Ignorance ?= Lie
|
Someone is lying if...
They are unintentionally ignorant when stating a fact.
1 (2.8%)
They are willfully ignornat when stating a fact.
22 (61.1%)
They are an ignoramus when stating a fact.
4 (11.1%)
They are Iggy Koopa.
9 (25.0%)
Total votes: 36
|
|
Chance Abattoir
Future Rockin' Resmod
Join date: 3 Apr 2004
Posts: 3,898
|
12-28-2005 16:51
Help Rick answer the following questions. These votes are public, so be careful not to do anything embarrassing. From: Rickard Roentgen Incidentally, ignorance and how it relates to lying and wether or not stating facts that are untrue because of ignorance is lying, is an interesting topic.
I've done some preliminary looking on the internet and haven't found a concensus or popular opinion about it yet.
MULTIPLE CHOICE* Someone is lying if... They are unintentionally ignorant when stating a fact. They are willfully ignorant when stating a fact. They are an ignoramus when stating a fact. They are Iggy Koopa. 
_____________________
"The mob requires regular doses of scandal, paranoia and dilemma to alleviate the boredom of a meaningless existence."
-Insane Ramblings, Anton LaVey
|
|
Jeffrey Gomez
Cubed™
Join date: 11 Jun 2004
Posts: 3,522
|
12-28-2005 16:55
Bwahahaha!
I definitely have to go with "Iggy Koopa."
_____________________
---
|
|
Lucca Kitty
Connie Dobbs' Incarnation
Join date: 13 Dec 2004
Posts: 60
|
12-28-2005 17:04
Didn't Jeska already lock downt he Steinback threat for personal attacks? Knock it off already before you get sent to Profky Jones's Locker
|
|
Chance Abattoir
Future Rockin' Resmod
Join date: 3 Apr 2004
Posts: 3,898
|
12-28-2005 17:05
From: Lucca Kitty Didn't Jeska already lock downt he Steinback threat for personal attacks? Knock it off already before you get sent to Profky Jones's Locker Uh, wrong thread. 
_____________________
"The mob requires regular doses of scandal, paranoia and dilemma to alleviate the boredom of a meaningless existence."
-Insane Ramblings, Anton LaVey
|
|
Rickard Roentgen
Renaissance Punk
Join date: 4 Apr 2004
Posts: 1,869
|
12-28-2005 17:07
Lol, I won't attack you if you don't attack me. Actually I probably won't attack even if you do. I don't think, and Jeska can correct me if I'm wrong, this sub debate is what the thread was closed for. In any case I am interested in what the popular opinion is.
|
|
Chance Abattoir
Future Rockin' Resmod
Join date: 3 Apr 2004
Posts: 3,898
|
12-28-2005 17:10
From: Rickard Roentgen Lol, I won't attack you if you don't attack me. Actually I probably won't attack even if you do. I don't think, and Jeska can correct me if I'm wrong, this sub debate is what the thread was closed for. In any case I am interested in what the popular opinion is. I'm not attacking you at all. I thought it was an interesting question. Jeska closed the thread for the personal attacks that were going on, as she indicated.
_____________________
"The mob requires regular doses of scandal, paranoia and dilemma to alleviate the boredom of a meaningless existence."
-Insane Ramblings, Anton LaVey
|
|
Stankleberry Sullivan
Interneter
Join date: 18 Dec 2005
Posts: 550
|
12-28-2005 17:11
A lie is anything that Bush said because he is a PROVEN LIAR. There were no WMDs found yet in Iraq, therefore he is a liar. Ipso factso.
|
|
Rickard Roentgen
Renaissance Punk
Join date: 4 Apr 2004
Posts: 1,869
|
12-28-2005 17:12
For the record, Willfully ignorant isn't "knowing something and just not mentioning it or pretending you don't". That is lying. Willfully ignorant is "not knowing something because you have avoided any sources that might let you know that something".
For instance. Not checking your mail because you don't want to know about your bills, is willfull ignorance.
Checking your mail and seeing the bill but then throwing it away unpaid and later claiming to never have seen it, is just flat out lying.
