Skip to main content

Michael the genuis uses the word prefixed....hmmm

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hellzbellz
  • Start date Start date
Luddite - definition
someone who does not like new technology and who tries to avoid using it

Ha!

Oh Ha!

Talk about the pot calling the kettle back!

I would never ever call someone a luddite!

Never ever ever!

I can't even work the TV remote!
 
I have another revelation for you Tra, the saying is actually the pot calling the kettle BLACK, not back :)
 
From what we've seen, I feel that Ben is smarter than Michael, but maybe that's age.
 
Ben certainly has better people skills and does seem to be more self aware. Michael only comes to certain realisations after others have crammed them down his throat - see his jealousy of Ava.
I did love it when Ben pulled him up for deflecting the conversation with a compliment when they were in the bathroom and Ben was trying to advise Michael of his poor behaviour.

As to prefix/ preface either sounds fine to me and I already said elsewhere I thought Estelles reaction was a result of his totally inadequate comparison/argument not that he said anything earth shatteringly smart.
 
He didn't come across very good. Using in a debate, well a lecture, "how would you argue against X if it didn't exist" would probably get you kicked off any high school debate team. He also made the point of arguing against a straw man and not what Estelle was saying.

I couldn't believe what he was saying - "would you want to drink beer if you didn't know what it was" - he was trying to ask Estelle a question that was impossible to answer to make her look stupid. She had the exact same expression on her face that I did - "WTF???"
 
Please see my response to ichi. I certainly don't think I'm a genius, nor do my flatmates. We had a chuckle at MICHAEL using a most inelegant word as a supposed genius. Perhaps I, the luddite that you take great pleasure in thinking I am should make myself more clear in future.

Is that you in your avatar hellzbellz - if so you are daaammmmmmnnnnnn fine! Smokin even hehe
 
His argument about "would you like beer if it didn't exist?" (or something to that effect) was so terrible. He clearly thought he was coming off as really clever but what he was saying didn't bolster his argument in the slightest.
 
Please see my response to ichi. I certainly don't think I'm a genius, nor do my flatmates. We had a chuckle at MICHAEL using a most inelegant word as a supposed genius. Perhaps I, the luddite that you take great pleasure in thinking I am should make myself more clear in future.

But you said: "Unfortunately his clumsiness in using the word prefixed as opposed to the correct word, prefaced", which clearly shows you think he used an incorrect, not inelegant word. And, besides that, I'm not sure how inelegance in one's use of certain words is really related to one's intelligence? Both are acceptable, why should a supposed genius feel his intelligence is at all compromised because he used a word people don't like the sound of as much as another?
 
I couldn't believe what he was saying - "would you want to drink beer if you didn't know what it was" - he was trying to ask Estelle a question that was impossible to answer to make her look stupid. She had the exact same expression on her face that I did - "WTF???"

I get the feeling she's kind of defeated trying to argue and prove her points too much.

We've all been in situations when you're trying to make a point and get ganged up on by the other people. Even though you're know they're being idiots you try and make your point and leave it be. There's way more energy coming at you than you can match and it's just draining. Where you have to leave it, because by the simple fact there's more people on the other side, they are reaffirming each others position feeding off that beating you down. You can make the most cogent argument and it doesn't matter in those situations. It's about, "all of us are right, you there by yourself is wrong."
 
Yes I accept that. The irony is on me. I didn't express myself properly! However that is what I meant regardless of the stupid way I put it. Plus you all are reading WAY to much into it. Essentially my point is this: Michael thnks he's 10 times smarter than everyone else. It's rather pompous and embarrassing, not to mention condescending and patronizing to his fellow housemates. I was making a point that if he's such a genius, perhaps he could speak more elegantly. I expressed myself badly, I take that. But honestly, not seeing the bones of my point but instead choosing to rip it to shreds is a bit full on. Jeeze.

Please excuse typos...if I edit them someone jumps n my back, if I leave them, people pretend not to recognize a typo or 2 when they see them. Ya can't win, it's hysterical.

But you said: "Unfortunately his clumsiness in using the word prefixed as opposed to the correct word, prefaced", which clearly shows you think he used an incorrect, not inelegant word. And, besides that, I'm not sure how inelegance in one's use of certain words is really related to one's intelligence? Both are acceptable, why should a supposed genius feel his intelligence is at all compromised because he used a word people don't like the sound of as much as another?
 
