I like this, you give good full explanations and answers, I think you are great.
Could you do me a favour and PM me an example of flaming, for although I understand the concept I do not have any evidence to back my deduction up.

. For I still am slightly swaying that some 'flaming' could be a form of respect. I have never really witnessed it between you and kennethamy but did notice he gives you more attention than the rest and I always thought of this as a respect, sure from what I did see he was not being complimentary but I just thought this was his way of trying to get more form you, that secretly he wanted and expected more form you and you to work harder for him and yourself.

'Wisdom makes a man's face to shine. If they aren't happy, they aren't as smart as they think they are...perhaps....' Reconstructo.
I love this, you may not need to know anything to be wise just so long as you know as little as you understand you don't know.

I would just love to, and I am looking hard for an occasion to do so. So far, no luck!

Thank you. I think that line is deep. It's just common sense, isn't it? That we want happiness. How can an unhappy man be wise? If wisdom is suffering, tis folly to be wise! A contradiction, of course. Sure, knowledge and suffering are old pals. Perhaps the trick is making the lead of knowledge into the gold of wisdom. And that line from the bible is a pointer on the way.. Nietzsche also made a big deal of this.

I personally think that the whole shebang, this life on earth, is about nothing but love and beauty, if one can find them. And philosophy is just a conceptual rudder to steer one toward them. I won't get into my favored paradoxes here, as they are elsewhere...but tanks.. :flowers:

How about this;

I don't think what I know is what I don't think.

I wont think what I know is what I wont think.

I cant think what I know is what I cant think.
(Think about it)

A mind twister! But I think they are all correct. Sounds right to me.

As far as fallacious arguments go, that's a tough one. I'm leaning towards Plato these days. I think there are leaps of intuition. I feel that sometimes one is forced into the territory of metaphor. Are metaphors arguments? I don't think they are. T. S. Eliot ends a famous poem w/ "the fire and the rose are one." In my mind, there is deep philosophy here, but it's not the Anglo-American type. I have argued and still contend that abstractions are dead metaphors, at least generally. Mathematics is an exception to this. How many of our debates involve such slippery words as "truth"? And how often is it recognized that a word gets its meaning from an entire sentence and then from a paragraph and then from the lives of the writer & reader in their entirety.

While I agree that there is "no private language," I also suggest that there is no public language. We have something in the middle of these two poles. And this connects to objectivity as an ideal and not a real possibility.

Give me anything T.S Eliot and I know I have been well fed.

Who said there was no private language? Have you ever met a schizophrenic?
I am being pedantic this may be true, it comes from Witt right?
Could you show me where please.

'And this connects to objectivity as an ideal and not a real possibility'
I like the sound of this, not sure I fully grasp, could you please expand.