Which logical fallacies are these?

[27Thousand]

Please point me to a post where anyone here thought your answers were from a book. What I said, and I think others did too, is that none of your thoughts are especially original. In fact, to be quite honest, they are pretty mundane, boring and unimaginative.

I mean, come on, 'conceptualising the world'! That's clumsy English. It might be a convenience for you to think of it that way, but actually sharing it with the rest of humanity shows you are overrating the quality of the thought. Sorry, am I devaluing you as a human being? No, I'm just pointing out that you came up with a pretty crap phrase there, whether it was original, or an adaptation of something out of a book. If you think creativity is about using Roget's Thesaurus, then you have a major shock in store. (And if you don't understand the relevance of that statement you have further shocks down the line.)

And you still don't get the point that most of the time, in everyday conversation, people do not want to hear a bunch of self indulgent thoughts spouted out publicly. Nor have you addressed the question as to why you are bothered about what these other people think. Are you going to answer that, or keep avoiding it?

That all may sound rather hostile, but when someone is so determined to be intransigently thick it is difficult not to be comewhat a trifle agitated. Redeem yourself now. Start making sense. you know you can do it.

(Please excuse the Aral in the first sentence of the last paragraph.)

The reason I thought of conceptualizing the world is because earlier I was talking with someone about how it's important not to have any route learning in life, but to think in concepts only. So that's what I was thinking at the time when I thought of that phrase, combining it with the Science show. I just thought it was weird that I can't think it because it may be from a book. The other day I said, "I'm going to bed." That's very unimaginative and unoriginal. I don't understand why all thoughts are supposed to be that way? My point is I wasn't quoting a book, even if the words are found in a dictionary. I just thought it was weird that roommates dismiss thoughts/feelings that way.

 

[DaveC426913]

I just thought it was weird that I can't think it because it may be from a book. The other day I said, "I'm going to bed." That's very unimaginative and unoriginal. I don't understand why all thoughts are supposed to be that way? My point is I wasn't quoting a book, even if the words are found in a dictionary. I just thought it was weird that roommates dismiss thoughts/feelings that way.

You want to think original thoughts? Stop treating your roommates' comments as commandments.

"I can't think it because it may be from a book."
"I don't understand why all thoughts are supposed to be that way?"

I don't see how you plan to have original thoughts if your habit is let your roommates tell you what you can think.

 

[27Thousand]

Please point me to a post where anyone here thought your answers were from a book.

Post 19, Jared in paragraph four says he thinks I got "I'm conceptualizing the world around me" from a book, although I said in post 1 that I didn't. He also says that changing word around is plagiarism. If I say "I'm dozing off" because I always hear people say "I'm tired" and want to change it, am I a bad plagiarizer? It may not sound creative, but it's not from a book and I don't understand how it's plagiarism if that's how I actually feel.

Post 50, bringing us to paragraph four again, Jared says, "There is nothing "not found in a book" about it." In my original post I mentioned that my hypothetical experiment wasn't from a book. Okay, so I'm curious if I stated my first post in a way to make people think that way? I'm just trying to feel the situation here, and my errors in communication.

 

[27Thousand]

You want to think original thoughts? Stop treating your roommates' comments as commandments.

"I can't think it because it may be from a book."
"I don't understand why all thoughts are supposed to be that way?"

I don't see how you plan to have original thoughts if your habit is let your roommates tell you what you can think.

Common sense tells me that something is fishy about "books". My intentions were just to get input on logical fallacies and communication improvements. Then it sounded like Jared thought all my thoughts were inside books.

 

[bp_psy]

Common sense tells me that something is fishy about "books".

Did you by any chance get that from a book?

 

[DaveC426913]

Common sense tells me that something is fishy about "books". My intentions were just to get input on logical fallacies and communication improvements. Then it sounded like Jared thought all my thoughts were inside books.

Non-sequitur. I do not see how your response is in any way related to what I posted.

 

[27Thousand]

You want to think original thoughts? Stop treating your roommates' comments as commandments.

"I can't think it because it may be from a book."
"I don't understand why all thoughts are supposed to be that way?"

