Upload
Login or register

captainfuckitall

Last status update:
-
Date Signed Up:4/12/2010
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#703
Highest Content Rank:#8779
Highest Comment Rank:#49
Content Thumbs: 42 total,  99 ,  57
Comment Thumbs: 78987 total,  96986 ,  17999
Content Level Progress: 77.96% (46/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 93.8% (938/1000)
Level 367 Comments: FJ Noble → Level 368 Comments: FJ Noble
Subscribers:22
Content Views:10929
Total Comments Made:20829
FJ Points:40110

latest user's comments

#16 - You guys realize this is bait, right? "Hide all&…  [+] (2 new replies) 06/27/2016 on Saturday noon in McKinney +1
User avatar
#52 - bigfootluke (06/28/2016) [-]
We know. I personally believe that even though other know, they enjoy taking the bait and arguing more then simply ignoring it. For some of the more entertaining comments are the arguments sprung from bait. It's a vicious cycle and one cannot live wit out the other. And yet we crave it. So yes. We know it's bait. Yet we take it anyway. For the thrill of the hunt.


Or I could just be talking out of my ass
User avatar
#17 - keemingitup (06/27/2016) [-]
Shh. Don't tell them that.
#38 - How so?  [+] (13 new replies) 06/27/2016 on marriage 0
#42 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Well you need some 'data' or experience to form an opinion right? So its pretty safe to say that experience is a relevant factor in what your opinion is.
User avatar
#43 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Then surely you could not argue that the Holocaust was bad or even unpleasant, considering you have never experienced one.
#44 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Well its safe to say I can't comprehend a Holocaust survivors perspective on the Holocaust
User avatar
#46 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Of course you can't, but that doesn't mean you can't have an opinion on it.

You don't HAVE to get shot in the face to recognize that getting shot in the face probably really hurts and is generally to be avoided.

You don't HAVE to go through 15 years of heroin addiction to understand that trying heroin in the first place isn't worth it.

Even SAYING that a holocaust survivor would be the world authority ON the holocaust is folly, since the scope of human perception for any single experience is wildly small.

Who do you think has a better chance of winning a race, someone who's done the same lap a hundred times and has tripped over every single hurdle, or someone who has never done that lap and understands perfectly what the former racer is doing wrong and exactly what he himself must do in order to win?

Both is optimal, of course, but it's hardly true that experience trumps observation, because wisdom isn't about experience, it's about perception. It's about knowing why people lose the race and what it must take to win it.
#63 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
I'm saying your opinion changes with experience - we seem to agree on that.
#45 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
And if I did experience a holocaust now I'm sure my understanding of suffering would evolve substantially lol
User avatar
#47 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
That's contradictory, since even as a Holocaust survivor, you wouldn't understand the same suffering a hanged man went through until you experienced it, by your previous statements.
#48 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
I don't see the contradiction...
User avatar
#49 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
"It's safe to say I can't comprehend a Holocaust survivors perspective on the Holocaust"
"And if I did experience the holocaust I'm sure my understanding of suffering would evolve substantially"

Either you can comprehend something without experiencing it or you cannot. That is, either you can understand something without direct experience in the matter, OR you must experience every individual trial in order to properly sympathize with those who have gone through it already.

Your understanding of suffering cannot 'evolve' if you cannot understand the suffering of anyone who's trials you haven't gone through, you see?
#53 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
"I have been in love, and am, my opinion on the topic above hasn't changed, and indeed, has only been refined. Maybe another time it will change, but that is unlikely as there is no cognitive dissonance going on with me (that I know of) and find no reason for my views to be without merit."

You admit your opinion could change due to experience... I think we agree bro
User avatar
#56 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
I wasn't trying to disagree, I was trying to say that putting it all down to whether I experienced it or not, or the depth of my experiences, is faulty.

YOU are saying that the depth of my experience is important because it is a defining factor in my beliefs and principles.

I am saying that the depth of my experiences is irrelevant, since you do not have to directly experience something at all in order to have a well informed or conscious opinion on it.

In another way: You are arguing that my desire to help starving African children is limited in direct correlation to the rate in which I myself have starved, while I am arguing that whether I was starved to bones or fat my entire life, it holds absolutely no sway over my levels of compassion or desire or ideals, as they could just as easily relate back to observations or similar experiences. You see?
#51 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
You can understand something without experiencing it, I agree. But this understanding will change with actual experience.
User avatar
#52 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Of course it would, but then it just comes down to your opinion being refined rather than changed.

I have been in love, and am, my opinion on the topic above hasn't changed, and indeed, has only been refined. Maybe another time it will change, but that is unlikely as there is no cognitive dissonance going on with me (that I know of) and find no reason for my views to be without merit.
#34 - 1. I do not believe he's wrong out of life experience, but onl…  [+] (17 new replies) 06/27/2016 on marriage -2
#40 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
but anyway, the point is you opinion about relationships is likely to change with experience. So really experience is quite relevant in this case
User avatar
#41 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
In that case, won't his too?

I'm not arguing my opinion won't change, I'm arguing that him ASSUMING I ONLY disagree with him BECAUSE I have not had similar experiences only limits him, and will do so in every interaction.

He genuinely believed I held my opinion because I haven't had experiences that he's had, the thought that my opinions were developed WITH experience or observation never crossed his mind, but only that they were formed from a lack OF them. It is this that I am criticizing and calling folly
#37 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Nope - not all things can be learned by reason. Many are completely irrational
User avatar
#38 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
How so?
#42 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Well you need some 'data' or experience to form an opinion right? So its pretty safe to say that experience is a relevant factor in what your opinion is.
User avatar
#43 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Then surely you could not argue that the Holocaust was bad or even unpleasant, considering you have never experienced one.
#44 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Well its safe to say I can't comprehend a Holocaust survivors perspective on the Holocaust
User avatar
#46 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Of course you can't, but that doesn't mean you can't have an opinion on it.

You don't HAVE to get shot in the face to recognize that getting shot in the face probably really hurts and is generally to be avoided.

You don't HAVE to go through 15 years of heroin addiction to understand that trying heroin in the first place isn't worth it.

Even SAYING that a holocaust survivor would be the world authority ON the holocaust is folly, since the scope of human perception for any single experience is wildly small.

Who do you think has a better chance of winning a race, someone who's done the same lap a hundred times and has tripped over every single hurdle, or someone who has never done that lap and understands perfectly what the former racer is doing wrong and exactly what he himself must do in order to win?

