Lionel wrote:
Ludo a écrit :

I can add that like many frontal cortex-disadvantaged when he's short
of an argument he resorts to forgery, quotes nonexistent sources and
makes sweeping affirmations about what his imaginary researchers are
doing.


OTOH there is also *very* intelligent persons who exactly act like this.
This is the big, big problem with your above conclusion Ludo.
Doing that, you implicitly include yourself in your description of the
"frontal cortex-disadvantaged".

Common sense and its corrolary *happiness* have nothing to do with
intelligence.
As long as you will prefer the *strass* to the reality you will remain
like *your* "frontal cortex-disadvantaged"... A life casualty. :-(

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Your point is well-taken: intelligent people can have no use for
intelectual honesty in debate. My model was an argument at eg. the
medical rounds where you're either factual and can quote your sources
or you're a laughing stock. Pop psychology is quite, quiite different
and one can easily find support for any dearly held notion that one
holds.
Generalisations apart it remains that NYOB stands out as a forger and
a cheat even by the elastic RAO standard just like Pinkerton is an
aggressive sociopath seeking his cow-waste missiles in a gutter as soon
as crossed and desperate for an argument.
These are my lessons from the RAO debates.
Ludovic Mirabel

--
Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
But what's new around here?

Dave Weil - Sun, 05 Oct 2003 00:57:15 -0500