Yes I accept that. The irony is on me. I didn't express myself properly! However that is what I meant regardless of the stupid way I put it. Plus you all are reading WAY to much into it. Essentially my point is this: Michael thnks he's 10 times smarter than everyone else. It's rather pompous and embarrassing, not to mention condescending and patronizing to his fellow housemates. I was making a point that if he's such a genius, perhaps he could speak more elegantly. I expressed myself badly, I take that. But honestly, not seeing the bones of my point but instead choosing to rip it to shreds is a bit full on. Jeeze.

Please excuse typos...if I edit them someone jumps n my back, if I leave them, people pretend not to recognize a typo or 2 when they see them. Ya can't win, it's hysterical.

I don't see myself ripping your post to shreds. I see you making a post about Michael using a word that doesn't exist and then, when you're shown to be wrong, you say that's not what you meant. I really don't care, but if you can be critical of a housemate, then surely I can be critical of your criticising them?

I do indeed think Michael believes he is smarter than he really is, I just don't agree with what you're saying. Some of the cleverest philosophers have a terrible command of their language but they still convey some of the most incredible ideas. And, in this case, he's using a word that exists and which works in the sentence. But, once again, by no means is Michael all that smart from what we've seen.

Anyway, as I said, it doesn't bother me, don't read this as me attacking your post. Forums are for bringing together ideas and discussing them, and that's all that is happening here.
 
Plus Micky, I do believe it is a clumsy choice of word. Indeed upon receiving such vitriolic responses from some people on here I consulted a handful of writer friends and they couldn't agree more with me. Again, my bad for not making myself clear, however I stand by the fact that using the word prefix over and over as opposed to the word preface is a bit clumsy. I would never have jumped on any other housemate if they had used that word, the bones of my point being that I find Michael's pomposity, grating.

There are sentences, paragraphs that can be written by talented writers that are beautiful and there are people who can write the same sentence or paragraph and make perfect sense, yet do so in such a stilted, clunky way.

There are raconteurs who can weave the most wonderful stories together and there are people who can tell the same story, perfectly correctly bit with no wit, charm or style.

But the bones of my original point, however badly written was that Michael can't be such a genius if he uses such clunky turns of phrase.



But you said: "Unfortunately his clumsiness in using the word prefixed as opposed to the correct word, prefaced", which clearly shows you think he used an incorrect, not inelegant word. And, besides that, I'm not sure how inelegance in one's use of certain words is really related to one's intelligence? Both are acceptable, why should a supposed genius feel his intelligence is at all compromised because he used a word people don't like the sound of as much as another?
 
Mickey I have taken your critique and admitted to expressing myself badly. I have tried to rectify that. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by saying something about a word that does not exist? However I too believe that this should be a forum of differing ideas. Indeed I like nothing better than a civil debate. I have though, I'm sure you've noticed, had people jump down my throat when I've been nothing but civil and respectful.
I can't write much more about this topic, I do believe I've done as much as I can to clarify my original point and agreed that I originally stuffed up my point by expressing myself badly.
Fin

I don't see myself ripping your post to shreds. I see you making a post about Michael using a word that doesn't exist and then, when you're shown to be wrong, you say that's not what you meant. I really don't care, but if you can be critical of a housemate, then surely I can be critical of your criticising them?

I do indeed think Michael believes he is smarter than he really is, I just don't agree with what you're saying. Some of the cleverest philosophers have a terrible command of their language but they still convey some of the most incredible ideas. And, in this case, he's using a word that exists and which works in the sentence. But, once again, by no means is Michael all that smart from what we've seen.

Anyway, as I said, it doesn't bother me, don't read this as me attacking your post. Forums are for bringing together ideas and discussing them, and that's all that is happening here.
 
But the bones of my original point, however badly written was that Michael can't be such a genius if he uses such clunky turns of phrase.

And I strongly disagree with that. But I do not think Michael is a genius at all.
 
Lolz, me neither!

I don't wanna get into a discussion about etymology but you're right, luddite does mean "someone who avoids technology" etc. However the meanings of words evolve and nowadays it's often used to describe an idiot, or someone who knows fuck all about anything.


Ha!

Oh Ha!

Talk about the pot calling the kettle back!

I would never ever call someone a luddite!

Never ever ever!

I can't even work the TV remote!
 
Lolz, me neither!

I don't wanna get into a discussion about etymology but you're right, luddite does mean "someone who avoids technology" etc. However the meanings of words evolve and nowadays it's often used to describe an idiot, or someone who knows fuck all about anything.

Well it sounds like it will fit me like a glove, then.

And for the record, if I put that definition in context with the post you wrote me, I certainly don't think you are a luddite, in fact I think you are the polar opposite of a luddite.
 
Back
Top