Yes, the number of Covid-19 deaths has been roughly equal to the annual number of deaths from flu, except in the case of Covid-19, we SHUT DOWN THE ENTIRE FUCKING PLANET AND STILL HAVE MORE THAN HALF A MILLION DEAD. How fucking stupid is Dave?
So, this latest strip makes me wonder what life has been like for Canadians during the pandemic. Has the border shutdown with the USA caused much of an inconvenience or no?
D'oh, I forgot about the CIH quotes! Here's another one for you "women want to be raped by rich, muscular, handsome doctors and are completely self-absorbed and, thus, see themselves in everything around them". Be sure to quote the entire line, won't you?
Dave is not exactly stupid. But he literally doesn't know how to think. He doesn't know how to evaluate evidence, or construct a logical argument, or make an analogy, or read a text. His "thinking" consists solely of erecting after-the-fact justifications for his feelings. It's actually pretty funny to watch him rant and foam, all the while insisting that he has no feelings and is a creature of pure reason. He doesn't even know himself.
As Bob Fiore once wrote, Dave is pretty lucky that his artistic instincts ran counter to his stated phoolosophy. Once the latter overwhelmed the former -- well, the audience lost interest, and the sales plummeted until Dave stopped printing them out of embarrassment.
I would agree that Dave isn't a moron per se, i.e. he does know things. There are some facts in his head which are accurate. Fair enough. However, his inability to come to sound conclusions based on available evidence is, I think, a sign of some kind of cognitive impairment much like stupidity. I agree whole-heartedly that Dave's problem is that he doesn't know HOW to think, which leads directly to him believing (and even worse, publicly stating) his absurdly myopic views thus ruining his own reputation and making himself the laughing stock of the comic-book world.
In a way, Dave has never stopped writing Latter Days and Tangent. 90% of his writing since the end of Cerebus is either whinging about Marxist-Feminists ruining his life or the debate between God and YHWH or whatever the fuck whackjob interpretation he has of the Bible. Yet, he will continue to insist that his isolation from the comic-book field (and the world at large) is always somebody ELSE'S fault.
Dave, actions have consequences. If you engage in activity that the rest of the civilized world finds offensive and disgraceful, the world will stop engaging with you. Don't cry about it. You made your bed, now lie in it without bitching about it every ten minutes.
Jeff S. @ 21:54 makes a factually false statement. But we are already aware that he and Brian W. believe that many of their country's founding fathers were cowards.
Dame, happy to have you back in the discussion! Now, would you care to answer my questions in this thread, if you please, instead of whining over comments made in another?
Bri-Bri, Jeffie, and Dave himself would do well to learn a lesson they apparently missed when their ages were in single digits: believing something very strongly doesn't make it true. "Here endeth the lesson."
You’ll never know what I actually believe Dame if you persist in wallowing in self absorption and ad hominem attacks. You could, if you wanted to, chose to engage in an honest discussion here. Think about it, Damian. I doubt we will come to an agreement about CIH? or Dave here but maybe there is some middle ground somewhere. But I think we both have to be mature enough to come to our senses and agree on terms of engagement going forward. Hopefully your contempt for me is not so complete that you won’t consider what I am proposing.
Think about it, Damian. Get out of that comfort zone for a minute and think about it.
Yes, of course, Damian. Thank you for choosing to engage with me here.
The part of your discussion here which I think was dishonest were those parts in which you referred to me by name, or a diminutive of it, in the third person. Reading previous exchanges at AMOC I assume that you might know Dave well, maybe even Jeff very well. But I don’t think you know me very well.
Aside from my profession of faith elsewhere at the blog and enjoyment of CIH?, and my view of the current cultural moment, you don’t know my politics, my opinions on other matters well enough to assume that I actually believe the founders to be cowards or that I am in total lockstep in belief with either Dave or Jeff in terms of belief and worldview.
I don’t believe that I have made enough comments here for you to draw a logical conclusion about what my opinions are on a variety Of topics. So far I have only commmented on anonymous users, CIH?, and BLM. Yet aside from that I have refrained from talking about non-Cerebus topics. As such I don’t think your comments about me are honest. Hyperbolic? Maybe. But not honest? I think not
Again, thank you for taking the time to address me directly. Addressing me directly I think does tend to clear the air for me here. Grateful that you have chosen to do so here.
Brian W.: Your points are easily debunked or refuted:
1) You seem to object to being addressed by a diminutive of your name. You initiated that practice in addressing me as "Dame". Either all of us can adopt affectionate diminutives for each other, or none of us can. (Of course, as you are a Simcophant, I imagine that for you there are few worse insults than to call someone a woman, so I suspect your nickname for me is intended to be a slur.)
2) Referring to you in the third person is not dishonest. It is dismissive and mocking. Or do you think that talking about someone is in itself dishonest?
3) You stated that people who do not sign their names to their opinions are cowards. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay did not sign their names to the Federalist Papers. Therefore, by your own criterion, they are cowards. QED. (Just to fun with ya, I'm not signing this comment. Now you can ignore it on principle, rather than because you're losing!)
4) Your comments about anonymous users are logically and factually false. (Jeff S. goes even further than you do. Oops, there I go being dishonest again by referring to someone in the third person!) You might not respect anonymous authors; you might choose not to engage with them. That does not refute their points -- like, at all. In fact, it looks like intellectual cowardice: deliberately avoiding opinions that make you uncomfortable, and seeking to cloak your ad hominem in alleged principle.
