How To Think Correctly

[Splitlink]

You will have to be number 4, yes, surely, for you are, even now exceeding the ultimate creation of generations, and, as Socrates, rightly says, by your continuous repetition, are heading towards the middle box, to receive that all important medal, of No. 1 Fool.

It may come as a big surprise to YOU and your BUDDIES, that similarities, will indeed manifest themselves in the writings of like minded people, and this holds true for those that know how to think correctly, the same as it holds true for those that are ignorant, or, in keeping with the recent flow, FOOLS. :idea:

As for the waste of space, I will reply to him next, and many will be now confused, and wondering who that might be, as the waste of space is growing and growing.

Now that is a worthwhile thought, maybe I will let people think for a while, so that can see where the space is really been wasted :idea:

It is always the same old FOOLS that come along to save the day - with nothing really to offer, but diversions from the real truth.

Ye are truly an ignorant bunch of fools!

Whatever you do, though, don't go purple on us. Green, to go with blarney, might be more suitable.

Split

 

[rossored]

This thread has now been moved to the foyer.

 

[CYOF]

Zu,

You have surpassed PT, and your are now on your way to becoming No.1 FOOL, but be careful, others are challenging you.

No I am back only because once again, you’ve shown your inability to think for yourself.

Do you really think this is factual?


You might also note that at no point in my post did I agree or disagree with the statistic you provided. I simply questioned the practice of accepting information that is presented as a “fact” at face value.

But I did say that I have the supporting information, all is needed is for someone to ask, but many are afraid to ask, because the think they will be ridiculed, like I am been ridiculed, but , the difference is, I always speak THE TRUTH, so I never have anything to fear, but, then again, you will never understand this concept


There where several reasons I pointed this out

a) Its not good practice, and its particularly foolish to accept numerical data from a source whose knowledge of elementary mathematics is so poor that he doesn’t even know the number of degrees in a circle.

That was a genuine error, for which I apologised, and if you want to know why it happened, it was due to me looking at the little icon in Adobe, which I was going out of my way to get a method so that all may rotate the chart, but, again, you of course will make a BIG issue out of nothing, typical mentality of a FOOL.

b) The % of options expiring worthless is common knowledge, but of no value in itself whatsoever, other than to suggest a possible basis on which a strategy could be developed.

Now, you have, again, just demonstrated that you are indeed a FOOL. "No value in itself", are you living in cuckoo land?, or are you still been taught by that brilliant professor of yours, whom, must have had something to do with Economics, by the things you are coming out with


c) I honestly believe that people should be cautious when taking advice from people who claim to speak with imaginary friends

Luiden and I are ONE - and we will always be ONE - but you will never grasp this concept either, for you keep the blinkers on so tight, that you have indeed, a tunnel vision.


I assure you “sticking out like a sore thumb” to you and your ilk causes me no concern whatsoever, you provide an entertaining distraction through the working day, no more no less.

Again you show your stupidity, what a statement



I work for no one, and haven’t for a considerable time, I have no need to, nor have I any wish to do so in the foreseeable future. I have no agenda whatsoever.

Maybe so, but it does not change the facts, which you are clearly showing :cheesy:



No its not a coincidence, you’ll find that if you say something stupid or foolish, people respond, some out of genuine concern for your mental wellbeing, and others to take the p1ss. In all sincerity I’m glad you feel as if your trap worked, personally if I where you Id spend a bit more time working on trading related issues rather than setting traps, but each to his own I guess.

The trap was not intended initially, but Luiden did tell me to watch this, and all I can say, is, he is never wrong


It does amuse me however to see you constantly encouraging us to share our methods, on the basis of your “law of abundance”, your not the first, and you wont be the last.

Your methods -what a joke - you have nothing to offer anyone. You are, to say the least, of no significance whatsoever, and whilst you may think you are successful, with your academic skills (and you know what I think of that type of teaching by now) then you surely should step up to the middle box, immediately.

At the risk of becoming repetitive I will once again point out that the half baked confused thoughts swirling around your brain are ill founded beliefs that you read from a free ebook, not the truth, and that is what really amuses many of us

A free e-book - OK let me see where the truth is in this.