I don't see how you plan to have original thoughts if your habit is let your roommates tell you what you can think.

Common sense tells me that something is fishy about "books". My intentions were just to get input on logical fallacies and communication improvements. Then it sounded like Jared thought all my thoughts were inside books.

Non-sequitur. I do not see how your response is in any way related to what I posted.

Sorry for any confusion, or if there is still some. What I was just trying to say is I agree with you in not letting what my roommates say about books alter my actual thoughts inside my head. Common sense tells me there is something wrong with omitting a thought if it sounds like it's from a book, or "something very fishy about saying I can't think it." Although that's what I already believe, I was looking to build intellectual arguments for why "from a book should not matter" (I like to find intellectual reasons for everything, even if intuition already says so).

The way I see it, Albert Einstein spent three weeks proving the Pythogorean Theorem to himself, which many think is unnecessary. However, it gave him a deeper understanding of the theorem, and how the world works. I'm trying to come up with good intellectual reasons why:

"I can't think it because it may be from a book."
"I don't understand why all thoughts are supposed to be that way?"

are messed up (besides the reason that common sense and intuition saying it'll screw up your thoughts).

Then next time I'll be prepared. If I can say something very rational, then it'll be helpful. Relying on their intuition alone may not work.

 

[27Thousand]

Did you by any chance get that from a book?

How'd you know lol

I'm just trying to rationalize all of this. Although it sounds rediculous, since some people say, "Not from a book", I am curious about intellectual persuasion.

 

[JaredJames]

Post 19, Jared in paragraph four says he thinks I got "I'm conceptualizing the world around me" from a book, although I said in post 1 that I didn't. He also says that changing word around is plagiarism. If I say "I'm dozing off" because I always hear people say "I'm tired" and want to change it, am I a bad plagiarizer? It may not sound creative, but it's not from a book and I don't understand how it's plagiarism if that's how I actually feel.

Post 50, bringing us to paragraph four again, Jared says, "There is nothing "not found in a book" about it." In my original post I mentioned that my hypothetical experiment wasn't from a book. Okay, so I'm curious if I stated my first post in a way to make people think that way? I'm just trying to feel the situation here, and my errors in communication.

You said yourself you got the original phrase from a film (you corrected me when I said book). I then said all you did was replace the word understand with the word conceptualize. Nothing creative there, unles of course, you agree with Ophiolite that using a thesaurus is creative. I said it was plagiarism as an extreme exmaple designed to have a dig at your repeated nonsense.
Your 'hypothetical experiment' doesn't exist, or at least not in the experimental sense. The research was conducted into what effect drilling the brain has and the results showed it did little more than cause brain damage (same thing with labotamies).

As far as I can gather, your roommates DID NOT say yo can't think anything, you assumed that with your ridiculous overthinking. And by missing the point so blatently they then procede to poke fun at you because of it.

 

[DaveC426913]

... some people say, "Not from a book"...

This has been bugging me all along, and I just can't let it go any longer.

Can you please expand on the above sentence fragment? It is quite ambiguous and open to interpretation.

You see, that sentence fragment could be a command ("Do not quote me from a book.")
or it could be a statement of opinion ("That was not from a book.")
And even this second one is ambiguous, since it could be serious or it could be sarcastic ("Haha, That's not from a book.. Nope!")

Depending on interpretation, the sentence fragment has three completely different meanings.


Please, since it seems central to your ruminations, define your interpretation of your roommate's words.

 

[0xDEADBEEF]

I'm callin' sock puppet.

I thought of that, but it's a very ineffective one. You should really get bait:reply ratios better than 1:5 this looks more like 1:1

Maybe to prove my point I'll do a physicist's disgruntled ex girlfriend and complain about all of you being bad in bed...

 

[27Thousand]

I said it was plagiarism as an extreme exmaple designed to have a dig at your repeated nonsense.

Wait, I'm confused, so did you say that earlier to confuse me for fun, or to really tell me that it was plagiarism?

