Ex-Tabula Rasa
I'm just an English bloke who lives in Canada after marrying a Canadian lady he met while living in Japan. Yeah, that old cliché.
Shameless Self-Promotion:
My utterly hilarious blog is here
And another one is here
Wow! I'm on Twitter now!
Averaging three stars a tweet since the death of Favrd!
Still Want More?
Email me for fun and frolics*! My address goes along the lines of Japanese (dot) smoth (@) gmail (dot) com. *Actual ratio of fun to frolics may vary.
![pocketcontents:
liberalsarecool:
College Republican meme.
The entire idea that we shouldn’t create laws because criminals don’t adhere to them is ludicrous. See also: anarchy.
Can I just call a time out here to complain about something? Okay, I’ve seen arguments in this form quite a bit on Tumblr and Facebook recently, both espousing liberal and conservative viewpoints on a bunch of different topics (not just gun control/abortion), and they piss me right off.
Arguments like this basically boil down to “If you believe [Thing believed by people on the opposite side of the political spectrum] but not [Parallel thing believed by people on my side of the political spectrum] then you’re a hypocrite because these things are logically equivalent.”
So what’s the problem? The problem is you’re laughing at people for believing A but not B when (in your eyes) they’re logically equivalent. But you believe B but not A. And according to your argument, they’re logically equivalent. Congratulations, you’ve undermined your whole argument.
Take the example above. Replace the grinning republican with a stereotypical hippie. Switch captions around, leaving “Doesn’t believe” at the top. Typical Leftist Commies! Don’t believe outlawing abortions will stop abortion, but believe outlawing guns will stop gun violence! Tee hee! What idiots!
Long story short: If your argument consists of two independent sentences, and reversing the order of those two sentences proves your political opponents’ point, then it’s not a very good argument.](http://25.media.tumblr.com/428ccca7eb33d4505e4cbbdbdfb26608/tumblr_mmidk7OeHZ1qzsnxyo1_500.jpg)
College Republican meme.
The entire idea that we shouldn’t create laws because criminals don’t adhere to them is ludicrous. See also: anarchy.
Can I just call a time out here to complain about something? Okay, I’ve seen arguments in this form quite a bit on Tumblr and Facebook recently, both espousing liberal and conservative viewpoints on a bunch of different topics (not just gun control/abortion), and they piss me right off.
Arguments like this basically boil down to “If you believe [Thing believed by people on the opposite side of the political spectrum] but not [Parallel thing believed by people on my side of the political spectrum] then you’re a hypocrite because these things are logically equivalent.”
So what’s the problem? The problem is you’re laughing at people for believing A but not B when (in your eyes) they’re logically equivalent. But you believe B but not A. And according to your argument, they’re logically equivalent. Congratulations, you’ve undermined your whole argument.
Take the example above. Replace the grinning republican with a stereotypical hippie. Switch captions around, leaving “Doesn’t believe” at the top. Typical Leftist Commies! Don’t believe outlawing abortions will stop abortion, but believe outlawing guns will stop gun violence! Tee hee! What idiots!
Long story short: If your argument consists of two independent sentences, and reversing the order of those two sentences proves your political opponents’ point, then it’s not a very good argument.
9,474 notes (via pocketcontents & liberalsarecool)
Scene: My wife kisses our baby as she lies on a bed
Audrey: Giggles
My wife: Laughs
Audrey: Laughs
Me: Laughs
Audrey: Laughs
My wife: Laughs
Audrey: Laughs
Me: Laughs
My wife: What are we laughing at?
Audrey: Pause
Me: Pause
Audrey: Giggle and fart at the same time
Me and my wife: Sudden hysterical laughter at giggletoot
Audrey: Pause
Audrey: Shocked sobbing
43 notes
‘I Luv the Valley OH’ by Xiu Xiu
Is this my favourite song in which the singer claims to have a beehive in his arse? Yes. Yes it is. Arsebees.
6 notes
I Think Academic Papers Should be Written in the Same Style as Cracked or Buzzfeed Articles
- 24 Incredible Phenotypes that You Won’t Believe can Lead to a Potential Increase in Tolerance to Airborne Toxicants
- 5 Mind-Blowing Consequences of Leibniz’s Attempt to Reconcile a Deterministic God with Human Free Will
- 14 Insane Antecedents to the Persian Expedition of Catherine the Great in 1796
- 8 Utterly Unfathomable Correlations Between the Use of Energy-Saving Technologies and Uncertainty in Residential Markets
- A Critical Analysis of Responses to Gilbert and Wilson’s Stance on Affective Forecasting in the Form of 48 gifs of Small Animals Falling off Things
70 notes
Oh hello there. Can I talk with you about our lord and savior, Mother H. Goose?
This duck has a horse’s head for a beak.
29 notes (via sparklytastic)
The photo accompanying this news article is also quite brilliant.
(Source: thisisnorthdevon.co.uk)
9 notes
