Whateverla. I leave it to readers to decide.

Reality is not tunnel vision. It is seeing the truth in the world around us, and knowing that exceptions exist.

Acknowledging norms of society (while noting that exceptions exist) is not "tunnel vision".

I hold that harping on exceptions, without acknowledging or downplaying the norms of society, is "tunnel vision".

There are winners and losers in the game of life. Some get good jobs. Some get bad ones. Some get good partners. Some get bad partners. And as with everything, there is a grey area between the good and bad. Nobody is black or white (figuratively, not referring to race).


I contend that acknowleging the cruel realities of the world let's us make real changes to our lives that make us better people... both in career and the game of love.

You may disagree. I respect that. I stand by what I say.

Arguing about who is right is pointless. At the end of the day, believe whatever makes you happy.

You know deep down inside if you have been successful in life or not.



-peace out-

This post has been edited by ezralimm: Aug 1 2009, 07:55 PM

Suit yourself mate. You don't even have the guts to admit you misread what I said.

Btw, exceptions only exists when your rule is too general and thus unfit to describe its observations. If others have a different view which can encompass your reality WITH the exceptions, then it only shows that your "rule" is weak. Think about that for a moment.

There is nothing to admit or deny. The readers will be the judge of this.

Believe whatever makes you happy. Life will be the judge of what you speak of. You know where you stand in the game of love. You know where you stand in the game of life. Now dont be a complete nerdy/no-life/fvcktard and confuse opinions with 'rules' or 'generalizations' because that would apply to almost everyone on this forum.

I will not argue over semantics. I have never claimed to make any 'rules'. Call it a rule or generalization or whatever damn words you want. I stand by what I said: I acknowledge the norms of society and the exceptions that exist within it.



This post has been edited by ezralimm: Aug 1 2009, 08:08 PM

I'm quite at a lost for words. You "corrected" something you obviously misunderstood, got pissed when you perceived a personal assault when none was intended, then throw the responsibility to the readers?

The readers have nothing to do with this, nor does their opinion on the subject, matter. It just me, trying to get you to understand things better. If you can't, then, so be it. Who people think is right/wrong doesn't matter.

Dont you dare try to put yourself on a pedestal.
I've ignored alot of the flames you've used in my threads.

This is a public forum. You attempt to discredit my views. I attempt to get readers to re-read and think about who is right and wrong.

If you believe you are right, fine.THe readers have a brain and can decide for themselves.


I stand by what I say:

1) Social norms exist with exceptions. eg. A girl will rarely date a guy who is both significantly shorter and lighter than she is.
2) The existance of exceptions does not disprove the social norm.
3) Acknowledging realities and social norms while also acknowledging that exceptions exist is inline with the truth (reality).
4) People who harp on the exceptions are the ones who are "narrow minded".


oh but they do. You are attempting to discredit my views by using ad hominems. All the pointless accusations of me having a "small mind" etc.

To other readers: This guy thinks that other people's opinion doesnt matter. It does. If not, then why the hell is he getting so worked up over what I said. Gosh he's such an idiot (yeah, calling him an idiot is an ad hominem).

I've said it a few times: we clearly have different views. There is no point arguing further. Delving into semantics is pointless.

This post has been edited by ezralimm: Aug 1 2009, 08:36 PM

at ezra.

there is a different between :

Having a different opinion AND having a better opinion.

Can I have your MSN?

Aha! I see. Now I get it.

Lol. With my own eyes I saw that happening, a forumer. You'll know who.

talking abt dogma ..

i banged a dogma with my karma lol ...

Dude I totally laughed my ass off!!! XD

This post has been edited by Dickson Poon: Aug 2 2009, 06:08 AM

you have to send the dogma to hospital...so can repair yr karma in wokshop

I'm not, you were the one who some how thought I said you don't know how to treat women. Tell me, where did THAT come from?


I haven't even started flaming you, don't tempt me


They will always have their own opinions, what you don't realise, is that in my posts to you, it doesn't matter. You want to be thought of as "right", I don't care about that. I just want to help you understand more things, but hey if you want to close your mind to that, its entirely your choice, and its my choice as well to point out to people that might agree with you, that there's a much bigger picture that you're missing.


Not saying it doesn't disprove the social norm, but the social norm isn't everything. There's a bigger and deeper picture you just can't seem to grasp. Oh well, perhaps that level of thought isn't reachable by you yet.