Okay, so let's make sure we're on the same page. Do you think that camera phones are creative? Yes/No? Most think that they are. I could be wrong but if they didn't know anything about cell phones or cameras, it wouldn't have happened. I could be wrong but cameras were not an idea that the inventor thought of, cell phones weren't an idea that they invented. Most of the technology/scientific principles they used to make camera phones had already been invented by others. Most innovations/creativity comes when someone takes ideas that already exist and combine them in ways that are different, often seeing things in a new way to do so. Thomas Edison's invented the light bulb, however 22 people discovered it before him and he knew about many of them; he was just trying to come up with a better version after much trial and error. Isaac Newton described how he stood on the heads of genius in coming up with gravitation; Benjamin Franklin and what he had to say about electricity; Louis Pasteur and spontaneous generation; etc. You probably get the picture. I'm not saying that I'm these people; I just don't understand why others can't do the same?

Although me trying to conceptualize the world around me isn't a profound way of expressing myself, I don't understand how I was plagiarizing, but rather how I felt at the time. It was less from a movie and the meaning behind it was more from another person if anything. The way I thought of that phrase is I was having a conversation with someone who said when he studies he hates route learning and prefers to think with meaning. Since I already agreed with him, I took "Newton's Apple, understanding the world around you," (or however they said it on TV, I don't even remember) to "I'm just trying to conceptualize the world around me."

This is why I get the impression that people are telling me to not have any thoughts/feelings and just forget everything I've learned (which would be bad). However, if I try to mimic how others speak and talk in layman terms, I don't have this problem at all. I just don't understand how wording things like everyone else is more thinking for myself and original, especially if I'm saying the same thing?

 

[JaredJames]

27thousand the more you keep this going, the more you force this to continue, the worse it makes you look.

You have continuously been told by multiple members what is going on and why your responses are inapropriate. Hence why your friends respond as they do.

Now take this advice and accept it. No it isn't what you wanted to hear, you wanted us all to agree with you and the only one to agree with you has been from a profile I believe you created yourself.
Let the thread go. Listen to the advice in it which has been restated many times over and over, or continue in your own little world where you know you are correct .

LET IT GO. Everytime you get a response you argue some stupid point in it. You drag the thread out by arguing semantics, discussing irrelevant statements and remaking your statements.

LET IT GO!
(anyone who agrees with the above please repost those three little words and show it, perhaps that will allow him to grasp what has been said here)

 

[27Thousand]

Your 'hypothetical experiment' doesn't exist, or at least not in the experimental sense. The research was conducted into what effect drilling the brain has and the results showed it did little more than cause brain damage (same thing with labotamies).

So I'm confused. Let me clear up any misunderstandings. Do you think my response in example three was from a book?

My roommate's response was the null hypothesis can always be true is a weakness of the Scientific Method, and you see that in book after book. Are you saying that is less from a book then if I make up a hypothetical experiment on how things could go wrong, using a historical event I never saw in a book to inspire my hypothetical experiment?

Now what I do is I just go to Google, look up "obsolete scientific theories", and use those as examples of how the Scientific Method can go wrong. I have no trouble with using these examples, they're a lot more concrete and in right field, however they're a lot more from a book (since the writing at Google is found in a book). See how ridiculous I find this "not from a book" is?

 

[JaredJames]

ffs!

27thousand the more you keep this going, the more you force this to continue, the worse it makes you look.

You have continuously been told by multiple members what is going on and why your responses are inapropriate. Hence why your friends respond as they do.

Now take this advice and accept it. No it isn't what you wanted to hear, you wanted us all to agree with you and the only one to agree with you has been from a profile i believe you created yourself.
Let the thread go. Listen to the advice in it which has been restated many times over and over, or continue in your own little world where you know you are correct .

Let it go. Everytime you get a response you argue some stupid point in it. You drag the thread out by arguing semantics, discussing irrelevant statements and remaking your statements.

Let it go!
(anyone who agrees with the above please repost those three little words and show it, perhaps that will allow him to grasp what has been said here)

 

[Ophiolite]

This has been bugging me all along, and I just can't let it go any longer.