Both is optimal, of course, but it's hardly true that experience trumps observation, because wisdom isn't about experience, it's about perception. It's about knowing why people lose the race and what it must take to win it.
#63 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
I'm saying your opinion changes with experience - we seem to agree on that.
#45 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
And if I did experience a holocaust now I'm sure my understanding of suffering would evolve substantially lol
User avatar
#47 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
That's contradictory, since even as a Holocaust survivor, you wouldn't understand the same suffering a hanged man went through until you experienced it, by your previous statements.
#48 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
I don't see the contradiction...
User avatar
#49 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
"It's safe to say I can't comprehend a Holocaust survivors perspective on the Holocaust"
"And if I did experience the holocaust I'm sure my understanding of suffering would evolve substantially"

Either you can comprehend something without experiencing it or you cannot. That is, either you can understand something without direct experience in the matter, OR you must experience every individual trial in order to properly sympathize with those who have gone through it already.

Your understanding of suffering cannot 'evolve' if you cannot understand the suffering of anyone who's trials you haven't gone through, you see?
#53 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
"I have been in love, and am, my opinion on the topic above hasn't changed, and indeed, has only been refined. Maybe another time it will change, but that is unlikely as there is no cognitive dissonance going on with me (that I know of) and find no reason for my views to be without merit."

You admit your opinion could change due to experience... I think we agree bro
User avatar
#56 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
I wasn't trying to disagree, I was trying to say that putting it all down to whether I experienced it or not, or the depth of my experiences, is faulty.

YOU are saying that the depth of my experience is important because it is a defining factor in my beliefs and principles.

I am saying that the depth of my experiences is irrelevant, since you do not have to directly experience something at all in order to have a well informed or conscious opinion on it.

In another way: You are arguing that my desire to help starving African children is limited in direct correlation to the rate in which I myself have starved, while I am arguing that whether I was starved to bones or fat my entire life, it holds absolutely no sway over my levels of compassion or desire or ideals, as they could just as easily relate back to observations or similar experiences. You see?
#51 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
You can understand something without experiencing it, I agree. But this understanding will change with actual experience.
User avatar
#52 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Of course it would, but then it just comes down to your opinion being refined rather than changed.

I have been in love, and am, my opinion on the topic above hasn't changed, and indeed, has only been refined. Maybe another time it will change, but that is unlikely as there is no cognitive dissonance going on with me (that I know of) and find no reason for my views to be without merit.
#9 - So, WHY do you want to be banned?  [+] (1 new reply) 06/27/2016 on Fillin' Her Up +1
User avatar
#10 - vmjsenpai (06/27/2016) [-]
At first I did it because the last time I got banned, I didn't go on FJ for those two days.
Thought it might help for me since I spend way too much time here rather than reading a good VN I put on hold.
But now I'm freakin' nervous about when it's gonna strike.
/channel/monster-girls/Greenteaneko/TTqjLGG/39#39
#31 - Because it is. Once you assume someone doesn't understand or c…  [+] (19 new replies) 06/27/2016 on marriage -4
#32 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
"I fall into this trap too"

yes.. you fall hard
User avatar
#34 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
1. I do not believe he's wrong out of life experience, but only on a matter of introspection. I'm not criticizing his opinions on relationships, only his belief that experience is the defining point of understanding (Vs. observation, study, or flat out different experiences. Ergo, you don't need to be whipped with barbed wire to understand that it must really suck)

2. I don't believe he's wrong at all, I fully understand there are plenty of people out there who would rather please their lovers than maintain their pride; that just doesn't change my opinion or belief that it eventually self-destructs the relationship itself.

3. I don't believe I cannot learn from him, he may very well know a thousand things I don't, but right now we're just discussing exactly WHY it is only ever limiting to believe that those who disagree with you 'must' be lacking certain life experiences, otherwise they wouldn't. "If X happened to you, you'd follow Y belief", "If you have been through what I have, you'd understand where I'm coming from", "You don't get to have an opinion on A until you have gone through B". Even IF all of these statements were TRUE, it would STILL be limiting because it absolutely crushes any attempt at open discourse or communication, because the speaker does not have to properly justify their beliefs, and the listener cannot retort because 'they just don't get it' and thus are not worth listening to.

Do you understand now?
#40 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
but anyway, the point is you opinion about relationships is likely to change with experience. So really experience is quite relevant in this case
User avatar
#41 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
In that case, won't his too?

I'm not arguing my opinion won't change, I'm arguing that him ASSUMING I ONLY disagree with him BECAUSE I have not had similar experiences only limits him, and will do so in every interaction.

He genuinely believed I held my opinion because I haven't had experiences that he's had, the thought that my opinions were developed WITH experience or observation never crossed his mind, but only that they were formed from a lack OF them. It is this that I am criticizing and calling folly
#37 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Nope - not all things can be learned by reason. Many are completely irrational
User avatar
#38 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
How so?
#42 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Well you need some 'data' or experience to form an opinion right? So its pretty safe to say that experience is a relevant factor in what your opinion is.
User avatar
#43 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Then surely you could not argue that the Holocaust was bad or even unpleasant, considering you have never experienced one.
#44 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Well its safe to say I can't comprehend a Holocaust survivors perspective on the Holocaust
User avatar
#46 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Of course you can't, but that doesn't mean you can't have an opinion on it.

You don't HAVE to get shot in the face to recognize that getting shot in the face probably really hurts and is generally to be avoided.

You don't HAVE to go through 15 years of heroin addiction to understand that trying heroin in the first place isn't worth it.

Even SAYING that a holocaust survivor would be the world authority ON the holocaust is folly, since the scope of human perception for any single experience is wildly small.

Who do you think has a better chance of winning a race, someone who's done the same lap a hundred times and has tripped over every single hurdle, or someone who has never done that lap and understands perfectly what the former racer is doing wrong and exactly what he himself must do in order to win?

Both is optimal, of course, but it's hardly true that experience trumps observation, because wisdom isn't about experience, it's about perception. It's about knowing why people lose the race and what it must take to win it.
#63 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
I'm saying your opinion changes with experience - we seem to agree on that.
#45 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
And if I did experience a holocaust now I'm sure my understanding of suffering would evolve substantially lol
User avatar
#47 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
That's contradictory, since even as a Holocaust survivor, you wouldn't understand the same suffering a hanged man went through until you experienced it, by your previous statements.
#48 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
I don't see the contradiction...
User avatar
#49 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
"It's safe to say I can't comprehend a Holocaust survivors perspective on the Holocaust"
"And if I did experience the holocaust I'm sure my understanding of suffering would evolve substantially"

Either you can comprehend something without experiencing it or you cannot. That is, either you can understand something without direct experience in the matter, OR you must experience every individual trial in order to properly sympathize with those who have gone through it already.

