crikey - MemberTJ still a rockin'?
readin. Not arguing. I think I have shown what a great mass debater I can be 🙂
I thank you for
crikey - MemberCourse, if we start not falling for all this shit, half of STW immediately become redundant...
No wonder they are all so desperate to make you understand how important it all is.
crikey - Member....................
It's a house of cards, its a confidence trick, its all style and no substance, in the words of Mike Harding, Fur coat and no knickers.
crikey - MemberAs I said before, so many people have to believe in this shit with such great passion because if 'the man in the street' caught on the whole charade would come a crashing down.
So let's get this straight. TJ, you think that you are in posession of some great truth, and we are all poor deluded fools?
Warra nob.
Not now molgrips... We're doing the He-man ending:
What have you learnt today Prince Adam?
I'm actually glad I read this thing just for Jackthedog's post. Very good sir.
Excellent recap. Can I have that printed on a Jack-The-Dog™ t-shirt? In a nice humanist sans-serif font, none of your Comic Sans. Any colour, because they have no meaning any more.
Northwind - MemberI'm actually glad I read this thing just for Jackthedog's post. Very good sir.
Indeed
*doffs cap*
So why did it take some people so long to comprehend it?
It didn't; I can't imagine anyone arguiing against that. It's common sense, people are different.
TJ came out with absolute statements that people rightly thought couldn't possible be true, people got wound up and challenged him, then he floundered round, picked on the more weakly worded arguments and semantic points to respond to, gave no impression that he was moving at all in his absolute standpoints.
People tagged in and out when they had to eat, sleep or work, TJ carried on winding people up, largely on exactly the same points, and here we are!
Quite a ride!
molgrips - MemberSo let's get this straight. TJ, you think that you are in posession of some great truth, and we are all poor deluded fools?
Warra nob.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Molgrips,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
What I think and mean I have done my best to explain. No hidden subtext.
I'm with teej and crikey on this..
I'm too long in the tooth for snake oil..
But what if your snake develops an annoying creak?
I'm with teej and crikey on this..I'm too long in the tooth for snake oil..
[img] 
[/img]
cunning.. you should change your name to jackthefox
[img] 
[/img]
There are more things in heaven and earth, Molgrips,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy
And the great irony is that the reality is the completely other way round 🙂
Then you turned up, and asked for a recap, so I wrote a recap which I'm doing right now as evidenced by the fact that I'm posting this post that I'm about to post and will have posted by the time you read it, even though said evidence plays no part in the actual proof of the existence of this post, so don't go getting big ideas, right
Genious... you sir, are a genius and I love your work... please post more 😀
So, just to clarify, NO ONE mentioned chickens before the egg thing?
Guess that's solved that one then.....
Does anyone have the logo for the Samaritans?
don't know how the hell I managed to miss Jack's recap earlier, mine seems rather insubstantial!
yunki: 😀
cant believe this junk is still going.... shame, it started out OK
I got to page 7. does it really follow the same pattern for another 27 pages? 😯
It's alright, Muhsixtuhtuhf, with posts like that, you'll bring it back on course!
warton - MemberI got to page 7. does it really follow the same pattern for another 27 pages?
Pretty much
largely, there are a couple of decent posts in there, but it would be a tragic waste of your time to try and find them.
I got to page 7. does it really follow the same pattern for another 27 pages?
I wouldn't waste your time, you know the protagonists, you know where it's (not) going.
I wouldn't waste your time, you know the protagonists, you know where it's (not) going.
😀
As Mick Jagger once said.
Brothers and sisters, come on now! That means everybody just cool out. We can cool out, everbody! Everybody be cool, now...Okay, I think we're cool, we can groove
I wouldn't waste your time, you know the protagonists, you know where it's (not) going.
It wasn't the protagonists. It was a single infallible antagonist. 🙂
As Mick Jagger once said.
Was that just before the Hells Angels murdered the crazy dude..?
The label can be a name, or a logo/symbol/style/ringtone whatever. Its an identifier. Its job is to be recognised as referring to the particular company, service or product that owns the coathook. When you see/hear the label you look at the coathook.