Can you please expand on the above sentence fragment? It is quite ambiguous and open to interpretation.

Yes. Yes. Yes.
It has been bugging me too. I think there could be even more meanings than you have proposed. The response has been taken out of context. I feel there is a whole subtext missing, where prior conversations led to that particular response. We need clarity of this 3³.10³.

Although me trying to conceptualize the world around me isn't a profound way of expressing myself, I don't understand how I was plagiarizing,

You acknowledge you took a phrase from elsewhere and changed a single word. That seems like mild plagiarism to me.

There is a saying:
When you copy from one person that is plagiarism.
When you copy from many people that is research.

To which I add
When you copy from no one, that is madness.

(And that addition was creative.)

 

[27Thousand]

This has been bugging me all along, and I just can't let it go any longer.

Can you please expand on the above sentence fragment? It is quite ambiguous and open to interpretation.

You see, that sentence fragment could be a command ("Do not quote me from a book.")
or it could be a statement of opinion ("That was not from a book.")
And even this second one is ambiguous, since it could be serious or it could be sarcastic ("Haha, That's not from a book.. Nope!")

Depending on interpretation, the sentence fragment has three completely different meanings.


Please, since it seems central to your ruminations, define your interpretation of your roommate's words.

How I interpret my roommate's words is they're saying not to use a book, or maybe that they think I'm regurgitating a book.

To me, it's obvious that situations one and three have nothing about them that I actually used from a book. Since there are millions of books out there every thought anyone has is mostly from a book just by chance, but doesn't mean you can't have thoughts.

My roommate's response in situation three was a response often said in common college research methods/statistics textbooks, which threw me off because I thought it was hypocritical, plus books shouldn't matter in the big picture of things. It also threw me off because I thought my response in situation three was too cheesy to even be found in a book.

In situation two I wasn't regurgitating a book, but rather using something from a book that makes sense to me and using it in an out of the ordinary way. Since you hear people all the time say "He's tired" and I even say that, I felt like he was saying I was just thinking "ordinary" when he said to be creative. Even if my response was geeky, since example works if you were to test the hypothesis, I don't understand how I was less trying to think differently about things.

 

[JaredJames]

This has already been explained to you 27thousand. You are overthinking their responses and giving them answers which they are not looking for.

The fact you said they laughed after saying "not from a book" shows they are messing with you. You're just too **** to see it.

You have already had responses from myself and others concerning what you have said. All previous comments from myself, dave etc are correct (except the one you made). They point out the flaws in your thinking and your responses.

Accept what you have been told. You wanted everyone to agree with you. They haven't. Deal with it.

 

[27Thousand]

You acknowledge you took a phrase from elsewhere and changed a single word. That seems like mild plagiarism to me.

There is a saying:
When you copy from one person that is plagiarism.
When you copy from many people that is research.

So then how was that not "research"? If someone told me that they hate route learning and prefer meaning, then I remember years earlier the phrase "Newton's Apple, Understanding the World around you," then as a way to express my feelings I say, "I'm just trying to conceptualize the world around me," how's that plagiarism? How is that not more taken from common people saying they hate route learning.

Please explain how that is plagiarism anymore than those who invented the camera phone? In the encyclopedia it even says, "The camera phone, like many complex systems, is the result of converging and enabling technologies. There are dozens of relevant patents dating back as far as the 1960s." Keep in mind they just combined existing ideas: phones and cameras to each other, which they didn't invent themselves. I guess that's plagiarism? When you look at the time line of the camera phone, every once in a while some person comes along and adds a technology to the camera phone, taken from another discipline. Do you think that's plagiarism?

 

[JaredJames]

Ooh look, to string it out you are once again arguing a pointless phrase from a previous post...

It is plagiarism because you quote the film, which had a writer (therefore quoting the writer) and simply changed a word. Copying from one source, hence, PLAGIARISM.

I suggest you learn what plagiarism is before debating it. Your cell phone crap has nothing to do with it. They sourced the technology, PAYING to use the technology (so as not to break a patent) and combined it. So, NOT PLAGIARISM. There was nothing copied about the technology (not in the plagiarism sense).

