Case-in-point.

/🎤

I think I've made my point.

I posted a link to Graham's article above. Why don't you read it and ask where you think you land on that pyramid with your posts on this forum.

I hope you're disappointed, because you should be.

https://paulgraham.com/disagree.html

Yeah. Shallow. You come here looking to argue about a singular issue and that's all you do. And not very well. I just read about 40 pages of you getting your ass handed to you. It was kinda embarrassing reading it.

Graham only came up with it in 2008. I graduated college in 1998. I was introduce through his essay 'How to disagree' in a compendium about Social Structure and Social Responsibility. lol

The more you post the more I think you've never even been to college.

And you say you took Philosophy in college? Fucking why? You didn't pick anything up. lol

Graham's Hierarchy is not philosophy, lol.

You're shooting ONE turd. That's all.

You're repetitive, argumentative and annoying.

For all you claim to know, you have a pretty narrow mind, aka 'shallow'.

You've never made it half-way up Graham's hierarchy. That's really all that needs to be said.

Dodge dodge dodge

The point is: you're a one trick pony. And it's not even a very good trick.

I say shallow. You've only ever one general topic to discuss, and that's pretty much it.

Heaven forbid you ever find yourself discussing the dichotomy of Plato vs Aristotle, or the finer points of telescope design.

Nothing for you but lame speak (woke, libtards, sleepy joe, etc.) and licking Trumps left testicle.

Ban me, I don't care. This place died 10 years ago.