Your understanding of suffering cannot 'evolve' if you cannot understand the suffering of anyone who's trials you haven't gone through, you see?
#53 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
"I have been in love, and am, my opinion on the topic above hasn't changed, and indeed, has only been refined. Maybe another time it will change, but that is unlikely as there is no cognitive dissonance going on with me (that I know of) and find no reason for my views to be without merit."

You admit your opinion could change due to experience... I think we agree bro
User avatar
#56 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
I wasn't trying to disagree, I was trying to say that putting it all down to whether I experienced it or not, or the depth of my experiences, is faulty.

YOU are saying that the depth of my experience is important because it is a defining factor in my beliefs and principles.

I am saying that the depth of my experiences is irrelevant, since you do not have to directly experience something at all in order to have a well informed or conscious opinion on it.

In another way: You are arguing that my desire to help starving African children is limited in direct correlation to the rate in which I myself have starved, while I am arguing that whether I was starved to bones or fat my entire life, it holds absolutely no sway over my levels of compassion or desire or ideals, as they could just as easily relate back to observations or similar experiences. You see?
#51 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
You can understand something without experiencing it, I agree. But this understanding will change with actual experience.
User avatar
#52 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Of course it would, but then it just comes down to your opinion being refined rather than changed.

I have been in love, and am, my opinion on the topic above hasn't changed, and indeed, has only been refined. Maybe another time it will change, but that is unlikely as there is no cognitive dissonance going on with me (that I know of) and find no reason for my views to be without merit.
#24 - I already am, thank you. Assuming that those who disa…  [+] (21 new replies) 06/27/2016 on marriage -2
#30 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
"Assuming that those who disagree with you just lack experience or understanding is folly"

"you were an idiot"

wat
User avatar
#31 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Because it is. Once you assume someone doesn't understand or comprehend, and all that's needed is life experience before they agree with you, the conversation is done, the bridge of communication is burned.

When people assume they themselves are right, ESPECIALLY due to personal experience that they believe others lack, they tend to completely close off from any type of learning or comprehension that their rival can give them; after-all, who wants to even attempt to learn from someone they believe is wrong?

I fall into this trap too, of course I do, everyone does, the point is that we must try to be conscious of it and aware that just because we are 'right' doesn't mean we cannot learn, and no quantity of 'rightness' should ever prevent learning.
#32 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
"I fall into this trap too"

yes.. you fall hard
User avatar
#34 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
1. I do not believe he's wrong out of life experience, but only on a matter of introspection. I'm not criticizing his opinions on relationships, only his belief that experience is the defining point of understanding (Vs. observation, study, or flat out different experiences. Ergo, you don't need to be whipped with barbed wire to understand that it must really suck)

2. I don't believe he's wrong at all, I fully understand there are plenty of people out there who would rather please their lovers than maintain their pride; that just doesn't change my opinion or belief that it eventually self-destructs the relationship itself.

3. I don't believe I cannot learn from him, he may very well know a thousand things I don't, but right now we're just discussing exactly WHY it is only ever limiting to believe that those who disagree with you 'must' be lacking certain life experiences, otherwise they wouldn't. "If X happened to you, you'd follow Y belief", "If you have been through what I have, you'd understand where I'm coming from", "You don't get to have an opinion on A until you have gone through B". Even IF all of these statements were TRUE, it would STILL be limiting because it absolutely crushes any attempt at open discourse or communication, because the speaker does not have to properly justify their beliefs, and the listener cannot retort because 'they just don't get it' and thus are not worth listening to.

Do you understand now?
#40 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
but anyway, the point is you opinion about relationships is likely to change with experience. So really experience is quite relevant in this case
User avatar
#41 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
In that case, won't his too?

I'm not arguing my opinion won't change, I'm arguing that him ASSUMING I ONLY disagree with him BECAUSE I have not had similar experiences only limits him, and will do so in every interaction.

He genuinely believed I held my opinion because I haven't had experiences that he's had, the thought that my opinions were developed WITH experience or observation never crossed his mind, but only that they were formed from a lack OF them. It is this that I am criticizing and calling folly
#37 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Nope - not all things can be learned by reason. Many are completely irrational
User avatar
#38 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
How so?
#42 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Well you need some 'data' or experience to form an opinion right? So its pretty safe to say that experience is a relevant factor in what your opinion is.
User avatar
#43 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Then surely you could not argue that the Holocaust was bad or even unpleasant, considering you have never experienced one.
#44 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Well its safe to say I can't comprehend a Holocaust survivors perspective on the Holocaust
User avatar
#46 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Of course you can't, but that doesn't mean you can't have an opinion on it.

You don't HAVE to get shot in the face to recognize that getting shot in the face probably really hurts and is generally to be avoided.

You don't HAVE to go through 15 years of heroin addiction to understand that trying heroin in the first place isn't worth it.

Even SAYING that a holocaust survivor would be the world authority ON the holocaust is folly, since the scope of human perception for any single experience is wildly small.

Who do you think has a better chance of winning a race, someone who's done the same lap a hundred times and has tripped over every single hurdle, or someone who has never done that lap and understands perfectly what the former racer is doing wrong and exactly what he himself must do in order to win?

Both is optimal, of course, but it's hardly true that experience trumps observation, because wisdom isn't about experience, it's about perception. It's about knowing why people lose the race and what it must take to win it.
#63 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
I'm saying your opinion changes with experience - we seem to agree on that.
#45 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
And if I did experience a holocaust now I'm sure my understanding of suffering would evolve substantially lol
User avatar
#47 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
That's contradictory, since even as a Holocaust survivor, you wouldn't understand the same suffering a hanged man went through until you experienced it, by your previous statements.
#48 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
I don't see the contradiction...
User avatar
#49 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
"It's safe to say I can't comprehend a Holocaust survivors perspective on the Holocaust"
"And if I did experience the holocaust I'm sure my understanding of suffering would evolve substantially"

Either you can comprehend something without experiencing it or you cannot. That is, either you can understand something without direct experience in the matter, OR you must experience every individual trial in order to properly sympathize with those who have gone through it already.

Your understanding of suffering cannot 'evolve' if you cannot understand the suffering of anyone who's trials you haven't gone through, you see?
#53 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
"I have been in love, and am, my opinion on the topic above hasn't changed, and indeed, has only been refined. Maybe another time it will change, but that is unlikely as there is no cognitive dissonance going on with me (that I know of) and find no reason for my views to be without merit."