Look up the definition of plagiarism and you'll realize just how ridiculous your little cell phone speech is.

edit: in fact here it is -

"the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work."

Note the word "unauthorised". So the cell phone using legal methods to obtain the technology is not plagiarism. If they broke into the patent office and stole the plans then yes, it would be. But they didn't

You, taking the phrase from a film writer without permission and changing a word, claiming you then 'created' the phrase IS plagiarism.

There is a difference. Look things up before arguing them.

 

[27Thousand]

This has already been explained to you 27thousand. You are overthinking their responses and giving them answers which they are not looking for.

The fact you said they laughed after saying "not from a book" shows they are messing with you. You're just too **** to see it.

I will not respond any further as you have already had responses from myself and others concerning what you have said. All previous comments from myself, dave etc are correct (except the one you made). They point out the flaws in your thinking and your responses.

I refuse to argue such a dumb thread anymore. Accept what you have been told. You wanted everyone to agree with you. They haven't. Deal with it.

Jared Over and Out!

And if you would just read the history of how Isaac Newton came up with gravity, how those with patents for camera phones came up with the idea, etc, for every scientific discovery and invention ever made, you'd understand how I wasn't plagiarizing.

You're phrase "Jared Over and Out", I hear people say "over and out" quite a bit. Hmmm? You're involved in plagiarism? Doesn't something sound ridiculous here? Or you say "I refuse to argue such a dumb thread anymore." People say "I refuse to do this" all the time, and use words like dumb all the time. You say I argue semantics and weird details? That's because I feel those are the same semantics and details you use against me in those original three roommate examples! I'm not understanding why I'm from a book and plagiarizer? Doesn't something seem wrong with the picture here?

 

[27Thousand]

Ooh look, to string it out you are once again arguing a pointless phrase from a previous post...

It is plagiarism because you quote the film, which had a writer (therefore quoting the writer) and simply changed a word. Copying from one source, hence, PLAGIARISM.

I suggest you learn what plagiarism is before debating it. Your cell phone crap has nothing to do with it. They sourced the technology, PAYING to use the technology (so as not to break a patent) and combined it. So, NOT PLAGIARISM. There was nothing copied about the technology (not in the plagiarism sense).

Look up the definition of plagiarism and you'll realize just how ridiculous your little cell phone speech is.

edit: in fact here it is -

"the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work."

Note the word "unauthorised". So the cell phone using legal methods to obtain the technology is not plagiarism. If they broke into the patent office and stole the plans then yes, it would be. But they didn't

You, taking the phrase from a film writer without permission and changing a word, claiming you then 'created' the phrase IS plagiarism.

There is a difference. Look things up before arguing them.

"Newton's Apple, understanding the world around you," and person says, "I hate route learning, I like meaning," to, "I'm just trying to conceptualize the world around me," is not plagiarism. It's not changing one word. It's almost because I use the word "conceptualize" rather than another word, you assume it's plagiarism. The context of the phrase is different than the television show I saw decades earlier; more like when common people say they hate route learning.

You didn't give me a reference for your stepping stones when you said "Jared over and out"? If someone got after because of that, you'd think they're weird. When my roommate quoted Princess Bride saying that he was creative, he didn't give a reference. I guess he assumed he didn't need to because you hear people quoting those same exact lines all the time and then you hear someone else say, "I love Princess Bride!"

I know what plagiarism is, and it was no more plagiarism than Newton plagiarizing gravity by combining various ideas. Thomas Edison plagiarizing the light bulb by coming up with a better version; I could go on forever. If you said it's plagiarism without a reference, I gave a reference for my stepping stones. You never even gave me a reference for your "over and out". What's up with all this "plagiarism crap"? Don't you think it's ridiculous?

 

[JaredJames]

I'm not the one complaining here. You made a ridiculous thread. Can't accept what you have been told. And now are arguing stupid little things about statements made.

I'm not passing "over and out" as a phrase I made up. So it isn't plagiarism. Full stop.
You claimed "conceptualize the world around me" as your own. When you copied it from a film (without permission) and simply changed a word and said in earlier posts you 'created it'. Plagiarism. There is no more to say on it.