Unintentional ignorance is checking your mail every day but actually never getting the bill.
|
|
Rickard Roentgen
Renaissance Punk
Join date: 4 Apr 2004
Posts: 1,869
|
12-28-2005 17:13
Please please please ignore any flaming in the interests of keeping this thread open.
|
|
Stankleberry Sullivan
Interneter
Join date: 18 Dec 2005
Posts: 550
|
12-28-2005 17:14
http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.aspOh my god, the entire US government were liars right until election year 2004, when they suddenly decided that they were only joking when they said all of these things.
|
|
Jeffrey Gomez
Cubed™
Join date: 11 Jun 2004
Posts: 3,522
|
12-28-2005 17:21
Honest opinion is the facts and evidence are more important than "the lie." I opened a pretty nasty can of worms using the term for debate, when I should have used "unproven falsity" to make the point more clear. That said, do I think the men and women in office are liars? Abso-freaking-lutely. Isn't that the definition of a politician? 
_____________________
---
|
|
Rickard Roentgen
Renaissance Punk
Join date: 4 Apr 2004
Posts: 1,869
|
12-28-2005 17:27
btw, is the ignoramous one meaning ignorant for any reason?
|
|
Chance Abattoir
Future Rockin' Resmod
Join date: 3 Apr 2004
Posts: 3,898
|
An odd choice to link to-
12-28-2005 17:28
From: Stankleberry Sullivan http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.aspOh my god, the entire US government were liars right until election year 2004, when they suddenly decided that they were only joking when they said all of these things. An odd choice to link to- From: Snopes
However, some of the quotes are truncated, and context is provided for none of them — several of these quotes were offered in the course of statements that clearly indicated the speaker was decidedly against unilateral military intervention in Iraq by the U.S. Moreover, several of the quotes offered antedate the four nights of airstrikes unleashed against Iraq by U.S. and British forces during Operation Desert Fox in December 1998, after which Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen and Gen. Henry H. Shelton (chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) announced the action had been successful in "degrad[ing] Saddam Hussein's ability to deliver chemical, biological and nuclear weapons."
_____________________
"The mob requires regular doses of scandal, paranoia and dilemma to alleviate the boredom of a meaningless existence."
-Insane Ramblings, Anton LaVey
|
|
Rickard Roentgen
Renaissance Punk
Join date: 4 Apr 2004
Posts: 1,869
|
12-28-2005 17:29
lol this isn't in reference to people in office. This is in general. Anyway, someone being a liar would indicate habitual behavior, we just want to define what behavior it is that has to be habitual  . |
|
Rickard Roentgen
Renaissance Punk
Join date: 4 Apr 2004
Posts: 1,869
|
12-28-2005 17:30
Bad Chance, don't feed him.
|
|
Stankleberry Sullivan
Interneter
Join date: 18 Dec 2005
Posts: 550
|
12-28-2005 17:32
From: Chance Abattoir An odd choice to link to- What's odd about it? So what if some of the people that made the statements were still against the war? That makes my point stronger. Everyone thought Iraq had WMDs, so calling Bush a liar is pretty stupid. Not that that'll stop people from believing that. |
|
Stankleberry Sullivan
Interneter
Join date: 18 Dec 2005
Posts: 550
|
12-28-2005 17:32
From: Rickard Roentgen Bad Chance, don't feed him. Mind your business. |
|
Chance Abattoir
Future Rockin' Resmod
Join date: 3 Apr 2004
Posts: 3,898
|
12-28-2005 17:32
From: Rickard Roentgen Bad Chance, don't feed him. Wait a bit till the second Billy Goat Gruff comes. He's much bigger.
_____________________
"The mob requires regular doses of scandal, paranoia and dilemma to alleviate the boredom of a meaningless existence."
