<p>guilty xPP</p>
<p>to Malishka and Andrizzle, and anyone else who felt so inclined as to point out the ‘arrogance’ involved in creating / contributing to a thread like this one… or who so insightfully psychoanalyzed the ‘superiority complexes’ evidenced by such contribution:</p>
<p>you children… have you thought even for a second about the hypocrisy to which you were condemned upon submission of those posts?
you’re ridiculous.</p>
<p>to everyone else who created this, had fun with this, saw parallels in this, got a laugh out of this, remembered overcoming the pains of dealing with the examples given in this… </p>
<p>i feel ya.</p>
<p>Before saying that everyone who doesn’t get things the first time around is stupid, remember that you go to a community college.</p>
<p>^ This too (except not everyone goes to community college because they royally f**cked up in high school).</p>
<p>Many go to cc out of high school just to have a second shot at their dream school. Though I did kinda mess up in HS, I got into all CSUs because of my SAT scores and into Pepperdine.</p>
<p>Hey I was stupid in high school, I admit it. I don’t know why you’d think being stupid in high school bothers anyone. I mean that’s like saying “Hey you were all a dumb little baby once, you better remember that.” Where’s the point? Just because we were once stupid we’re ****ed for life?</p>
<p>I’ve already mentioned multiple times like many people here have, that being stupid isn’t something inherent or something genetic, it’s the matter of a heavily conditioned detrimental learning habit. Does that mean it can’t seriously bother me that so many people from multiple age groups have this habit and thus are all incredibly stupid?</p>
<p>kkiiji, no offense (I see your point and agree, with reservation), but you’re making claims fit only to be made by a professional. Chill out. :)</p>
<p>Actually I got into all the CSU’s(at least all the ones I applied too) and a good chunk of the UC’s I just decided that I was really picky and wanted to wait a year for UCSD.</p>
<p>"kkiiji, no offense (I see your point and agree, with reservation), but you’re making claims fit only to be made by a professional. Chill out. "</p>
<p>Well I am practically quoting professionals when I say this stuff, it’s not like I’m basing it solely on personal observations. I’m quite sure the latest studies in neuroscience shows that areas of our brains can be trained/conditioned into intelligence, and of course this includes comprehensive analysis and critical thinking of the bigger concepts. </p>
<p>Just because we’re not professionals doesn’t mean we can’t discuss what they claim. :)</p>
<p>Though the original point still stands, the word stupid by definition means a dull mind, if anyone is offended by that please take it up with Webster’s dictionary.</p>
<p>i challenge anyone who thinks he/she is smarter than I to Jeopardy! Useless trivia knowledge = measure of intelligence for sure.</p>
<p>Rofl yes! In order to ascend to the rank of a genius you MUST know which species of ant forms a mutualist symbiotic relationship with fungus! Also you must know how many gallons of his own urine does a man have to drink before he dies.</p>
<p>I’ll add to the list:</p>
<p>*The morons that argue on collegeconfidential.com *</p>
<p>How about this one:</p>
<p>The morons that think arguing on collegeconfidential.com makes one a moron.</p>
<p>stellar comeback kkiiji, I wish we could all be as clever as you</p>
<p>Doesn’t have to be witty if it gets the point across. In this case the point was a simple “**** you”.</p>
<p>kkiiji…you’re a funny girl</p>
<p>if we knew each other in real life, I’m pretty sure we would be friends</p>
<p>arguing on the internet is like the special olympics.
even if you win, you’re still ■■■■■■■■. </p>
<p>still, don’t knock ■■■■■■■.
it’s racist.</p>
<p>Well the funny thing is, arguing in “real life” is no different. A debate is a debate, no matter where you hold it it’s susceptible to a lack of conclusion. </p>
<p>If you’re going to make fun of arguing on the internet, might as well make fun of being on the internet at all. The only thing lacking is the possibility of physical confrontation, are you suggesting all arguments should be solved through violence? That’s something a moron would say. :)</p>
<p>“Well the funny thing is, arguing in “real life” is no different.”</p>
<p>that’s neither funny nor cogent, and to require an explanation of why it’s neither funny nor cogent would make one a moron. ;)</p>
<p>“If you’re going to make fun of arguing on the internet, might as well make fun of being on the internet at all. The only thing lacking is the possibility of physical confrontation, are you suggesting all arguments should be solved through violence?”</p>
<p>^ it’s fun using fallacies to instigate a defensive response, isn’t it…</p>
<p>It’s funny in the sense that there’s a whole stupid internet fad based on the whole </p>
<p>"arguing on the internet is like the special olympics.
even if you win, you’re still ■■■■■■■■. "</p>
<p>thing, even though there’s little distinction between arguing on the internet and arguing in real life, especially regarding civilized debates. I also have no idea what fallacy you’re talking about, I wasn’t even attempting to prove anything, it was more of a question on what exactly makes arguing on the internet so different. For example, does the difference rest on the lack of moronic physical confrontation?</p>
<p>Perhaps you need to retake your entry level logic course.</p>