You admit your opinion could change due to experience... I think we agree bro
User avatar
#56 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
I wasn't trying to disagree, I was trying to say that putting it all down to whether I experienced it or not, or the depth of my experiences, is faulty.

YOU are saying that the depth of my experience is important because it is a defining factor in my beliefs and principles.

I am saying that the depth of my experiences is irrelevant, since you do not have to directly experience something at all in order to have a well informed or conscious opinion on it.

In another way: You are arguing that my desire to help starving African children is limited in direct correlation to the rate in which I myself have starved, while I am arguing that whether I was starved to bones or fat my entire life, it holds absolutely no sway over my levels of compassion or desire or ideals, as they could just as easily relate back to observations or similar experiences. You see?
#51 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
You can understand something without experiencing it, I agree. But this understanding will change with actual experience.
User avatar
#52 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Of course it would, but then it just comes down to your opinion being refined rather than changed.

I have been in love, and am, my opinion on the topic above hasn't changed, and indeed, has only been refined. Maybe another time it will change, but that is unlikely as there is no cognitive dissonance going on with me (that I know of) and find no reason for my views to be without merit.
#13 - This must truly be some type of full-circle joke. For ****** s…  [+] (47 new replies) 06/27/2016 on """"anti""""-fascists in a... +89
User avatar
#200 - badgoodass (06/28/2016) [-]
oh boy there we go romanticising neo nazis again
"and just helping people in general"
yeah no
just like the extreme left, they want to help people of their choice while trying to harass the opposition out of existence
User avatar
#204 - captainfuckitall (06/28/2016) [-]
Not from what I've seen.

No matter how much the far right may hate you, they always give you a chance to speak and state your opinions; as proven in internet forums, debates, social media...

The only time I've seen otherwise is when they are badmouthed or antagonized deliberately
User avatar
#207 - badgoodass (06/28/2016) [-]
have you heard bout r/the_donald?
User avatar
#209 - captainfuckitall (06/28/2016) [-]
I have, but as far as I know, the only banning I've heard is when people outright insult them.
User avatar
#211 - badgoodass (06/28/2016) [-]
nope, shortly after the r/news thing happened I've seen screencaps of redditors on other forums showing how they got banned for disagreeing with some of Trumps policies or just even asking critical questions

another example of Neo Nazis being "so tolerant" would be the recent attacks on minorities in London after Brexit
User avatar
#213 - captainfuckitall (06/28/2016) [-]
Could you provide sources for both?
User avatar
#215 - captainfuckitall (06/28/2016) [-]
Thank you! That's more than most do.
User avatar
#216 - badgoodass (06/28/2016) [-]
np you're welcome
it's always good to stay informed, especially on FJ
#187 - anon (06/28/2016) [-]
>Neo-Nazis
>Respecting human rights

Jesus fucking Christ, some of you are utterly unsalvageable retards
User avatar
#205 - captainfuckitall (06/28/2016) [-]
I've yet to witness Neo-Nazis brutalizing a person just for being there, at least in recent times.
User avatar
#149 - elsanna (06/28/2016) [-]
Friendly reminder that the Germany nazi party was voted into power democratically and it was just Hitler who made it into a dictatorship.
#229 - anon (07/01/2016) [-]
The National Socialist party in Germany wasn't even democratically elected.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_presidential_election,_1932

An independent won the election, but Hitler received the position of chancellor the year after.
User avatar
#136 - destaice (06/28/2016) [-]
That's probably because neo Nazis are actually manchildren who just want attention
User avatar
#138 - captainfuckitall (06/28/2016) [-]
"Freedom of speech, movement, and rights to arms are really great and necessary for the defense and integrity of a nation; it is these qualities that we should embrace and attempt to foster in all further generations"
"Wow, what man-children you must be"

Wat?
User avatar
#139 - destaice (06/28/2016) [-]
You literally cannot read.

I said they're manchildren because they do this neo-nazi thing for attention
User avatar
#141 - captainfuckitall (06/28/2016) [-]
You used literally wrong, and no, you never said that. Whether or not you 'implied' it is up for grabs, but it's much more likely you were referring to Neo-Nazism on a whole, considering I doubt your opinion of them improves with their level of fervour.
User avatar
#206 - spoopyskeleton (06/28/2016) [-]
I'm just butting in here, but people use "Literally" for emphasis.

I fucking hate how people don't understand this.
User avatar
#208 - captainfuckitall (06/28/2016) [-]
I understand, but it's not 'supposed' to be used that way. It's supposed to describe a literal action.

If literally could just be used for emphasis, then there would be no point to the word to begin with, you see?
User avatar
#210 - spoopyskeleton (06/28/2016) [-]
Yes, but it's doesn't need to be it's literal meaning.
So many words are used for emphasis outside of their respected literal meanings.

I suppose it is a bit different with the word "Literally" but people DO use it for emphasis. There is a high change they do know what it means and are intentionally using it wrong.
User avatar
#212 - captainfuckitall (06/28/2016) [-]
Maybe so, but that's not an excuse.
#153 - anon (06/28/2016) [-]
you're right, dude
User avatar
#143 - destaice (06/28/2016) [-]
No, it is actually what I said. You are just incapable of reading.
#151 - adhdtookmyaccount (06/28/2016) [-]
User avatar
#144 - captainfuckitall (06/28/2016) [-]
Sure it is.
User avatar
#34 - Darianvincent (06/27/2016) [-]
There was a pol post about how scary it is that valuing traditional family values and morality along with respecting free speech is now "edgy"
User avatar
#106 - themarineelite (06/28/2016) [-]
I'm pretty sure the people in pol don't have anything relating to that, so I wouldn't count them as a reliable source.
#103 - anon (06/28/2016) [-]
"there was a pol post"