Your reality is "warped'


No, they're people who can see the bigger picture. I've told you many times that you're not entirely wrong, but you're not entire right either. Your "exceptions" do not exist to me, because from my point of view, everything can be explained using the same theory. Your theories have exceptions. Your data set is minimal, and your theory doesn't work on a larger dataset, you hand wave it away saying that those are exceptions rather than admitting your theory is weak and trying to improve it to include the larger data set.


FFS, please understand what ad hominem is Saying you have a small mind isn't an ad hominem. Never once did I say you shouldn't be listened to because you have a small mind. If you don't show a proper understanding of mathematics in a discussion of mathematics, I can immediately say your small mind can't grasp the more abstract mathematical concepts, and IT WONT BE AN AD HOMINEM. I've xplained time and time again the problems with your reasoning.

If you want to use logical fallacies, at least learn to use it properly.


You write here to gain some sort of validation from other people. I write here to help people, and helping you is also why I'm posting, which is why I point out the flaws in the way you think. Also, it seems you're getting a lot more worked up about what I say to you, than the other way around


Right, no point discussing because we have different views. Stick to your own then, and forever be closed to the opinions of others.

Silverhawk, you bl00dy wanker. First you talk about people making "rules". Now you're talking about "datasets". Like wtf. Get a life. Get out of your room.

My theory works on every scenario i have come across. Exceptions are rare, but do exist.

Example:

My Theory On A Social Norm: Girls will rarely date a guy significantly shorter (6cm+) and significantly lighter (<5kg) than she is.

1) Look at every reasonably attractive (whatever your definition of attractive is) girl around you who is taken. Look at the guy next to her.
2) Occasionally, as in very occasionally, you will find an exception.


I acknowledge #1 while also acknowledging #2. I place the appropriate amount of emphasis on both.

you place pretty much all your emphasis on #2, and everytime I mention #1 and #2, you criticize me for mentioning #1, claiming that im narrow minded etc.



RE: Ad hominems.
To Other Readers:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html
I leave it to you to decide

Ezra, you're so personally invested in wanting your pet theories to be absolutely correct, infallible, and the be all and end all of all social and dating theories.

It's ironic that you're asking Silverhawk to get a life, because you've probably spent more time THINKING and REFINING your theories than he has. Silverhawk speaks from experience and a mind fortunate enough to have been broadened by observing the full spectrum of human behavior. This is something you do not have.

Dickson. PM sent.

---

Added on August 2, 2009, 3:59 pmI dont really mind if my theories are challenged.

But this guy is not challenging them. He is simply ranting about how it is wrong to place adequate emphasis on social norms (with all that talk about "datasets" OMG) and then throwing wild accusations towards me (like I dont notice there are exceptions), discrediting my theories in the process.



#0) One of Ezra's Theories On Social Norm: Girls will rarely date a guy significantly shorter (6cm+) and significantly lighter (<5kg+) than she is.
#1) Look at every reasonably attractive (whatever your definition of attractive is) girl around you who is taken. Look at the guy next to her. Do you find #0 true in your reality?
#2) Occasionally, as in very occasionally, you will find an exception.

Silverhawk: Do you agree, in a simple YES or NO, to the statements above?
#0 YES/NO
#1 YES/NO
#2 YES/NO

This post has been edited by ezralimm: Aug 2 2009, 04:19 PM

Dude have you seen the link on my signature? The one that says "Pls support handsome guy to be your lover "

Omg you wouldn't believe the number of girls who said NO THEY WOULDN'T choose a handsome guy to be their lover in that thread.

Wtf! I feel like I'm living in a twilight zone or something. Maybe this is just Malaysia, that the only people who feel free enough to act on their natural desires are gays.

Either that or I look very perverted in real life too.

This post has been edited by Dickson Poon: Aug 2 2009, 04:46 PM

Lmao.

Girls aren't that shallow when it boils down to choosing their soulmate. I mean attraction on the looks does matter, but it's not the main thing IMHO. At least decent looking then good enough lah~

I have seen a lot of shorter males going out with girls.

Physical attraction isn't a priority to girls as opposed to males. Man are easily excited based on sight, while woman are a whole different world altogether. From sight, sound, touch, communication, career etc.

Even making a woman get excited is an entire different ball game. In fact, women prefers less handsome males or those with shorter manhoods to make love with, because these males will not think so highly of themselves, and be good servant when their female masters spreads her legs. Handsome males will be so full of themselves, and always end up satisfying himself first...which puts the woman off.

i think noob13 theories are flawed.

u know why? cos his nick name is noob x 13 times .. lol