A shoat, really? I mean a geep, of course. Where did it happen? I haven't heard. Is that really true? Or are you just pulling our collective leg?
Leg-up is what we sometimes call the help one gets, in other words a helping hand, that kind of thing. One supposes this metaphor comes from the days when folks, at any rate those who could afford it, rode around on horseback.
Horseback is a good place to view the countryside from. You get to see over the high hedges and if you drink and nod off, it doesn't really matter.
Horseback is a good place to view the countryside from. You getto see over the high hedges, and if you drink and nod off, it doesn't really matter.
(thought to revive this thread... next poster starts with last word of my post, 2 sentences please on any subject)
Really, matter has an undeniable existence--who cares what silly self-styled philosophers say. I am reminded of Dr. Johnson kicking the stone and saying: "I refute it thus!"
Thus spake Zarathustra, I expect, who was a sensible man. I called my firstborn a Zoroastrian name.
Name any similar circumstance, and i can name an opposite. You haven't made your case, you just indulging a post hoc fallacy.
Fallacy is itself a fallacy.Any "fallacy" existing within the organism is a physical state and thus has reality.
Reality and fallacy within an organism is different from the reality and fallacy of philosophical discourse which touches on erroneous beliefs. Would you say the 'Monte Carlo fallacy' in statistics does not exist?
Exist it most definitely does.If it didn't how could it be included in a discourse.
Discourse is disgraceful. I send it back to da cook.
Who says,like a proper cook,"if you don't eat it you get no dessert you finnicky little brat."
Brat is not a nice word but an even worse concept. Does one blame the parents?
Who cares who's to blame.The trick is to deal with it.
"Deal with it". Yes, how often nowadays do we hear these words. Have we strayed too far from thr zero-tolerance approach of yesteryear, and afflicted miscreants with too much of trying to understand them? Some yobboes think a tolerant approach is a sign of weakness.
Weakness is NOT disciplining the little miscreants before they become criminals. I'm not for beatings or anything but there's something to be said for the "spare the rod, spoil the child" philosophy.
You mean I'm not going to get my bottom smacked after all!
Philosophy includes education, and we are perhaps too influenced by Rousseau even though he put his children into the Enfants Trouvés. Brilliant programmes on TV like Little Angels show how to make children happy and obedient.
Conditioning them I presume to a wonderful state of obedience to Nanny.
Spendius, in this game, one starts with the final word of the previous post. For the above, your word would be "obedient"...yes?