Essay by Montaigne - free e-book, I do not think so, it may be a valuable historical document, but then again, we all know by now, how the vast majority, been 99.999% of so called professional teachers, know nothing about real teaching, and you, appear to be their No.1 student :cheesy:

ION dialogue - hmmm.

Life and Death of Socrates - well, it is a very old book in an e-book format, and I did get it for nothing, so in that respect it is a free e-book - I hold my hands up high here.

You would like to know the rest, wouldn't you, but you are not getting them, for you do not deserve them, and you, and your like, will never be able to understand them anyway :cheesy:


as to who will be next.... sorry... I don’t make predictions.

Well, at least I will give you some little credit, and you probably learned this form Socrates at some time in the past, but, you will of course not say, for, you are, indeed, a FOOL.

Regards
zup

BTW, do not take this personally, for, although you may not know it, I am actually trying to help you, but I need to speak THE TRUTH, else, all will be in vain :idea:

Slainte,

 

[CYOF]

This thread has now been moved to the foyer.

Please explain why Matt,

Are we not entitled to our opinions?

Are we not entitled to take "an eye for an eye"?

Are we not all adults, that can handle any emotional issues?

Are we not FREE to say as we wish?

And, just so all know, I have never, since I joined this site, reported a bad post, for this is another way of censorship, and censorship stops the real TRUTH from emerging.

Slainte,

 

[CYOF]

Also Matt,

Please remove all my stars, for I have tried to do it in the past, but was unable.

I have no need for such a thing.

Thank You.

 

[rossored]

Please explain why Matt,

Are we not entitled to our opinions?

Are we not entitled to take "an eye for an eye"?

Are we not all adults, that can handle any emotional issues?

Are we not FREE to say as we wish?

And, just so all know, I have never, since I joined this site, reported a bad post, for this is another way of censorship, and censorship stops the real TRUTH from emerging.

Slainte,

you're quite entitled to your opinions.

However when this thread has carried on (off the rails) as long as it has, I don't see the point in it cluttering up the front page anymore.

Your stars (and green blobs) have been removed. However if you receive further ratings they will re-appear.

 

[CYOF]

you're quite entitled to your opinions.

However when this thread has carried on (off the rails) as long as it has, I don't see the point in it cluttering up the front page anymore.

Your stars (and green blobs) have been removed. However if you receive further ratings they will re-appear.

Thank you for that Matt,

And I now have a simple request, as follows.

Can we please set up a POLL to see if members want this thread returned to the Psychology section - and in keeping with democratic principles, the majority vote will be carried.

The polling station can be closed on Friday, as that should be ample time to allow the public to vote.

Slainte,

 

[CYOF]

It's not a real can. It's just a picture. Please study the diagram carefully :

As I said, you are on a different wavelength, but Luiden has asked me to post something, which will help you understand, for, he really is, at the back of it, a nice little fellow, although, he can be very stubborn at times, and I am glad he is

What about this colour split - too heavy on the eyes?

Or this maybe?

As I said, you are on a different wavelength, but Luiden has asked me to post something, which will help you understand, for, he really is, at the back of it, a nice little fellow, although, he can be very stubborn at times, and I am glad he is

Slainte,

 

[SOCRATES]

If this thread is returned to the Psychology Section, INTACT I will continue to post on it, and if it is not, I will not.

 

[Splitlink]

As I said, you are on a different wavelength, but Luiden has asked me to post something, which will help you understand, for, he really is, at the back of it, a nice little fellow, although, he can be very stubborn at times, and I am glad he is

What about this colour split - too heavy on the eyes?

Or this maybe?

As I said, you are on a different wavelength, but Luiden has asked me to post something, which will help you understand, for, he really is, at the back of it, a nice little fellow, although, he can be very stubborn at times, and I am glad he is

Slainte,

No, I take it back-- green's very difficult

Split

 

[CYOF]

Apologies, as I have to go now, but Luiden has promised that he will get me to post later on.

But, as he is a stubborn little fellow, he has also asked me to give you his name in English, for he is worried that some may think he is German, or some other nationality, when in fact, he is Irish.

