Dictionary, Encyclopedia and Thesaurus - The Free Dictionary
The user name or password entered is incorrect. Please try again.
Acronyms & Abbr.
Español / Spanish
Deutsch / German
Français / French
Italiano / Italian
Português / Portuguese
Nederlands / Dutch
Norsk / Norwegian
Ελληνική / Greek
Русский / Russian
The Free Dictionary Language Forums
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Thursday, March 11, 2010 12:19:14 AM
Number of Posts:
[0.04% of all post / 0.09 posts per day]
Last 10 Posts
What is happening to the forum?
Wednesday, December 16, 2009 5:16:34 PM
There are many exceptions but...Speaking for myself, I'm tired of seeing a small group of people post obviously contentious topics, not for real discussion, but to use TFD forums as a podium to anonymously pontificate about their controversial opinions while pretending to hide a thinly veiled contempt for those who may disagree with them.
TB is talking about me. Banal posts I can deal with, it's when posters start in on those that are weaker or different than they are that makes me want to rub it back in their faces.
Writing develops and strengthens your opinion. When a writer picks up a pen or types on a keyboard, he is forced to think about his ideas in a language that is structured for communication. A discussion helps form new and better ideas (or at least gives him practice in communicating them). A lot of the ideas here are bad or wrong, so what? You cannot have the good without the bad.
Sure I sometimes don't like the way others treat people, they can be down right ignorant and nasty, and if this was not an anonymous forum I probably would run them out of town. That's what he wants to do to me but this isn't the physical world this is an Internet forum.
I guess TB's sincerity is the saving grace where he derives all of his moral authority from but in the cold hard bit-code world of the Internet it is lost. Here reason rules supereme.
I too believe people should be sincere; however, there should be a time and a place for everything, even speculative and controversial thought without the fear of the proverbial "dictator" and his squad coming to get you. IF not this forum than where?
P.S. I was going to post topics about the following... but i dont know if i should on this forum because the topics are not social by nature.
In general, when modeling phenomena in science and engineering, we begin with simplified, incomplete models. As we examine things in greater detail, these simple models become inadequate and must be replaced by more refined models.
The contrast between function and procedure is a reflection of the general distinction between describing properties of things and describing how to do things, or, as it is sometimes referred to, the distinction between declarative knowledge and imperative knowledge. In mathematics we are usually concerned with declarative (what is) descriptions, whereas in computer science we are usually concerned with imperative (how to) descriptions.
Declarative and imperative descriptions are intimately related, as indeed are mathematics and computer science. For instance, to say that the answer produced by a program is ``correct'' is to make a declarative statement about the program. There is a large amount of research aimed at establishing techniques for proving that programs are correct, and much of the technical difficulty of this subject has to do with negotiating the transition between imperative statements (from which programs are constructed) and declarative statements (which can be used to deduce things). In a related vein, an important current area in programming-language design is the exploration of so-called very high-level languages, in which one actually programs in terms of declarative statements. The idea is to make interpreters sophisticated enough so that, given ``what is'' knowledge specified by t
he programmer, they can generate ``how to'' knowledge automatically. This cannot be done in general, but there are important areas where progress has been made.
I'm trying to invent two new words.
I want to make a word using and combining the phrase "cook's knife".
The definition will be the following:
Noun, an elegant idea which seems dangerous, but which experts use with confidence.
Noun, something that is so horrible that the only good thing about is when you stop doing it.
Rachel Maddows has such large labia, just like a hyena's, that she could teabag you.
What if we were not made of atoms. can you image a world that is not based on atoms.. it doesn't have to look like this world or existence. what if the material didn't exist?
Does it look like clouds (common image of heaven)?
Being smart is the new stupid.
Saturday, December 12, 2009 1:54:24 AM
First off I believe that society can only be good, it's other things that are hurting us right now, unnatural things.
You're sorry about your ridiculous opinion on the forbidden use of the word cavemen, duly noted and thankfully forgotten. I'm sure laymen and scientists both appreciate your apology. You repeatedly stating that it was wrong without suggesting an alternative was cute and cruelly pedantic at the same time. What are you going to do, throw me out of the University of Furrumples?
Now on to your points about nature and Mesopotamia. You say all of Babylon is thriving? That is debatable but whatever you meant by thriving I still believe it is bad.
You misused the word ironic, there is nothing unexpected about Rousseau writing books or even making engravings. Also, I would never call "the state of nature" a wilderness that was always too cold or barren for human life--that came from your "intellect" not mine.
Here is some real irony, apparently
our efficient civilization is going to destroy us
You're making this personal and I rather not open that can of worms. The "society" I was born and raised in doesn't exist any more, it was destroyed by certain powers that will remain nameless. Let us just say an illiterate but wise bushman gave me my real name and another use to carried me into the bush on his shoulders when I was a babe. My mother said he would take me with him all day into the bush and that's where bushmen go to gather food. You know nothing, absolutely nothing about my "house" and you better not show your ignorance again. It also has nothing to do with the subject matter and it is not cool.
Don't get me wrong I am not nostalgic and I know each generation thinks the next is going to destroy the world. I'm just stating this all as a static truth--the problems we face are as far from a solution as even.
We cannot rest on our laurels; we must always seek the truth and if it cannot be done simply than it cannot be done at all. When once simple honest clear thinking was held in high esteem, thinkers would spend a lifetime working to make their ideas more understandable. Now convolution and esoteric thought is used to masquerade the perpetration of vice as virtue. The forbidden caveman would agree.
what is ritual terror?
Saturday, December 12, 2009 1:34:32 AM
maybe it is an open ended question.
Being smart is the new stupid.
Saturday, December 12, 2009 12:09:01 AM
why, in your opinion, I misused the word 'society'.
I assumed that you were one of those guys that thinks society is evil and government is good. You know the type: afraid of life and in need of a master to save them from it. (If you didn't read my last post on the first page, please do)
the seer wrote:
It's more about...who is in power. After all, the powerful dictate the kind of world we live in, whether we like it or not.
This is exactly what I am arguing against.
Freedom is not the known, it is the unknown. Freedom is not placid safety, it is most definitely dangerous but it is a responsibility you have not only to yourself but to every other human being. For those of you who don't understand yet; believe me, when you do break through to the other side, if you ever do,
there will be no going back
. And when you do I will be there to share in your joy and wonderment.
Being smart is the new stupid.
Friday, December 11, 2009 11:57:49 PM
I can name one person who uses the term caveman, me! My words are too simplistic? Not for the topic of this thread.
the seer wrote:
your statement that we are no smarter now then when we were back then is not exactly accurate. Take into consideration Mesopotamia, widely considered the first major civilization. It formed around 7000 B.C.E. The emergence of modern humans occurred 200,000 years ago. Therefore, it took us more than 190,000 years to establish self sustaining civilizations. This provides a strong case against your assertion in that it shows definite progress of large groups of people working together (increase in average intelligence),even if it took so long to accomplish.
What progress did the ancient Mesopotamian civilization achieve over its predecessors? what accomplishments? Rousseau states that the state of nature was superior and I agree--it was paradise. This is exactly what people do not understand about Rousseau; he's saying that the people in Mesopotamia were forced into an inferior form of life just to survive.
You assume that cavemen didn't have their own life. Conversely, I assume they had more life than we will ever have. I'm willing to go out on a limb, like Rousseau, and say they had a "superior experience" than us--life, love, art, culture, knowledge and understanding. Can you dig it?
IF someone calls me absurd for believing that anything is possible, I'll call them just as absurd for not believing that anything is possible.
This thread is working out better than I thought it would, so much fun.
Post Your Word List at TFD
Friday, December 11, 2009 4:37:26 PM
adj. exhibiting inexperience
n. integrity and uprightness; honesty.
adj. 1. worthy of esteem; deserving respect or admiration. 2. capable of being estimated.
adj. having failed, missed, or fallen short, esp. because of circumstances or a defect of character; unsuccessful; unfulfilled or frustrated (usually used postpositively).
n. in the philosophy of Kant, an object as it is in itself independent of the mind, as opposed to phenomenon. Also called thing-in-itself.
a word or phrase used in a manner that it can be interpreted in two ways, especially when one of the meanings is risque.
(included here just because I don't see it as much as I should)
verb tr. to inconvenience
adj. Free from contamination
n. a horizontal beam supporting a wall over a large opening, such as a shop window.
n. the 15th day of March, May, July, or October, and the 13th day of the other months
(this word must no longer be important)
adj. having teeth.
n. the sky or heaven
adj. given to scratching the ground to look for food
n. the second most important part in a play.
n. an easing of tension between rivals.
adj. serving as a warning or alarm.
adj. showing different colors when viewed from different directions
n. a violent dust storm or sandstorm, especially in Sudan.
adj. having returned to a saner mind.
n. double vision.
adj. occurring in pairs; twin.
adj. having the end truncated, as if bitten or broken off.
adverb. Maybe; possibly. noun. Uncertainty; doubt.
(another easy word little used)
adj. 1. rural; rustic 2. crude; unpolished
(from ager, Latin for field.)
n. 1. a half 2. a portion
n. a state of freedom from disturbance of mind
n. obsessive repetition of meaningless words and phrases
n. conciseness of diction or an instance of such
n. oral stimulation of the clitoris or vulva
adj. 1. having a shell 2. having the reddish brown color of bricks or baked clay
v. to make decorative additions to; to spruce up
n. a doorkeeper, especially in a church.
vomitorium (plural: vomitoria)
n. a passageway to the rows of seats in a theater.
(someone on this forum misused this word)
adj. like a thrush (a songbird)
(a classic word for any list)
n. 1. the fraction of light reflected from a body or surface. e. g. earth's is around 0.39. 2. the white, spongy inner lining of citrus fruit rind.
adj. bluish or grayish green.
adj. growing in windy conditions.
adj. of or relating to worms
adverb Anew; from the beginning
Picture Association, Part 2
Thursday, December 10, 2009 3:33:31 PM
Thursday, December 10, 2009 12:27:53 AM
Historic EPA finding: Greenhouse gases harm humans
Wednesday, December 9, 2009 11:54:08 PM
Yea, it sucks that the Internet is being censored by location. Youtube is another offender. I guess it's motivated by money. Content producers need to make a living too but it goes against the original intent of the Internet--anonymity.
Historic EPA finding: Greenhouse gases harm humans
Wednesday, December 9, 2009 8:24:36 PM
Your BBC show is not part of the Internet, only brits can view it.
Why does the UK want to block foreigners from their websites? (The founders of the Internet are turning in their graves.)
Main Forum RSS :
Forum Terms and Guidelines
Copyright © 2008-2020
. All rights reserved.