Did Newton claim all the work as his own?

 

[Ophiolite]

Where to begin.
First of all its rote learning, not route learning.

Secondly, Jared is being a little harsh in saying its plagiarism, but that's because you seem to genuinely believe changing a single word in a phrase you heard on a film was an example of creative and original thinking.
What we are all saying is that it had a tiny,miniscule, itsy-witsy, teeny-weeny, microscopically small, fragement of orginality, but it is so small that to credit yourself as having been original in changing that one word makes me wonder if you have the intellectual skills of a stuffed aardvark in a tea cosy.
So, strictly speaking, I'll say "Jared, plagiarism? A bit harsh. He's acknowledged he got it somewhere else. He hasn't stolen it. The only thing he's done wrong is to deceive himself that it was a significantly creative action, changing that one word."

Next, your first example may not have been from a book but it was from a film so your roommates had it more or less right. It wasn't original.
Your spouting of 101 psychology i answer to a simple question was based entirely on what you had just learned in class - book larning again my lad.
Your brain drilling example is so contorted in its presentation I can't even be bothered to comment on it.

Let me be really rude. I'll hate myself in the morning, but what the hell.
What is your IQ? And while I am at it, how old are you?

(And while you are thinking about how some of us have been quite rude to you, recognise we are all still hanging in here, trying to help you make sense of it all, even though you are acting just as thick as a chocolate shake with added quick dry cement.)

 

[JaredJames]

Where to begin.
Secondly, Jared is being a little harsh in saying its plagiarism, but that's because you seem to genuinely believe changing a single word in a phrase you heard on a film was an example of creative and original thinking.
What we are all saying is that it had a tiny,miniscule, itsy-witsy, teeny-weeny, microscopically small, fragement of orginality, but it is so small that to credit yourself as having been original in changing that one word makes me wonder if you have the intellectual skills of a stuffed aardvark in a tea cosy.
So, strictly speaking, I'll say "Jared, plagiarism? A bit harsh. He's acknowledged he got it somewhere else. He hasn't stolen it. The only thing he's done wrong is to deceive himself that it was a significantly creative action, changing that one word."

Just to point out, I didn't mean it seriously (as per previous posts) it was simply because he was failing to respond to anything less than an all out accusation (one I wish I hadn't made, jokingly or otherwise!).

 

[Ophiolite]

Did Newton claim all the work as his own?

And in case you are in any doubt 27 recall that he said this in a letter to Robert Hooke: "If I have seen farther it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."

(Which given that Hooke was a hunchback has been seen by some as a not so subtle (but decidedly creative) dig by Newton.)

And while we are on the subject, there is a story I like about Einstein. At a dinner a neighbouring guest took out a small notebook and wrote in it several times during the meal. When Einstein asked him what he was doing the man replied, "Whenever I have a good idea I jot it down in my notebook for future reference. You should try it."

Einstein paused for a moment then said, "No. There would be little point. I have only had one or two good ideas in my entire life."

You are coming across like the dinner guest who sees his own creativity in the most mundane things. Why not try being more like Einstein. Maybe one day you might have a good idea too.

Just to point out, I didn't mean it seriously

No. I got that, but I don't think our literalist friend did.

 

[JaredJames]

And in case you are in any doubt 27 recall that he said this in a letter to Robert Hooke: "If I have seen farther it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."

(Which given that Hooke was a hunchback has been seen by some as a not so subtle (but decidedly creative) dig by Newton.)

Wow, didn't know that. Congratulations, you have just made the first interesting post in this thread!

 

[DaveC426913]

I think that 27K's question has been given enough attention. Time to move on.

 

[JaredJames]

I think that 27K's question has been given enough attention. Time to move on.

Here Here!

 

[27Thousand]

Secondly, Jared is being a little harsh in saying its plagiarism, but that's because you seem to genuinely believe changing a single word in a phrase you heard on a film was an example of creative and original thinking.

