Immersion Heater Question

[sooey]

It's all Greek to me!

 

[Softus]

You seem to be simply imagining that you know what he is supposed to have said on the subject of poverty and wealth

Aren't you too?

No. Although I don't regard Plato's Socratic dialogue as a gospel, it's pointless having a discussion based on one of them unless you've read it.

How can you be sure that your original statement of his postulate isn't taken out of context

Because I didn't make a statement - I asked a question.

Must admit it's been a while since I read plato

That is not new information.

If you assume his meaning of poverty and wealth then his arguments will no doubt stand, but I question these definitions and can thus refute his arguments accordingly.

I made no such assumption, but at least I've read the thing that I'm referring to.

 

[swidders]

.. am trying to work out the quote boxes/commands to reply here!!

 

[Agile]

Must admit it's been a while since I read plato, but the gist was to use logical arguments based on agreed axioms.

Softun never agrees to anything!

 

[swidders]

..

 

[swidders]

You seem to be simply imagining that you know what he is supposed to have said on the subject of poverty and wealth

Aren't you too?

No. Although I don't regard Plato's Socratic dialogue as a gospel, it's pointless having a discussion based on one of them unless you've read it.?

I have

How can you be sure that your original statement of his postulate isn't taken out of context

Because I didn't make a statement - I asked a question.?[/quote]

So your question is about whether socrates did postulate, and not what you claim he postulated

Must admit it's been a while since I read plato

That is not new information.?[/quote]

Define "new informaton"

If you assume his meaning of poverty and wealth then his arguments will no doubt stand, but I question these definitions and can thus refute his arguments accordingly.

I made no such assumption, but at least I've read the thing that I'm referring to. [/quote]

You are correct here - your question was about whether he said it, not what corollaries naturally follow. Although, for some contradictory purpose, you appear to make such a corollary/application.

 

[oilman]

.. am trying to work out the quote boxes/commands to reply here!!

You are improving, but there's some way to go yet.

 

[Softus]

How can you be sure that your original statement of his postulate isn't taken out of context

Because I didn't make a statement - I asked a question.?

So your question is about whether socrates did postulate, and not what you claim he postulated.

I asked a playful question of oilman. That question was based upon part of a Socrates Dialogue, in which Plato's character made a postulate (one of many, of course). In those circumstances, a reasonable figure of speech is "Did Socrates not postulate......?".

Must admit it's been a while since I read plato

That is not new information.?

Define "new informaton"

Information of which I am not already aware.

If you assume his meaning of poverty and wealth then his arguments will no doubt stand, but I question these definitions and can thus refute his arguments accordingly.

I made no such assumption, but at least I've read the thing that I'm referring to.

You are correct here - your question was about whether he said it, not what corollaries naturally follow.

I don't know why you're wasting time telling me that I'm correct.

Although, for some contradictory purpose, you appear to make such a corollary/application.

To repeat: the secondary question was aimed at oilman, and to fully understand it requires some knowledge of his forum persona, and of mine. This is knowledge that you appear not to have.

If you want to respond instead of, or aswell as, oilman, then please feel free, but so far you're the one who's been issuing contradictions.
________________________

Softun never agrees to anything!

Not so. For example, I wholeheartedly and unequivocally agree that you're a drunken and uneducated turd of the lowest grade.

 

[swidders]

I don't know why you're wasting time telling me that I'm correct

Since when is confirming/agreeing with someone a waste of time?

When you ask if Socretes postulate anything, how do you or i know for a fact? We onlyhave Plato's et al word for it.

swidders wrote:
Must admit it's been a while since I read plato

That is not new information.

How did you know before I told you?

To repeat: the secondary question was aimed at oilman, and to fully understand it requires some knowledge of his forum persona, and of mine. This is knowledge that you appear not to have.

This is not new information.

You have clearly read/studied Plato in greater detail and more recently than I, but this doesn't mean that I cannot comment on my own view of what I have read and remembered. Constructive criticism and guidance is of greater value that point scoring here, and if I did seem to embark on the latter, I apologise and bow down before your greater wisdom in these matters.

On more pressing matters now - how do you get multiple mini quotes (in white boxes) into your posts - am struggling here!!

 

[Softus]

I don't know why you're wasting time telling me that I'm correct

Since when is confirming/agreeing with someone a waste of time?

I already knew that I was correct, and since you consider my posts to be for the purpose of contradiction, and are roundly missing the whole point, I don't consider that you're "agreeing" with me on one single solitary point.

When you ask if Socretes postulate anything, how do you or i know for a fact?

I don't know it for a fact.

I've never said that I know it for a fact.

I've never implied that I know it for a fact.

Notwithstanding that, don't some inherent truths transcend accurate origin? For example, don't certain 'christian' doctrine make irrelevant the question of whether Jesus Christ ever existed?

Must admit it's been a while since I read plato

That is not new information.

How did you know before I told you?

It doesn't interest me to tell you how I knew. Suffice it say that it was more obvious than being poked in the eye with a sharp stick.

You have clearly read/studied Plato in greater detail and more recently than I, but this doesn't mean that I cannot comment on my own view of what I have read and remembered.

Then please feel free to comment, but without understanding my interplay with oilman I feel that you're just treading water.

And I don't mean to imply that you wouldn't understand - I think you would, but so far you haven't. And explaining it takes all of the fun out of it.

Constructive criticism and guidance is of greater value that point scoring here, and if I did seem to embark on the latter, I apologise and bow down before your greater wisdom in these matters.

No apology necessary, but wisdom has nothing to do with it. If you can't identify when oilman is being playful, then reading Plato again isn't going to do anything for you.

On more pressing matters now - how do you get multiple mini quotes (in white boxes) into your posts - am struggling here!!

Somewhere I set it out in some detail - I'll see if I can find it and post a link here.

 

[swidders]

Thanks - look forward to the link.

I don't consider your posts for the purpose of contradiction, I consider this forum as a means of contributing where i can and learning as much as i can from those (nearly everyone here) more knowledgable than i. Devil's advocate is one way - sometimes, as in this case, one gets stung badly and put right quite unequivocably

As for understanding contributors' forum personae, i seem to be attempting to run before i can walk, and will endeavour to redress this.

 

[oilman]

Since when is confirming/agreeing with someone a waste of time?

Er, now for example? Very little on this topic has been to do with the OP's question about immersion heaters.

On more pressing matters now - how do you get multiple mini quotes (in white boxes) into your posts - am struggling here!!

Compare to nested parentheses.

I don't consider your posts for the purpose of contradiction, I consider this forum as a means of contributing where i can and learning as much as i can from those (nearly everyone here) more knowledgable than i. Devil's advocate is one way - sometimes, as in this case, one gets stung badly and put right quite unequivocably icon_sad.gif

Then the rules/etiquette should be observed, instead of hijacking existing posts.

 

[Softus]

Very little on this topic has been to do with the OP's question about immersion heaters.

Yebbut the OP has only posted once. Ever. I betcha he's one of those that we'll never see again.

You see - you just can't help yourself. And I bet you've smiled at least once already this year.

 

[sooey]

Aristotle, Aristotle was a bu**er for the bottle,
but Socrates...was a cracking player for Brazil.

 

[swidders]

Then the rules/etiquette should be observed, instead of hijacking existing posts.

Quite right - apologies all round.