stopped reading
#199 - anon (06/28/2016) [-]
Just because it's on /pol/ doesn't necessarily mean it's wrong. Even a broken clock tells the right time twice a day.
User avatar
#201 - badgoodass (06/28/2016) [-]
except this isn't edgy at all
the majority still does this
pol is just obsessed with playing the victim card
#202 - anon (06/28/2016) [-]
My point still stands.
User avatar
#61 - renespar (06/27/2016) [-]
the issue with that though is that it wasn't traditional family values and morality, it was THEIR values, THEIR morality, and their ilk censors people just as much, if not more than the 'liberals' they rag on. On top of all this, considering they worship Ben "6 million more" Garrison, it can only be assumed their 'morality' is dubious at best
User avatar
#15 - platinumaltaria (06/27/2016) [-]
Well neo-nazis have to value free speech, under any other system they'd be shot.
#177 - anon (06/28/2016) [-]
They value freedom of speech as long as it is counting only for themselves.
User avatar
#20 - heartlessrobot (06/27/2016) [-]
Except their own, bastardized fascism.
User avatar
#21 - platinumaltaria (06/27/2016) [-]
Pretty sure fascism is always fascism.
User avatar
#22 - heartlessrobot (06/27/2016) [-]
Yeah but the Third Reich would likely put modern neo-nazis in a camp with all the retards and cripples.
User avatar
#23 - platinumaltaria (06/27/2016) [-]
I'm pretty sure that's not true.
User avatar
#35 - jaggsauce (06/27/2016) [-]
i'm pretty sure you don't know shit about that.
User avatar
#37 - platinumaltaria (06/27/2016) [-]
I'm pretty sure no one knows anything about hypothetical interactions that have never and will never occur, so chill the fuck out.
User avatar
#16 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
The progressives who protest AGAINST free speech don't seem to grasp that.
User avatar
#17 - platinumaltaria (06/27/2016) [-]
I can see the headlines now: FJ user shocked to learn that progressives are anti-free speech.
User avatar
#18 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
As if Funnyjunk would ever hit headlines
#25 - slyblade (06/27/2016) [-]
I don't know, they're already after Mr 4Chan.
User avatar
#36 - jaggsauce (06/27/2016) [-]
wow.. that's a pretty high quality gif.
#42 - slyblade (06/27/2016) [-]
I swear it was slower before I uploaded it.
User avatar
#43 - jaggsauce (06/27/2016) [-]
i swear i was being serious.
#22 - It's not that, I'm not scratching at compromise, but just a we…  [+] (23 new replies) 06/27/2016 on marriage -3
User avatar
#23 - talosknight (06/27/2016) [-]
And I'm telling you, when you are happily with someone one day, you will learn to pick the battles. I don't expect you to understand right now, but one day you will.
User avatar
#24 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
I already am, thank you.

Assuming that those who disagree with you just lack experience or understanding is folly, and will only ever hinder you in your life. How many lessons and insights have passed you by because you believed that? I suppose you will never know.

Since you feel like sharing with me, I will with you: You must do better. Either one day you will realize that you were an idiot to believe that your unique personal experiences were the constitution of truth, and lament all the lost time and knowledge, or you will not, and go further and further into frustration and isolation and never understand how it's your own fault.
#30 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
"Assuming that those who disagree with you just lack experience or understanding is folly"

"you were an idiot"

wat
User avatar
#31 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Because it is. Once you assume someone doesn't understand or comprehend, and all that's needed is life experience before they agree with you, the conversation is done, the bridge of communication is burned.

When people assume they themselves are right, ESPECIALLY due to personal experience that they believe others lack, they tend to completely close off from any type of learning or comprehension that their rival can give them; after-all, who wants to even attempt to learn from someone they believe is wrong?

I fall into this trap too, of course I do, everyone does, the point is that we must try to be conscious of it and aware that just because we are 'right' doesn't mean we cannot learn, and no quantity of 'rightness' should ever prevent learning.
#32 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
"I fall into this trap too"

yes.. you fall hard
User avatar
#34 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
1. I do not believe he's wrong out of life experience, but only on a matter of introspection. I'm not criticizing his opinions on relationships, only his belief that experience is the defining point of understanding (Vs. observation, study, or flat out different experiences. Ergo, you don't need to be whipped with barbed wire to understand that it must really suck)

2. I don't believe he's wrong at all, I fully understand there are plenty of people out there who would rather please their lovers than maintain their pride; that just doesn't change my opinion or belief that it eventually self-destructs the relationship itself.

3. I don't believe I cannot learn from him, he may very well know a thousand things I don't, but right now we're just discussing exactly WHY it is only ever limiting to believe that those who disagree with you 'must' be lacking certain life experiences, otherwise they wouldn't. "If X happened to you, you'd follow Y belief", "If you have been through what I have, you'd understand where I'm coming from", "You don't get to have an opinion on A until you have gone through B". Even IF all of these statements were TRUE, it would STILL be limiting because it absolutely crushes any attempt at open discourse or communication, because the speaker does not have to properly justify their beliefs, and the listener cannot retort because 'they just don't get it' and thus are not worth listening to.

Do you understand now?
#40 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
but anyway, the point is you opinion about relationships is likely to change with experience. So really experience is quite relevant in this case
User avatar
#41 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
In that case, won't his too?

I'm not arguing my opinion won't change, I'm arguing that him ASSUMING I ONLY disagree with him BECAUSE I have not had similar experiences only limits him, and will do so in every interaction.

He genuinely believed I held my opinion because I haven't had experiences that he's had, the thought that my opinions were developed WITH experience or observation never crossed his mind, but only that they were formed from a lack OF them. It is this that I am criticizing and calling folly
#37 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Nope - not all things can be learned by reason. Many are completely irrational
User avatar
#38 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
How so?
#42 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Well you need some 'data' or experience to form an opinion right? So its pretty safe to say that experience is a relevant factor in what your opinion is.
User avatar
#43 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Then surely you could not argue that the Holocaust was bad or even unpleasant, considering you have never experienced one.
#44 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Well its safe to say I can't comprehend a Holocaust survivors perspective on the Holocaust
User avatar
#46 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Of course you can't, but that doesn't mean you can't have an opinion on it.

You don't HAVE to get shot in the face to recognize that getting shot in the face probably really hurts and is generally to be avoided.

You don't HAVE to go through 15 years of heroin addiction to understand that trying heroin in the first place isn't worth it.

Even SAYING that a holocaust survivor would be the world authority ON the holocaust is folly, since the scope of human perception for any single experience is wildly small.

Who do you think has a better chance of winning a race, someone who's done the same lap a hundred times and has tripped over every single hurdle, or someone who has never done that lap and understands perfectly what the former racer is doing wrong and exactly what he himself must do in order to win?

Both is optimal, of course, but it's hardly true that experience trumps observation, because wisdom isn't about experience, it's about perception. It's about knowing why people lose the race and what it must take to win it.
#63 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
I'm saying your opinion changes with experience - we seem to agree on that.
#45 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
And if I did experience a holocaust now I'm sure my understanding of suffering would evolve substantially lol
User avatar
#47 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
That's contradictory, since even as a Holocaust survivor, you wouldn't understand the same suffering a hanged man went through until you experienced it, by your previous statements.
#48 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
I don't see the contradiction...
User avatar
#49 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
"It's safe to say I can't comprehend a Holocaust survivors perspective on the Holocaust"
"And if I did experience the holocaust I'm sure my understanding of suffering would evolve substantially"

Either you can comprehend something without experiencing it or you cannot. That is, either you can understand something without direct experience in the matter, OR you must experience every individual trial in order to properly sympathize with those who have gone through it already.