Well for extra credit in one of my classes, I went to the University's Counseling Center where they were testing students' IQ's. They gave the test to the participants over the span of two days. I scored 131. Later I took an online Tickle IQ Test, although not official like the University's test, and scored a 133. So I think there was some consistency. However, whenever I take online "interpersonal communication skills" tests, I always score extremely low on interpersonal communication. I have a hunch that's why I have trouble communicating in non-university settings, am accused of being over analytical to people, and accused of taking them literally. My University GPA is 3.81, and my professors always say they like my critical thinking essays in class. However, when I'm not around those educated in areas that I'm immersed in, everything breaks down. It's almost like I can't adapt to my audience. I have a hunch about all this. My parents said I didn't start talking until I was four. They took me to a doctor, who said that there was nothing wrong with my hearing, only that I didn't seem to interact. Then most of my life I would read about Science, do nothing else, and avoid talking to others. So I think my social/interpersonal communication skills may have been screwed up because of it. However, that's only a thought I have.


By the way, I wasn't trying to pass that phrase off as a magnificent work of art. It's just how I felt at the time. I was only trying to communicate with my roommate (yes I already know my social skills aren't great). I didn't change one word. The only part I took from TV I heard years ago was "the world around". From, "Newton's Apple, understanding the world around you," to, "I'm just trying to conceptualize the world around me." It was more taken from people who say they hate rote learning. Then I heard the phrase, "I think in concepts." So I juxtaposed them together, so I could communicate with people. From my perspective, I felt the same way you'd feel if you were eating breakfast and someone said, "Nope, breakfast is in a book." As far as the context of the situation, since my roommate later quoted phrases Princess Bride, lines from a movie, why was I any less justified in what I said?

Your brain drilling example is so contorted in its presentation I can't even be bothered to comment on it.

That's why I became frustrated when he said, "Not from a book." I thought it was too cheesy of an example to be found in a book; I was just playing around. So when he said, "Not from a book," and then when his reason was something you actually hear from books a lot, something felt fishy.

Your spouting of 101 psychology i answer to a simple question was based entirely on what you had just learned in class - book larning again my lad.

For me, there was more to it than that. I thought across the disciplines to come up with an unusual answer for operant conditioning, not the usual from class. When people say professors don't want what's from the book, but rather you to think, they mean just regurgitating facts from the book. I was thinking outside of the book, if the definition means that. If I think across the disciplines, I don't understand how I'm regurgitating?

 

[27Thousand]

You are coming across like the dinner guest who sees his own creativity in the most mundane things. Why not try being more like Einstein. Maybe one day you might have a good idea too.

I didn't present these situations because I thought they were good ideas. I only presented them because of the context of them, I thought they weren't anymore taken from a book than my roommate's responses. Example three is too cheesy to be from a book, and wouldn't include it in a book. I just was frustrated that he passed it off as from a book, but then his answer was one of the most common answers found in books. Of course they were mundane ideas, but not anymore from a book than my roommates'. The point was to figure out better interpersonal communication skills in letting them know my personal thoughts aren't from a book, and to see if anyone thinks it's stupid to excuse any idea you don't like as being from a book.

 

[JaredJames]

You wanted us to reply with three things:
1) Your roommate is an idiot and had no right to tell you, you should be able to have your own thoughts and feelings.
2) Your response to the question 'why did he go upstairs?' was trully mind blowing and a damn good application of your knowledge.
3) Your phrase 'conceptualize the world around you' is brilliantly creative and obviously 'not from a book'.

The facts are:
1) Your roommate DID NOT at any point say you can't have thoughts and feelings of your own. You implied that by your own thinking.
2) You simply repeated textbook knowledge to him in a situation that did not warrant it. A simple "to sleep" would have sufficed. You applying it to a situation or not, it is still learn and repeat, just you insert words from your own scenario.
3) The fact is, it is from a book (or film). It wasn't creative at all, you just know how to use a thesaurus. Any further use of 'not from a book' would be a reference to the initial use of it by him to mock you.

