.
you do make constant references to philosophy, whether direct or indirect. that in itself could be considered a redundancy, though I think the term ironic would be more appropriate considering he's essentially accusing you of sophistry rather than philosophy

Conquer Club

For our American cousins- the origin of Romneyshambles

Re: For our American cousins- the origin of Romneyshambles

Re: For our American cousins- the origin of Romneyshambles