Your understanding of suffering cannot 'evolve' if you cannot understand the suffering of anyone who's trials you haven't gone through, you see?
#53 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
"I have been in love, and am, my opinion on the topic above hasn't changed, and indeed, has only been refined. Maybe another time it will change, but that is unlikely as there is no cognitive dissonance going on with me (that I know of) and find no reason for my views to be without merit."

You admit your opinion could change due to experience... I think we agree bro
User avatar
#56 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
I wasn't trying to disagree, I was trying to say that putting it all down to whether I experienced it or not, or the depth of my experiences, is faulty.

YOU are saying that the depth of my experience is important because it is a defining factor in my beliefs and principles.

I am saying that the depth of my experiences is irrelevant, since you do not have to directly experience something at all in order to have a well informed or conscious opinion on it.

In another way: You are arguing that my desire to help starving African children is limited in direct correlation to the rate in which I myself have starved, while I am arguing that whether I was starved to bones or fat my entire life, it holds absolutely no sway over my levels of compassion or desire or ideals, as they could just as easily relate back to observations or similar experiences. You see?
#51 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
You can understand something without experiencing it, I agree. But this understanding will change with actual experience.
User avatar
#52 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Of course it would, but then it just comes down to your opinion being refined rather than changed.

I have been in love, and am, my opinion on the topic above hasn't changed, and indeed, has only been refined. Maybe another time it will change, but that is unlikely as there is no cognitive dissonance going on with me (that I know of) and find no reason for my views to be without merit.
#14 - That's actually kinda sad, man... All of these are pr…  [+] (59 new replies) 06/27/2016 on marriage -13
#65 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
It's just humour. 'Cos we all want to pretend we have it so bad instead of being quite fucking cosy.

I might say: my wife wanted to watch Pride and Prejudice and I wanted to watch Zombieland so we compromised and watched Pride and Prejudice.

but I actually mean: I watched Pride and Prejudice so my wife would might sleep with me. And she didn't tell anyone that I really got into it and nearly cried at the end when they finally kiss. And we watched Zombieland the next week. And she loved it.
User avatar
#66 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Did you really watch Pride and Prejudice?
User avatar
#19 - talosknight (06/27/2016) [-]
When you find someone who actually loves you one day, you will realize that you make concessions for that person. She lets me play videogames with the friends, and wake up to the PokeRap, I let her have a kitten and warm her cold fingers on my back in the dead of winter.
User avatar
#95 - yunoknow (06/27/2016) [-]
Don't listen to these guys, man. Cherish what you have, most of us would kill to live like you do.
#94 - maxpaynenarration (06/27/2016) [-]
She lets me play videogames.
LETS
LETS
LETS

Jesus.
#138 - jeej (06/27/2016) [-]
#127 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
I think y'all are reading way to far into this.

It's a joke, point being they both get to do things they want.

Although, surprising him with a new pet was too much, in my opinion.
#99 - cupotruth (06/27/2016) [-]
Yeah god forbid the concept of a wife wanting to spend time with her husband instead of him playing video games.

What an alien concept.
User avatar
#102 - fffffffuuuuuuuuuuu (06/27/2016) [-]
The wife wants to spend time with the husband
The husband wants to spend time playing videogames
It's not like the wife gets the favor because she's the damn woman.
#104 - cupotruth (06/27/2016) [-]
If you want to be in a relationship and also be allowed to do whatever you want whenever you want, buy a dog.

She's a living person, sometimes she leaves you alone when you want it sometimes you leave her alone when she wants, sometimes she comforts you when you need sometimes you comfort her when she needs it.

You seem to be arguing very hard for the concept that because this guy in a relationship, who's making concessions because he knows the other person cares for him, is somehow a chump based solely on those compromises everyone makes when they dedicate their life to someone.

And I find that kind of ignorant to the reality of love.
User avatar
#105 - fffffffuuuuuuuuuuu (06/27/2016) [-]
Love is supposed to be playful and fun. You really take the whole love thing way too serious.
#109 - cupotruth (06/27/2016) [-]
The honeymoon ends friend and the sooner you realize you've dedicated your imperfect personality to spending the rest of its life with another imperfect personality the sooner you will be able to have an adult kind of love that will last and be reliable because you understand each other's faults and can change together as people.

Love is fun, but not the fleeting fun of a flash game you found on newgrounds but the fun you have to work on like dwarf fortress.
User avatar
#110 - fffffffuuuuuuuuuuu (06/27/2016) [-]
Sure man, whatever tickles your pickle.
#100 - maxpaynenarration (06/27/2016) [-]
LETS.
LETS him play.

We're not fucking children.
#139 - krygas (06/27/2016) [-]
#140 - maxpaynenarration (06/27/2016) [-]
Damnit. Now I see it too.
#103 - cupotruth (06/27/2016) [-]
>#97

She doesn't care that he goes out or plays games at home.

Are you really that eager to find faults in someone else's happiness?
#108 - maxpaynenarration (06/27/2016) [-]
I'll find fault not in their happiness, but the fact SOMEBODY ROCKS UP INTO HIS LIFE AND TELLS HIM WHAT TO DO JUST BECAUSE SHE'S GOT A VAGINA. Stop trying to defend something that is wholly not good. You should be with somebody who doesn't give a fuck if you play video-games. You find time for them. But if you want attention because they're playing video-games, well then you're a fuckin' attention-seeking cunt. Stop trying to defend this. You're wrong.
User avatar
#141 - alooshka (06/27/2016) [-]
She wants to spend time with him and doesnt enjoy video games, but she doesn't make a fuss about it and just LETS him play.
That isn't controlling someone, it's literally letting them do what they want because it makes them happy, even if you don't necessarily like it. That's how love works. I'm sorry you haven't had anyone to show you that yet.
#142 - maxpaynenarration (06/28/2016) [-]
Don't make assumptions. I'm in a happy relationship. I just don't LET people tell me what to do.
User avatar
#143 - alooshka (06/28/2016) [-]
#104
User avatar
#145 - maxpaynenarration (06/28/2016) [-]
k
#113 - cupotruth (06/27/2016) [-]
I'm wrong because I say its a good trait to be willing to stop playing video games if the women you love says she needs you at the moment.

