rationalskepticism.org

Thommo wrote:

jamest wrote:

Thommo wrote:So, you know how there are some posters who just make threads based on whatever random shit pops into their head in the course of a day and present it as profound insight or philosophy?

I was wondering today about why men don't wear makeup and women do. I remember hearing some turgid rant about how women who wear makeup are "cheating" or "advertising by deception" or some nonsense. But then I wondered, if it's really nonsense why am I so antipathetic about the very idea of doing it myself?

So, yeah. Answers on a postcard, robes and sandals etc. Frozen badgers need not apply.

You're akin to a woman I once loved and no longer care about, since you're not worthy. You're intelligent, of course, but that's not what I'm talking about.

I still care about philosophy/God of course, though I've now reached a stage in my life where I demand sincerity. I put you in the same category as GrahamH. Enough said.

What category is that? Humans who post on Ratskep?

The answer to this burning question seems like a key step forward for jamest-ism.

By the way, I know you're never going to listen to my requests that you post something constructive and abide by the FUA, but I have to say that I *really* don't understand why you always answer with these personal comments about "respect" or "intelligence". I could not have made it more plain over the years that I could not care less about your (or anyone else's) opinion of how intelligent I seem.

If I want to know how intelligent I am, I'll sit an IQ test again, cheers. And if there are reasons I don't talk about my (or anyone else's) measured intelligence, it's because (a) It's got nothing to do with what a particular post or topic says; (b) It's nobody's business anyway and (c) People who bang on about how intelligent they are are fucking tossers.