So, his name is pronunced in English as follows:


LouDean

Lou -as in Lou Grant, and Dean as in James Dean

Mac

Mock - as in Mock Exam

Lou - as in Lou Grant again.


So, his full name in English is, please note he has dressed for the occasion:

LouDean Mock Lou

 

[CYOF]

If this thread is returned to the Psychology Section, INTACT I will continue to post on it, and if it is not, I will not.

Yes, I think you are correct Socrates, and I also think if others want this discussion to continue, then they must post requesting the POLL.

And this now must be done, for LouDean has told me that it is now make or break time - time for the adults to come forward and for the children to stay at home.

I am sorry, but that is what he has said

Slainte,

 

[dc2000]

If this thread is returned to the Psychology Section, INTACT I will continue to post on it, and if it is not, I will not.

This is not the first time you have taken the decision to no longer post in a thread that no longer appears on the FRONT PAGE

Surely you can see that Rosso is correct and the thread has gone so far off track that it is totally irrelevant to the Psychology section

 

[Splitlink]

Apologies, as I have to go now, but Luiden has promised that he will get me to post later on.

But, as he is a stubborn little fellow, he has also asked me to give you his name in English, for he is worried that some may think he is German, or some other nationality, when in fact, he is Irish.

So, his name is pronunced in English as follows:


LouDean

Lou -as in Lou Grant, and Dean as in James Dean

Mac

Mock - as in Mock Exam

Lou - as in Lou Grant again.


So, his full name in English is, please note he has dressed for the occasion:

LouDean Mock Lou

Yes, well, seeing that your location is Kilkenny I figured that anyone associated with you would be Irish. We're not complete idiots around here, you know! A certain amount of deduction is done (and excuses made)

Also, I have been verbally battered by Irish logic for years. I've worked with them, drunk with them and had them on both sides of me as neighbours but not one of them has exposed me to his brand of physcology before. They'll get me in the end

But, maybe, we can save you from the dreaded purple people eater, first

Split

 

[Charlton]

Keep under psychology

This is not the first time you have taken the decision to no longer post in a thread that no longer appears on the FRONT PAGE

Surely you can see that Rosso is correct and the thread has gone so far off track that it is totally irrelevant to the Psychology section

Disagree - this thread and the postings have absolutely everything to do with thinking correctly and psychology and CYOF has every intention IMHO to continue it along those lines if allowed to do so.

Matt - please add my vote to keep it under psychology

Charlton

 

[Splitlink]

I'm not very deep into psychological musings. My question is: Is this talk, between Socrates and CYOF, psychology ? If it is, let it stay. If it isn't--out.

I'm not voting on it, though. There are plenty here who know more about what is being talked about than I do.

They can take that as a compliment, or not

Split

 

[andycan]

Disagree - this thread and the postings have absolutely everything to do with thinking correctly and psychology and CYOF has every intention IMHO to continue it along those lines if allowed to do so.

Matt - please add my vote to keep it under psychology

Charlton

i would have to agree too
CYOF initiated the thread he has attempted to keep it on track but there are a few that would rather turn it into a pub mentality discussion

 

[stoic]

for Socrates

Socrates, either you have not seen it, or don't want to reply. I know it's the latter

 

[dc2000]

Disagree - this thread and the postings have absolutely everything to do with thinking correctly and psychology and CYOF has every intention IMHO to continue it along those lines if allowed to do so.

the thread started well and had some good postings in the first 12 pages by CYOF and others even Soc has made a couple but what seems a complete waste of time and worthless exercise is to quote a 300 word post and add "exactly so " or other general comment there are many good posters on this board that post interesting and informative material but there are also those that post to cause controversy

 

[CYOF]

the thread started well and had some good postings in the first 12 pages by CYOF and others even Soc has made a couple but what seems a complete waste of time and worthless exercise is to quote a 300 word post and add "exactly so " or other general comment there are many good posters on this board that post interesting and informative material but there are also those that post to cause controversy

Why then do not these people challenge the subject, and put their views on the subject across?

Would it be because they have no interest in the subject :idea:

LouDean is speaking - please wait.