Okay.
#119 - maxpaynenarration (06/27/2016) [-]
And no. Wrong also! Stop playing video-games at the moment? No. I have a girlfriend. I play video-games. If she needs me, I will stop playing video-games. If she turns around to me and says "Stop playing video-games. NOW." I will tell her to off in the general direction of fuck. Why? Because you don't dictate the actions of somebody you love, no matter how miniscule. Also, is your girl watching you type? Is that why you're spewing this bullshit? Look, all you gotta do is reply "Wigglywogglywoo" and I'll get the message she's watching you.
User avatar
#124 - cupotruth (06/27/2016) [-]
The thing I had an issue you with is that you thought he was being controlled but I read the rest of his comments and it shows that he has a fine relationship where they both make sacrifices and love each other. Check cemment 97 he talks about how she doesn't bitch about him playing video games.
User avatar
#122 - cupotruth (06/27/2016) [-]
Me spewing bullshit? You just agreed with me, I thought it was a given that you pay attention when she actually needs you not run around at random.
#117 - maxpaynenarration (06/27/2016) [-]
I like how you're making out it's something like your women needs you. No, you fucking mong. The concept I'm not okay with, is you thinking it's okay for your partner to tell you what to do.

You're also going "Well I have the most objective viewpoint on love so please, let me tell you all how to be a good partner." Nah, mate. If you're in a relationship where you're being told what you can and can't do at any time, you're not in a relationship, you're in a little game. If you wanna slap the word love on that and think you've got a clue, by all means, do it, but don't sit there and expect me to listen to that bullshit with anything other than an incredulous look.
User avatar
#84 - redbread (06/27/2016) [-]
Holy shit waking up to PokeRap sounds really fucking cool now that you mention it
#83 - fffffffuuuuuuuuuuu (06/27/2016) [-]
Sounds to me like she's walking all over you. You don't let her have the kitten, she gave it as a "gift" so it was a surprise; something she herself came up with and you should just deal with her decision. She let's you play videogames and wake up to the PokéRap? Mate if that's how you want to live and if that's who you are, then the "love" you're talking about won't let her drop you for silly reasons like that. She's not worth it if she would. And to put the icing on the cake, she uses you for her personal furnace and you're willing to suffer cold ass fingers on your back for it.
TL;DR If someone actually loves you for you and you love her for her, there's no need to have her "let you" do the things you love to do.
Of course, based from these 2 sentences.
User avatar
#97 - talosknight (06/27/2016) [-]
Dude... It has less to do with the "let" and more that she has no issues with it, and enjoys that I have things to do. It's more like she doesn't care that I'm playing, but you're all making it sound like I'm walking around with my girlfriend holding my balls in her purse.
#111 - garena (06/27/2016) [-]
I understood man. I wish you all the best.
#101 - fffffffuuuuuuuuuuu (06/27/2016) [-]
"You all"?
Maybe if we ALL interpreted your choice of words incorrectly, the mistake lies with yourself.
User avatar
#68 - toosexyforyou (06/27/2016) [-]
You sound pretty autistic tbh, good for you that you found someone that puts with you playing videogames with friends and waking up to pokerap, that sounds horrible.
#62 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
"She lets me play videogames with the friends"
that turned out really sad man you are fucked, seriously an animal is a serious decision you two should decide but she shouldn't "allow" you to play video games....
User avatar
#121 - talldumbdork (06/27/2016) [-]
I agree. Out of my love and enjoyment for my wife, I put games down to be with her after work often. I don't have to necissarily, but it's what I want to do. Significant other has a right to complain if all you do is play video games and aren't giving them any attention, but if they do that too often that is a bit over possessive. It should be by choice. Plus it's fun trying to find other games that you can do WITH your wife, best of both worlds. Me and the wifey are playing Diablo 3. So I do think you shouldn't play videogames all the time and ignore your wife, but that could mean a much bigger issue if you are doing that.
User avatar
#22 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
It's not that, I'm not scratching at compromise, but just a weak spine.

Being a couple is just that, a couple, part of a team; if they go and make decisions on YOUR behalf without consulting you, whether getting you a pet, or draining your bank account, and don't feel the need to even justify it, it doesn't prove consideration or trust, but only a lack of respect, and something like that will not last.

It's more of a complex issue than I am making it, bare-bones and all, but it's along the same vein, "I didn't want a dog, my wife wanted a dog, so in the end we got a dog", yeah, you can shrug and say it's just because you love them, but really wouldn't they have NOT gotten it if it were returned? Going against your wishes or otherwise disregarding your judgement or opinions entirely shows only a lack of regard for your person and character; how people can just 'accept' that always makes me cringe.
User avatar
#23 - talosknight (06/27/2016) [-]
And I'm telling you, when you are happily with someone one day, you will learn to pick the battles. I don't expect you to understand right now, but one day you will.
User avatar
#24 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
I already am, thank you.

Assuming that those who disagree with you just lack experience or understanding is folly, and will only ever hinder you in your life. How many lessons and insights have passed you by because you believed that? I suppose you will never know.

Since you feel like sharing with me, I will with you: You must do better. Either one day you will realize that you were an idiot to believe that your unique personal experiences were the constitution of truth, and lament all the lost time and knowledge, or you will not, and go further and further into frustration and isolation and never understand how it's your own fault.
#30 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
"Assuming that those who disagree with you just lack experience or understanding is folly"

"you were an idiot"

wat
User avatar
#31 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Because it is. Once you assume someone doesn't understand or comprehend, and all that's needed is life experience before they agree with you, the conversation is done, the bridge of communication is burned.

When people assume they themselves are right, ESPECIALLY due to personal experience that they believe others lack, they tend to completely close off from any type of learning or comprehension that their rival can give them; after-all, who wants to even attempt to learn from someone they believe is wrong?

I fall into this trap too, of course I do, everyone does, the point is that we must try to be conscious of it and aware that just because we are 'right' doesn't mean we cannot learn, and no quantity of 'rightness' should ever prevent learning.
#32 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
"I fall into this trap too"

yes.. you fall hard
User avatar
#34 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
1. I do not believe he's wrong out of life experience, but only on a matter of introspection. I'm not criticizing his opinions on relationships, only his belief that experience is the defining point of understanding (Vs. observation, study, or flat out different experiences. Ergo, you don't need to be whipped with barbed wire to understand that it must really suck)

2. I don't believe he's wrong at all, I fully understand there are plenty of people out there who would rather please their lovers than maintain their pride; that just doesn't change my opinion or belief that it eventually self-destructs the relationship itself.

