Ace
Junior Member
yo
Posts: 88
Likes: 40
Country: US
Politics: Marxist-Leninist
Religion: None
Hero: Fidel Castro
Age: 16
|
Post by Ace on Jul 21, 2018 18:40:47 GMT
If you want to get your message across, please do so in a civilized manner. Sit down and talk with people who disagree with you instead of yelling in their faces.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Jul 21, 2018 18:49:18 GMT
Who are the blm activists?
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Jul 21, 2018 18:50:55 GMT
Who are the blm activists? Black Lives Matter = BLM.. I think
|
|
heneryt
Junior Member
Posts: 78
Likes: 42
|
Post by heneryt on Jul 31, 2018 17:20:10 GMT
If you want to get your message across, please do so in a civilized manner. Sit down and talk with people who disagree with you instead of yelling in their faces. That's true but it's quote hard to convenience these type of people... I have already tried to talk with these people they are not ready to accept anything which is against them
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2018 21:13:13 GMT
There's something interesting about speech acts as they are discussed in 'linguistic philosophy'. Some of phrases can be taken by someone as sorta action. For example, if I had come to the forum and loudly type 'I LOVE ELIZABETH!', and some of participants would have guessed my message as a reveal of my love to Elizabeth. But what is never done to this phrase - it can be accepted as both truth and false. So, such phrases can't help us if the case if we start to consider them as phrase with a 'special message'.
The secret of such phrases is in two spare adds to the phrases. Firstly, we start considering something behind it, secondly, considering something behind it means that something is linked with what are considering about. If A is a speech act, this means that someone (probably, the one who does all this routine) add ->B, so we get A->B, and B means that 'there's something inside an 'A' that causes B.
(A^x)->B
The statement x->B is usually dropped. But this statement is the main one. If A, and x->B, and A is truth, and x->B is supposed to be truth by the routine maker, than ... then nothing. There's no conclusion from A and x->B to something. That's why this mind-discussion is false.
So, you all can ask me: for why I wrote it? I'll explain - the very first statement in the start of the post is very close to the speech act phrase. We can't say whether it is a speech act or no in every case, but some of are able to be them. We can notice such claims in political or social life very often.
|
|
FireFoxAssassin
Full Member
Posts: 268
Likes: 151
Country: United Kingdom
Region: Wales
Religion: N/A (Atheism)
Age: 17
|
Post by FireFoxAssassin on Sept 3, 2018 21:34:49 GMT
I have not been..uh..."graced" to talk to one of these people, but looking at the thread opening post, it seems they are not that fun to talk to.
|
|