News:

TESTEMONAIL:  Right and Discordianism allows room for personal interpretation. You have your theories and I have mine. Unlike Christianity, Discordia allows room for ideas and opinions, and mine is well-informed and based on ancient philosophy and theology, so, my neo-Discordian friends, open your minds to my interpretation and I will open my mind to yours. That's fair enough, right? Just claiming to be discordian should mean that your mind is open and willing to learn and share ideas. You guys are fucking bashing me and your laughing at my theologies and my friends know what's up and are laughing at you and honestly this is my last shot at putting a label on my belief structure and your making me lose all hope of ever finding a ideological group I can relate to because you don't even know what the fuck I'm talking about and everything I have said is based on the founding principals of real Discordianism. Expand your mind.

Main Menu

HEY DISCORDIA:

Started by Salty, June 07, 2012, 10:06:10 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Triple Zero

I'm not sure, I've read the Dutch translation in dead tree format, which I suspect would be closer to the original German text (also, though it's been a while, I seem to remember they left in a bunch of Germanisms, so it might actually have been quite close). If it was intended to be humorous (which is not all too unlikely), it's definitely written with a straight face.

Wikipedia seems to agree: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Being_Right
"The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831) (Eristische Dialektik: Die Kunst, Recht zu Behalten) is an acidulous and sarcastic treatise written by the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer in sarcastic deadpan.[1]"

Either way, it's definitely very useful and informative. What I particularly like about the book is how it's pretty much complete: It spans the range from perfectly acceptable "moves" in an argument (refuting the opponent's position with counterproof, reasoning or logic) all the way to the final stratagem which reads "If all else fails, become rude, insulting" :)
Ex-Soviet Bloc Sexual Attack Swede of Tomorrow™
e-prime disclaimer: let it seem fairly unclear I understand the apparent subjectivity of the above statements. maybe.

INFORMATION SO POWERFUL, YOU ACTUALLY NEED LESS.

Bebek Sincap Ratatosk

I agree, I only recently read it when PE showed me the definition and I started researching it more...
- I don't see race. I just see cars going around in a circle.

"Back in my day, crazy meant something. Now everyone is crazy" - Charlie Manson

ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞

Quote from: Triple Zero on June 08, 2012, 02:48:22 PM
It spans the range from perfectly acceptable "moves" in an argument (refuting the opponent's position with counterproof, reasoning or logic) all the way to the final stratagem which reads "If all else fails, become rude, insulting" :)

:hammer:
P E R   A S P E R A   A D   A S T R A

Anna Mae Bollocks

Quote from: Net on June 09, 2012, 01:16:35 AM
Quote from: Triple Zero on June 08, 2012, 02:48:22 PM
It spans the range from perfectly acceptable "moves" in an argument (refuting the opponent's position with counterproof, reasoning or logic) all the way to the final stratagem which reads "If all else fails, become rude, insulting" :)

:hammer:

I learned that on the internets.  :lulz:
Scantily-Clad Inspector of Gigantic and Unnecessary Cashews, Texas Division