Accept what you have been told. No, we didn't agree with you. But that's how life is. Most people go their whole lives without having a single 'good' idea. These most certainly aren't 'good' ideas on your part. Keep trying and one day you may get there. But you certainly aren't there right now. Especially not with this kind of thinking.

 

[Math Is Hard]

I think that 27K's question has been given enough attention. Time to move on.

Here Here!

Then you should stop positively reinforcing him with replies!

Seriously, 27, maybe you should check with your school and see if there are some counselors who could help you in developing your social skills a bit. This topic is starting to wear pretty thin.

 

[27Thousand]

You wanted us to reply with three things:
...
2) Your response to the question 'why did he go upstairs?' was trully mind blowing and a damn good application of your knowledge.

I emailed my professor and he said that he thought my example was a very deep understanding of how the concept works, and he said just to not worry about it because an education will get me further than what my roommate will have. Don't you hear people all the time say, "He's tired"? Although my response was geeky, was my roommates response any more thought out/less rote?

3) Your phrase 'conceptualize the world around you' is brilliantly creative and obviously 'not from a book'.

Where did I say it was brilliantly creative? I only what I said wasn't from a book, and described how I felt at the time.

The facts are:
1) Your roommate DID NOT at any point say you can't have thoughts and feelings of your own. You implied that by your own thinking.

If you say what you think, and someone says, "Not from a book," please explain how they are not discrediting your thoughts? If what I said was how I thought just as much as someone saying, "I'm happy," how is it supposed to be any less of a blow to being a person when someone says, "Not from a book"? I didn't even get it from a book. If he quotes lines from the movie Princess Bride, how is his response less from a book? Roommates tell others that they're going to the grocery store, and I see going to the grocery store in books/newspapers. So what?

2) You simply repeated textbook knowledge to him in a situation that did not warrant it. A simple "to sleep" would have sufficed. You applying it to a situation or not, it is still learn and repeat, just you insert words from your own scenario.

In hindsight, I agree that it was too much thought to share for the situation, but how was "he's tired" less ordinary? Which do you hear more often? Which answer was used in a more out of the ordinary way, even if neither was entertaining? Does "He's tired" sound extremely entertaining and original? Don't you think he could have been more "new" and creative than "he's tired"? Remember, Einstein said he wasn't trying to create, but rather discover.

3) The fact is, it is from a book (or film). It wasn't creative at all, you just know how to use a thesaurus. Any further use of 'not from a book' would be a reference to the initial use of it by him to mock you.

I don't understand why you say I got it from a thesaurus? Everyone knows the word "conceptualize"; the word is free for everyone to use. The only words I took from the television show decades ago was "the world around". I used multiple life experiences to create, "I'm just trying to conceptualize the world around me." It wasn't meant to be brilliant, but rather communicate my feelings at the time. That's why I got the impression he was saying not to have any feelings, because everything is automatically in a book.

 

[Ophiolite]

I don't understand why you say I got it from a thesaurus? Everyone knows the word "conceptualize"; the word is free for everyone to use. .

This is symptomatic of your entire problem.
A thesaurus, as I think you know, contains alternative words.
You used an alternative word, conceptualise, in your sentence.
When we say you got it from a thesaurus we are speaking figuratively. We are using a metaphor. We do not mean that you literally went to a library, headed for the reference section and consulted Roget's Thesaurus.

What we mean is you took an everday phrase, mentally checked your own vocabulary and substituted one of its words with one that resonated with you more effectively. You were consulting your own mental thesaurus. So, yes. We do say you got it from a thesaurus, because you did exactly that - not literally, but metaphorically.

What is astounding to me and I suspect the other posters is that you do not see this.
You think when your friends said 'From a book', they were talking literally.

Most people speak in metaphors most of the time.

If you want to survive in the big, cruel world (loads of metaphors there (you see, even loads of is another metaphor)) you had best start to appreciate that most speech is metaphorical not literal.

If you say what you think, and someone says, "Not from a book," please explain how they are not discrediting your thoughts?

No. It's been explained to you more than once already. Read the explanations. Your IQ isn't exceptional, but its adequate to understand the epxlanations given here.

What you still haven't explained why the **** it matters.