Posted by Mikko (184.108.40.206) on May 25, 2002 at 03:54:07:
In Reply to: Oh, please. Like I need yet ANOTHER sex-crazed groupy. In your dreams, woman. (nt) posted by Bartholomew (220.127.116.11) on May 24, 2002 at 16:52:28:
: : : : : No, both those people are hypocrites. The grocery store yeller DOES yell at grocery clerks. The murderer DOES murder people.
: : : : This is what I'm saying.
: : : True, it's one thing you were saying. But it's not the issue here.
: : : What you were REALLY saying (and the reason you brought up the grocery store guy and the murderer in the first place) is that my definition was wrong BECAUSE of your example. As a secondary goal, you wanted to prove my definition to be wrong because it said that Porky was not a hypocrite.
: : : I said "No, both those people are hypocrites" in contradiction of your statement "That's like saying...." To put my statement in other words, "No, I am not saying that those people are hypocrites."
: : :
: : : THIS is the MAIN part of what I was saying (which you deleted because you didn't know how to respond to it)(which is probably because it's right):
: : : : : "Practice" is not the same as "do." Just because someone is not doing murder at the current time doesn't mean that they don't practice murder.
: : : My definition was, "Hypocrisy is preaching what you do not practice." So my definition DOES say that the shopper and the murderer are hypocrites. So it's consistent. And my definition ALSO says that porky is not a hypocrite. If you want to say my definition's wrong, and that porky is a hypocrite, you need better reasons than the one's you've presented.
Post a Followup