• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Aura Testing

Pragmatist said:
You have not merely mentioned the existence of critiques but have specifically stated that the critiques were "very good". You have been asked on what basis you judge them to be "very good". That is a reasonable question. Why won't you answer it?
Click to expand...

Based on my opinion.

This was already mentioned.
 
When I read that someone says a critique is "very good" and I fail to see anything good about it, then I'm curious about what someone finds good about it.
It's part of the process we go through all the time in an attempt to assess other people's reasoning processses, and ultimately. whether it's worth our time to read their posts.
 
Jeff Corey said:
When I read that someone says a critique is "very good" and I fail to see anything good about it, then I'm curious about what someone finds good about it.
Click to expand...

I'm curious why, when someone states, several times, that they decline to elaborate on their opinion, why people keep insisting on it? (and basically insist much stronger).

Very curious.
 
T'ai Chi said:
I'm curious why, when someone states, several times, that they decline to elaborate on their opinion, why people keep insisting on it? (and basically insist much stronger).

Very curious.
Click to expand...
Well, I didn't actually insist. And if you say I did, I'll contact a certain Viking I know who will insist on "evidence".
 
T'ai Chi said:
I'm curious why, when someone states, several times, that they decline to elaborate on their opinion, why people keep insisting on it? (and basically insist much stronger).

Very curious.
Click to expand...
Perhaps because typically people are willing to stand behind their opinions. Usually, when asked to elaborate...they do so. I'm curious why you do not. I can think of several reasons, but of course I have no way of knowing without your input.

Too bad, really; there is a possibility that you are right about it and I am wrong. I could learn something. But frankly, the fact that I am willing to discuss the critiques and you are not does not give me much hope for that one...
 
I think I was saying something similar. Or a simile.
How is a simile like a smilie?
 
T'ai Chi said:
When I cite the existence of critiques, I don't expect to be asked to demonstrate the critiques which are not mine.
Click to expand...
You said, as others have pointed out, that the critiques are 'very good'.

Yet you flee screaming when anyone attempts to ask you anything about the critiques. Why?
 
Mercutio said:
Usually, when asked to elaborate...they do so.
Click to expand...

But when they don't, and decline to, repeatedly, it doesn't seem productive to keep spinning ones' wheels. It certainly isn't productive for me to keep repeating this.

I'm curious why you do not.
Click to expand...

As stated, I'd rather have people read the critiques in their original form in the literature. I'm not sure why I'd need to explain the importance of seeking the original source and further.
 
PixyMisa said:
Yet you flee screaming
Click to expand...

Zzz.

My summary of the critique simply isn't relevant to the need to read the actual critiques in their original source.

You seem to be confusing the messenger with the message somewhat.
 
T'ai Chi said:
My summary of the critique simply isn't relevant to the need to read the actual critiques in their original source.
Click to expand...
Well, it would be if you were to back it up. Since you are unwilling to say anything concrete about the critiques at all, I see no reason to read them.

Why are you so desperately averse to making a statement? Have you actually read the articles?
 
T'ai Chi said:
As stated, I'd rather have people read the critiques in their original form in the literature. I'm not sure why I'd need to explain the importance of seeking the original source and further.
Click to expand...
And if I already have read the original critiques? And am now wishing to discuss them with you? Will you explain why you think they are "very good"?

I am not trying to hold you responsible for the critique itself. I am curious as to why you wish to avoid responsibility for your "very good".
 
Do you stand by your claim that the critiques are "very good"? Or will you distance yourself even from that?

If you withdraw even from that, then there is no reason for me to continue to ask you about that evaluation. If it is still on the table, then so is my request that you discuss it with me.
 
T'ai Chi said:
When I make extraordinary claims, I expect to be asked to demonstrate them.

When I cite the existence of critiques, I don't expect to be asked to demonstrate the critiques which are not mine.
Click to expand...

What extraordinary claims have you made here, or on other forums?
 
And thus, this thread has deteriorated from original comments about Rosa's experiment to a person refusing to provide evidence, to a dead thread...

(And they lived happily ever after. The end.)
 
T'ai Chi said:
Zzz.

My summary of the critique simply isn't relevant to the need to read the actual critiques in their original source.

You seem to be confusing the messenger with the message somewhat.
Click to expand...

Ah, so now it's a summary?

The message was - the critiques are "very good". How is it confusing the message with the messenger to ask why or on what basis the messenger says that?
 
TimmyBerry said:
And thus, this thread has deteriorated from original comments about Rosa's experiment to a person refusing to provide evidence, to a dead thread...

(And they lived happily ever after. The end.)
Click to expand...

This thread isn't dead, it's pining for the fjords! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom