Hi, so, I was wondering. Instead of talking *about* books and free will and very very advanced philosophical concepts. Why don't we have conversation that includes the implication that we have access to that knowledge, but not base the conversation around s-a-i-d knowledge.
No big deal I was just wondering.
No big deal.
you start
might be because you avoid that knowledge in its entirety and have no access to conversations based in it. try reading.
I just did, any momentum in there?
You have no idea how backwards you have it.
Who are you that I should be taking advice from?
I've read more than I should have. It sounds like you need to catch up.
>can't passive reference
And that's -5 points.
>judges worth based on reference
>uses a numerical point system
have I caught your eye, little one
enough that I need trimming?
>reddit spacing
-20
>categorical imperative
trapped inside the box are we
>violating own premises
-40, official failing grade, resit next year
>still adhering to premise
>not being a hypocritical monster
what is that, negative 65 by now.
I guess all I'll have to do is give it the ol' switcheroo
that's earthworm bait, just for you
it'd be even better if you knew exactly what I was talking about. and so would this. and so would this. and so would this. and so would this.
...
>solecism
-7, 28%, student cannot be retested and manuscript cannot be revised by external examiner
I love this game!
>still focused on worth
>obvious attachment to system of standardization whether satirical or not
I wonder how negative we can go. I'm late. I'm late! For an astoundingly vampiric date! (get it because negative numbers and their tendency to suck)
right lol
Wouldn't that conversation end up on another board? What topic would belong on Veeky Forums but not be explicitly about books?
>hanging around after you flunked out
you sound like you've a full length leather jacket your mother paid for
OP doesn't like to read books and would like other people to pretend he tried
>resulting to insult
please play right or use your coins elsewhere.
4.0 and counting. English Lit. Son of Bacchus, at your service.
what is the opposite of explicitly
not you too. we've been over this. but I am good at pretending.
>american
lulz
best of both worlds
not about Veeky Forums, delete this thread already
this *is* lit
Defensive much?
>what is the opposite of explicitly
Well let's see we both read a book about musical instruments, and we wished to discuss guitars under the assumptions that we are both knowledgeable on the subject, then we'd go to a forum dedicated to music.
I take equal pride in my ability to fortify and my ability to lay the shield down
or, more realistically and usefully and entertainingly, you would make music
>being this sad and lonely
(You)
isn't that the general theme of this place?
(You)
my favorite book is goodnight moon and my favorite philosophy is the way michael jackson combs his hair