3. I don't believe I cannot learn from him, he may very well know a thousand things I don't, but right now we're just discussing exactly WHY it is only ever limiting to believe that those who disagree with you 'must' be lacking certain life experiences, otherwise they wouldn't. "If X happened to you, you'd follow Y belief", "If you have been through what I have, you'd understand where I'm coming from", "You don't get to have an opinion on A until you have gone through B". Even IF all of these statements were TRUE, it would STILL be limiting because it absolutely crushes any attempt at open discourse or communication, because the speaker does not have to properly justify their beliefs, and the listener cannot retort because 'they just don't get it' and thus are not worth listening to.

Do you understand now?
#40 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
but anyway, the point is you opinion about relationships is likely to change with experience. So really experience is quite relevant in this case
User avatar
#41 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
In that case, won't his too?

I'm not arguing my opinion won't change, I'm arguing that him ASSUMING I ONLY disagree with him BECAUSE I have not had similar experiences only limits him, and will do so in every interaction.

He genuinely believed I held my opinion because I haven't had experiences that he's had, the thought that my opinions were developed WITH experience or observation never crossed his mind, but only that they were formed from a lack OF them. It is this that I am criticizing and calling folly
#37 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Nope - not all things can be learned by reason. Many are completely irrational
User avatar
#38 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
How so?
#42 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Well you need some 'data' or experience to form an opinion right? So its pretty safe to say that experience is a relevant factor in what your opinion is.
User avatar
#43 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Then surely you could not argue that the Holocaust was bad or even unpleasant, considering you have never experienced one.
#44 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Well its safe to say I can't comprehend a Holocaust survivors perspective on the Holocaust
User avatar
#46 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Of course you can't, but that doesn't mean you can't have an opinion on it.

You don't HAVE to get shot in the face to recognize that getting shot in the face probably really hurts and is generally to be avoided.

You don't HAVE to go through 15 years of heroin addiction to understand that trying heroin in the first place isn't worth it.

Even SAYING that a holocaust survivor would be the world authority ON the holocaust is folly, since the scope of human perception for any single experience is wildly small.

Who do you think has a better chance of winning a race, someone who's done the same lap a hundred times and has tripped over every single hurdle, or someone who has never done that lap and understands perfectly what the former racer is doing wrong and exactly what he himself must do in order to win?

Both is optimal, of course, but it's hardly true that experience trumps observation, because wisdom isn't about experience, it's about perception. It's about knowing why people lose the race and what it must take to win it.
#63 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
I'm saying your opinion changes with experience - we seem to agree on that.
#45 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
And if I did experience a holocaust now I'm sure my understanding of suffering would evolve substantially lol
User avatar
#47 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
That's contradictory, since even as a Holocaust survivor, you wouldn't understand the same suffering a hanged man went through until you experienced it, by your previous statements.
#48 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
I don't see the contradiction...
User avatar
#49 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
"It's safe to say I can't comprehend a Holocaust survivors perspective on the Holocaust"
"And if I did experience the holocaust I'm sure my understanding of suffering would evolve substantially"

Either you can comprehend something without experiencing it or you cannot. That is, either you can understand something without direct experience in the matter, OR you must experience every individual trial in order to properly sympathize with those who have gone through it already.

Your understanding of suffering cannot 'evolve' if you cannot understand the suffering of anyone who's trials you haven't gone through, you see?
#53 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
"I have been in love, and am, my opinion on the topic above hasn't changed, and indeed, has only been refined. Maybe another time it will change, but that is unlikely as there is no cognitive dissonance going on with me (that I know of) and find no reason for my views to be without merit."

You admit your opinion could change due to experience... I think we agree bro
User avatar
#56 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
I wasn't trying to disagree, I was trying to say that putting it all down to whether I experienced it or not, or the depth of my experiences, is faulty.

YOU are saying that the depth of my experience is important because it is a defining factor in my beliefs and principles.

I am saying that the depth of my experiences is irrelevant, since you do not have to directly experience something at all in order to have a well informed or conscious opinion on it.

In another way: You are arguing that my desire to help starving African children is limited in direct correlation to the rate in which I myself have starved, while I am arguing that whether I was starved to bones or fat my entire life, it holds absolutely no sway over my levels of compassion or desire or ideals, as they could just as easily relate back to observations or similar experiences. You see?
#51 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
You can understand something without experiencing it, I agree. But this understanding will change with actual experience.
User avatar
#52 - captainfuckitall (06/27/2016) [-]
Of course it would, but then it just comes down to your opinion being refined rather than changed.

I have been in love, and am, my opinion on the topic above hasn't changed, and indeed, has only been refined. Maybe another time it will change, but that is unlikely as there is no cognitive dissonance going on with me (that I know of) and find no reason for my views to be without merit.
#33 - Any proof for what you're claiming? You're clearly obviously b…  [+] (5 new replies) 06/27/2016 on ‘Remain’ Petition Uses... -1
#34 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
They took back, within the hour after the result was announced, that the £350 million promised to be invested i nthe NHS was a mistake claim. Farage is now claiming that in the next 10 years the NHS could be replaced with private healthcare. Boris paradoxically wants us to 'strengthen the bond and ties' to the EU through our exit negotiations. He wants us to remain in the single market - which means not only paying the same kind of fee's as we already were paying in (so that £350 million isn't just not getting spent on the NHS, it just wont exist) but it also preserves the free right to move within the EU meaning that the other big asshole of the election - people being scared of immigrants is also not going to change one fucking bit. Then you have the fact that the 'fear mongering of the pound plummeting' has happened - with a current net loss for the country far greater than those bogeyman EU fees people were crying about. Everything is being mapped out on BBC News in real-time. This whole bloody thing is a farce - Leave STILL hasn't actually presented any kind of formal plan, they've so far only presented hollow promises that it's 'totes gonna be fine guys'
#35 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
"They took back, within the hour after the result was announced, that the £350 million promised to be invested in the NHS was a mistake claim" bet you read that online and didnt even check didn't you? the advert stated that we would reclaim £350 million that we currently pay the EU that could POTENTIALLY be spent on the NHS, and still could, no, not all of the £350 million will go to the NHS but some of it will, it will be split among all the aspects of the budget like all the other money we have in this country
#42 - ctenop (06/27/2016) [-]
User avatar
#40 - ctenop (06/27/2016) [-]
No, I heard farage say that in two interviews....
#38 - anon (06/27/2016) [-]
Some of it will, will it?

Thats funny since the figure was called out for being deliberately misleading since it was a gross figure and didn't account for rebates etc. So actually any saving would be far less than £350 million. Fine, let's still pretend that some of it will go to the NHS. But oh wait, Boris is pushing for us to remain in the single market which, guess what? come with fees that are pretty much identical to what we're paying in now. Poof. There goes anything for the NHS pot.

Nice try though.