Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
7/8/2020 3:01:36 PM
Posted: 4/20/2016 11:46:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/20/2016 11:49:22 PM EDT by a555]
I haven't seen this discussed here and I'm curious how common this is.

I'm pretty binary when it comes to conversation; either I have "mouth diarrhea," as my girlfriend calls it, filled with enough back-and-forth conversational volleys of cultural/scientific references to qualify for banter in an episode of Archer, or I'm am utterly silent when talking to people. I've experienced times with foreigners being able to hold better conversations than I have with other Americans at times. I hold the opinion that people are either interested in learning things and developing skills and that the people who have that drive develop and learn so much over the years to make them interesting enough to exchange thoughts with, or they'd rather hold the status quo, work a menial job for menial pay and can't think past what they are spoon-fed on social networking sites or television.

Example of a conversation with a foreigner (Deadwood: Al's exchange with Wu), and either character could fit, but with legal content: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QbEzCoTafU
Link Posted: 4/20/2016 11:49:48 PM EDT
I am an excellent public speaker, and I can keep a conversation going.

Most of the time I choose not to.



You learn a lot more being quiet. Those that know the least talk about it the most and all that.
Link Posted: 4/20/2016 11:50:54 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Zack3g:
I am an excellent public speaker, and I can keep a conversation going.

Most of the time I choose not to.



You learn a lot more being quiet. Those that know the least talk about it the most and all that.
View Quote


Like how Trump would keep his mouth shut during the debates until it was time to open it.
Link Posted: 4/20/2016 11:52:52 PM EDT
Depends on the person. If they are talkative I find it very easy. If they aren't then I hate having to be the one always talking
Link Posted: 4/20/2016 11:56:30 PM EDT
Just found this: http://myweb.clemson.edu/~campber/peikovianarbitrary.pdf from page 53 in the pdf:

A positive statement derived from some erroneous evidence
can be refuted by means of proving the errors of the alleged
evidence. Such a refutation would be the disproving of a
positive. This is not the same thing as proving a negative; that
is, proving an error or the falsehood of a statement for which
no evidence of any kind exists. For instance, if I said that the
side of the moon which we see consists of mountains and
dead volcanic craters, I would have to offer you scientific
evidence to prove it. But if I said that the other side consists
of rose gardens and Coca-Cola factories and you asked for
proof and I answered, “My proof is the fact that you can’t
disprove it,” no one could blame you if you decided not to
pursue the conversation any further, and, thereafter, not to
hold any serious conversations with me at all. (Lecture 3)
View Quote
Top Top