Why you don't really have free will

saturnz

Honorary Master
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
13,906
+ is intended as a separator from the fist two. I should've made it clearer. :)
separated from what? you haven't made anything clearer

for someone who went to university, I find it surprising you do can't differentiate between majors and... minors

For a Bachelor Degree, a major is a primary focus of study and a minor is a secondary focus of study. ... A Minor is a secondary concentration of courses that often complements the Major.
 

Bobbin

Executive Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
7,041
separated from what? you haven't made anything clearer

for someone who went to university, I find it surprising you do can't differentiate between majors and... minors
Oh god. Let me break down the comprehension...
+ is intended as a separator from the fist two
So let's assess what the first two was...
majored in marketing and business management
As stated, the + was intended as a separator from the first two...
+ economics, stats, accounting, industrial psyc etc...
Which means anything that comes after the + was not a major.

You passed matric I hope? lol. That's basic comprehension :p

Like I said, I could have made it clearer as in structured the sentence better. I admitted that. But this line of questioning/comprehension actually has me a little concerned :laugh: I remember you couldn't separate the concept of private ownership from profit to discuss each on merits? hmmm... interesting.

Anyway, now I hope it's clear which were the majors. If not then I bloody well can't help you :ROFL:
 
Last edited:

saturnz

Honorary Master
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
13,906
have you got a reference that a + can be used as a separator, or did you decide upon this convention through years of thinking about it?
 

Splinter

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 14, 2011
Messages
23,752
have you got a reference that a + can be used as a separator, or did you decide upon this convention through years of thinking about it?
It's his opinion. You know, the thing that apparently only you are allowed to express here; the rest of us need to supply you references...
 

saturnz

Honorary Master
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
13,906
It's his opinion. You know, the thing that apparently only you are allowed to express here; the rest of us need to supply you references...
you are welcome to express your opinion, but don't expect me to take it seriously, can you post the opinions of mine that I've expressed without references that I expected others to take seriously
 

Splinter

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 14, 2011
Messages
23,752
you are welcome to express your opinion, but don't expect me to take it seriously, can you post the opinions of mine that I've expressed without references that I expected others to take seriously
This one, for example.
 

Splinter

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 14, 2011
Messages
23,752
you are welcome to express your opinion, but don't expect me to take it seriously, can you post the opinions of mine that I've expressed without references that I expected others to take seriously
Oh yes, you didn't seem to get the irony that you've just asked me for proof/ a reference...
 

Splinter

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 14, 2011
Messages
23,752
And?

Edit: You think because you posted something you found on the internet, we must all bow down to your post? :laugh:
 

Bobbin

Executive Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
7,041
have you got a reference that a + can be used as a separator, or did you decide upon this convention through years of thinking about it?
+ was meant as other subjects I took as part of the degree that also seems relevant to understanding the way the market and businesses function (stats, accounting, economics, industrial psych etc...) - which lends some credibility to being able to comment generally and have discussions on broader concepts of profit, businesses, employer/employee relationships, market interaction and how things in this space generally works.

It was not part of the "major" distinction. Call it lazy typing if you will or typing in head voice format, I already admitted I could have expressed it better twice! Are you trolling me now?

I find it amusing we're applying so much energy to this, it's not difficult. :ROFL:
 
Last edited:

Bobbin

Executive Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
7,041
its actually part of the rules of engagement in this Philosophy Debates section
Except you have irrelevantly asked for references as a convenient escape.

For example, when you took issue with capitalism (without any "credibility" I might add) I distinctly recall trying to establish some meaningful definition on terms so we could take the discussion forward - and you asked for a reference. It was completely irrelevant and a cop out.

All I wanted was to try separate private ownership from profit (Both seemingly encompassed in the umbrella term capitalism by many definitions - which by the way I don't agree with), so we could understand if private ownership as a concept itself, without the stigma of profit in the umbrella term, is okay with you. That's literally all I wanted to know, is private ownership okay with you. Simple! That way I would know where to focus my attention, purely on the profit aspect... unless there's some issue you have with private ownership as well, which I also would want to know about. And you ****ing asked for a reference. You expected me to quote and reference an entirely uninvented ideological system or some such just to carry these basic concepts forward. :laugh: Deflection level 100!

Now that's the level of bullshittery I have to contend with when talking with you.

If I make a claim (not a logical argument), on the other hand, and you demand reference - that's a different story. i.e. I can't show you my degree without doxing myself, so fair enough - I won't blame you if you don't take that seriously. Like I said, it's a funny story :)
 
Last edited:

saturnz

Honorary Master
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
13,906
Except you have irrelevantly asked for references as a convenient escape.

For example, when you took issue with capitalism (without any "credibility" I might add) I distinctly recall trying to establish some meaningful definition on terms so we could take the discussion forward - and you asked for a reference. It was completely irrelevant and a cop out.

All I wanted was to try separate private ownership from profit (Both seemingly encompassed in the umbrella term capitalism by many definitions - which by the way I don't agree with), so we could understand if private ownership as a concept itself, without the stigma of profit in the umbrella term, is okay with you. That's literally all I wanted to know, is private ownership okay with you. Simple! That way I would know where to focus my attention, purely on the profit aspect... unless there's some issue you have with private ownership as well, which I also would want to know about. And you ****ing asked for a reference. You expected me to quote and reference an entirely uninvented ideological system or some such just to carry these basic concepts forward. :laugh: Deflection level 100!

Now that's the level of bullshittery I have to contend with when talking with you.

If I make a claim, on the other hand, and you demand reference - that's a different story. i.e. I can't show you my degree without doxing myself, so fair enough - I won't blame you if you don't take that seriously. Like I said, it's a funny story :)
maybe find the relevant posts, I doubt I asked for a reference in the context as you project it

and if you did a minor in economics, that doesn't really help with credibility on expressing views about economics, for example it is my understanding mostly Keynesian and neo classical economics is taught at universities with little covered in the way of the Austrian school for example
 
Last edited:

Bobbin

Executive Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
7,041
maybe find the relevant posts, I doubt I asked for a reference in the context as you project it

and if you did a minor in economics, that doesn't really help with credibility on expressing views about economics, for example it is my understanding mostly Keynesian and neo classical economics is taught at universities with little covered in the way of the Austrian school for example
Quoted there to take it to relevant thread :)

No I will admit I am not the expert in these things, hence why I discuss them in the first place.
 
Top