You are actually describing an account of language here as others did with the chair.
As TJ notes
the label is not the object.
which is true [ but wrong so bear with me] however if I shout fire and start running and you dont respond as if there is a fire and go oh look a sound that means nothing whatsoever then you are in trouble sir. The point of language is to label things [ the sound or the written word is not the object] but we respond as if it is. There is a complicated test that can be done to prove the difference [ no animal except verbal humans can pass it] as to when this occurs and it involves equivalence. You can actually test responses and you can actually get these responses without the person being trained[ or aware but that was deemed unethical but it was fun* ] - that is you can transfer the function from b to c without training a response a to c but only to a-b. This is language
Ok real world example as that probably lost everyone.
so we have shoe the object [a] - shoe the sound[b] and shoe the written word[c]. If I teach a child this shoe object- shoe spoken[a-b] and shoe spoke to written[b-c] [ imagine they dont know what a shoe does yet] you can then test a-c even though you have never trained it and this is the bit only verbal humans can do. Then I put a shoe on their foot using the object and then saying the word shoe [ a-b]. What would happen if I asked them what they did with this and then showed them the written word shoe [c and they have not been trained on this].Would they stare at me blankly or tell me you wear it in your feet? They would transfer the function to c without training or they would not have language skills. in essence it becomes the object
I can reference all of this if you want and it only applies to verbal humans. Apes /other animals cant pass this test so a dog can respond to walk but it is just a sound they associate with an activity- this is verbal behaviour but many animals respond to sounds.
TJ if I say lets go for a bike ride do you go and get your bike or walk out with a coat hook in your hand or any other random object ? The word is not the bike yet you respond as if it was - if you do not you do not have language.
I know of no research that shows that the logo, font or style of the written word [logo]affects your response beyond the aesthetic of liking or disliking it. Back to nestle show it how you like I just transfer the function [ how I respond] of scumbag baby killer to that new symbol and still dont buy it however pretty it is.
Symbols/logos work it is what language does I have not seen anything yet to convince me the style of the logo affects much beyond recognition tbh.
If this got covered sorry but I could not keep reading the thread.
Ps GrahamS has entertained me most he should be a more frequent feature of forum life IMHO.
yunki, it was, and i fear my plea has fallen on equally deaf ears.
Junky, let it die and put it out of our misery in the most humane way possible. I'll give you Contador as a drug taking cheat for a bit of peace and quiet.
FFS
Please mods, think of the children!!!
Come on chaps - If youa re going to post and bump the thread and get me all excited please actually put some content.
We will never get to 2000 unless someone kicks it off again
DS sorry I have dipped in and out I thought I made a relevant point but ok
exits stage left
I still don't get the garmin logo 🙁
Interesting stuff Junkyard, didn't know that. I [i]would[/i] like to discuss it further, but I literally don't have the strength left.
Thanks for this though:
GrahamS has entertained me most he should be a more frequent feature of forum life IMHO.
If I spent any more time on here though I'd lose my job 🙂
DT78 - MemberI still don't get the garmin logo
😆
Any homophobes on here that don't like BBC's iplayer?
[img] 
[/img]
Correct me if I'm wrong. "Brand" a unique identifying mark left on cattle . Those cleaver cowboys did it so as not to get each others cows mixed up, after a while a guess not only did they know it wasn't their cow but remembered that that brand belonged to cowboy weston or whoever. To me that is what a brand is an identifying mark. Taking this a step further an unscrupulous cowboy may see a cow with brand he recognises as being from a cowboy with a reputatuion for breeding good cows and being unscrupulous would maybe choose to steal or maybe rustle the cows with that brand as he recognises it may be a quality cow. These quality cows could be cash cows ut thats something else.
OK, never mind all that shit - does anyone pronounce it "loggo" ??? 😆
only those with big eggos.
It's those bloody eggos again!
I still don't get the garmin logo
me neither. apparently triangles are "clever"
No, but I'm a homophone - I bloody hate gazeAny homophobes on here that don't like BBC's iplayer?