-Insane Ramblings, Anton LaVey
|
|
Rickard Roentgen
Renaissance Punk
Join date: 4 Apr 2004
Posts: 1,869
|
12-28-2005 17:33
oh I give up, just close it now . |
|
Stankleberry Sullivan
Interneter
Join date: 18 Dec 2005
Posts: 550
|
12-28-2005 17:34
From: Rickard Roentgen oh I give up, just close it now . I wonder why constantly calling someone who you don't agree with a "troll" doesn't count as a personal attack. Weird. |
|
Rickard Roentgen
Renaissance Punk
Join date: 4 Apr 2004
Posts: 1,869
|
12-28-2005 17:39
I have never called you that, and have attempted not to attack you in a personal matter. I have implied it once I suppose . My appologies. |
|
Jeffrey Gomez
Cubed™
Join date: 11 Jun 2004
Posts: 3,522
|
12-28-2005 17:39
For those that missed it, here's a blow-by-blow summary of the debate so far: http://www.bash.org/?23396From: someone Poster #1: HEY POSTER #2
Poster #1: INSULT
Poster #2: RETORT
Poster #1: COUNTER-RETORT
Poster #2: QUESTIONING OF SEXUAL PREFERENCE
Poster #1: SUGGESTION TO SHUT THE FUCK UP
Poster #2: NOTATION THAT YOU CREATE A VACUUM
Poster #1: RIPOSTE
Poster #1: ADDON RIPOSTE
Poster #2: COUNTER-RIPOSTE
Poster #1: COUNTER-COUNTER RIPOSTE
Poster #3: NONSENSICAL STATEMENT INVOLVING IGGIE KOOPA
Poster #4: RESPONSE TO RANDOM STATEMENT AND THREAT TO REPORT OPPOSING SIDES
Poster #5: WORDS OF PRAISE FOR JESKA LINDEN
Poster #4: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND ACCEPTENCE OF TERMS
_____________________
---
|
|
Chance Abattoir
Future Rockin' Resmod
Join date: 3 Apr 2004
Posts: 3,898
|
12-28-2005 17:44
From: Stankleberry Sullivan What's odd about it? So what if some of the people that made the statements were still against the war? That makes my point stronger. Everyone thought Iraq had WMDs, so calling Bush a liar is pretty stupid. Not that that'll stop people from believing that. From: Snopes
However, some of the quotes are truncated, and context is provided for none of them — several of these quotes were offered in the course of statements that clearly indicated the speaker was decidedly against unilateral military intervention in Iraq by the U.S. Moreover, several of the quotes offered antedate the four nights of airstrikes unleashed against Iraq by U.S. and British forces during Operation Desert Fox in December 1998, after which Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen and Gen. Henry H. Shelton (chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) announced the action had been successful in "degrad[ing] Saddam Hussein's ability to deliver chemical, biological and nuclear weapons."
That part plus the lack of context. Context is everything. Whose information they are going off of when they are reading their statement, for instance, would change the context of the speech. If Sen. Joe Democrat was given a military intelligence report from Rumsfeld prior to making the statement, that would change the way I'd view the quote. Your point would be better if you chose specific instances or quotes and cited in context, rather than linking to a resource that Snopes has already indicated is questionable.
_____________________
"The mob requires regular doses of scandal, paranoia and dilemma to alleviate the boredom of a meaningless existence."
-Insane Ramblings, Anton LaVey
|
|
Torley Linden
Enlightenment!
Join date: 15 Sep 2004
Posts: 16,530
|
12-28-2005 17:46
For the record, my favorite Koopa kid was Ludwig von Koopa.
|
|
Stankleberry Sullivan
Interneter
Join date: 18 Dec 2005
Posts: 550
|
12-28-2005 17:49
From: Chance Abattoir That part plus the lack of context. Context is everything. Whose information they are going off of when they are reading their statement, for instance, would change the context of the speech. If Sen. Joe Democrat was given a military intelligence report from Rumsfeld prior to making the statement, that would change the way I'd view the quote.
Your point would be better if you chose specific instances or quotes and cited in context, rather than linking to a resource that Snopes has already indicated is questionable. It's not like those statements meant something different because they didn't want us to invade alone. "Saddam has WMDs and wants to make more of them". That's pretty straightforward. We're talking about "Bush lied", not "should we have gone into Iraq". Many of the quotes on that page are from after 2001. You can ignore the 1998 quotes if you'd like. |