5) I don't have much to say about CiH, except to remark that I don't find it funny (it's for the TFFBs only -- which is fine; not everything has to be for me) and to characterize Dave's involvement as being akin to Jim Davis's with Garfield (i.e. someone else writes and draws the strips, and the creator gives a thumbs up, thumbs down, or corrections -- oh, and also contributes the occasional gag).
6) Your existential terror at BLM was strictly fact-free party-line-talking-point RWNJ paranoia. If you want to talk about dishonesty, your "thoughts" there are a good place to start. (I do suggest that, if this a subject you wish to discuss with me, we take it offline, in the interests of keeping this blog centred on Cerebus and Dave Sim.)
7) I think you employ the term "dishonest" because the more accurate "someone disagreed with me and my li'l snowflake fee-fees are hurt" doesn't make you look as good. Hyperbolic? Maybe. (I'll grant that your double negative is probably a typo.)
Thank you for taking the time to explain your accusation, however empty it may have turned out to be. Discussions here can get sarcastic or heated, but we are all united in our interest in the work of Dave Sim.
30 comments:
Hilarious!
Yes, the number of Covid-19 deaths has been roughly equal to the annual number of deaths from flu, except in the case of Covid-19, we SHUT DOWN THE ENTIRE FUCKING PLANET AND STILL HAVE MORE THAN HALF A MILLION DEAD. How fucking stupid is Dave?
Not very.
Calm down. You're hyperventilating.
And if you're going to insult him for his satire, you probably shouldn't do it anonymously.
Hey Matt et. al.! FOUR quotes for the inside back cover of the next CIH?! Handed to you on a silver platter!
So, this latest strip makes me wonder what life has been like for Canadians during the pandemic. Has the border shutdown with the USA caused much of an inconvenience or no?
D'oh, I forgot about the CIH quotes! Here's another one for you "women want to be raped by rich, muscular, handsome doctors and are completely self-absorbed and, thus, see themselves in everything around them". Be sure to quote the entire line, won't you?
Dave is not exactly stupid. But he literally doesn't know how to think. He doesn't know how to evaluate evidence, or construct a logical argument, or make an analogy, or read a text. His "thinking" consists solely of erecting after-the-fact justifications for his feelings. It's actually pretty funny to watch him rant and foam, all the while insisting that he has no feelings and is a creature of pure reason. He doesn't even know himself.
As Bob Fiore once wrote, Dave is pretty lucky that his artistic instincts ran counter to his stated phoolosophy. Once the latter overwhelmed the former -- well, the audience lost interest, and the sales plummeted until Dave stopped printing them out of embarrassment.
-- Damian
I would agree that Dave isn't a moron per se, i.e. he does know things. There are some facts in his head which are accurate. Fair enough. However, his inability to come to sound conclusions based on available evidence is, I think, a sign of some kind of cognitive impairment much like stupidity. I agree whole-heartedly that Dave's problem is that he doesn't know HOW to think, which leads directly to him believing (and even worse, publicly stating) his absurdly myopic views thus ruining his own reputation and making himself the laughing stock of the comic-book world.
In a way, Dave has never stopped writing Latter Days and Tangent. 90% of his writing since the end of Cerebus is either whinging about Marxist-Feminists ruining his life or the debate between God and YHWH or whatever the fuck whackjob interpretation he has of the Bible. Yet, he will continue to insist that his isolation from the comic-book field (and the world at large) is always somebody ELSE'S fault.
Dave, actions have consequences. If you engage in activity that the rest of the civilized world finds offensive and disgraceful, the world will stop engaging with you. Don't cry about it. You made your bed, now lie in it without bitching about it every ten minutes.
Hey Dame, you got a link or a citation of the Fiore writing?
Also, can you point me to where exactly Dave states that he is, in fact, a creature of “pure reason”?
Thanks.
Brian: as I recall, the R. Fiore quote is from his entry in the Comics Journal #263, Cerebus roundtable.
Hello, Mr. Kopperman. Pleasure to meet you. Thank you for the information. Will have to read that entry forthwith.
Anyone who posts up hre anonymously cannot and should not be taken seriously, regardless of the veracity (or lack thereof) of their assertions.
If you want to criticize Dave Sim (or me, or anyone), then show your balls, and sign your name.
Signed,
Jeff Seiler
here
Sheesh.
Fucking autocorrect.
And, Damian, before you get your britches in a wad, I know that you, almost, always own your posts.
Though, I suspect, *not* always.
Such is life.
It's true, Jeff: I didn't sign my "conceited lion-tamer" joke from earlier this week.
-- D.
Jeff S. @ 21:54 makes a factually false statement. But we are already aware that he and Brian W. believe that many of their country's founding fathers were cowards.
-- Damian
Dame, happy to have you back in the discussion! Now, would you care to answer my questions in this thread, if you please, instead of whining over comments made in another?
Before there’s another potential dust up between The Federalist Damian Jay and me I say thank you Jeff for what you wrote earlier.
Bri-Bri, Jeffie, and Dave himself would do well to learn a lesson they apparently missed when their ages were in single digits: believing something very strongly doesn't make it true. "Here endeth the lesson."
-- D.
You’ll never know what I actually believe Dame if you persist in wallowing in self absorption and ad hominem attacks. You could, if you wanted to, chose to engage in an honest discussion here. Think about it, Damian. I doubt we will come to an agreement about CIH? or Dave here but maybe there is some middle ground somewhere. But I think we both have to be mature enough to come to our senses and agree on terms of engagement going forward. Hopefully your contempt for me is not so complete that you won’t consider what I am proposing.
Think about it, Damian. Get out of that comfort zone for a minute and think about it.
What part of my discussion is not honest, if it can be told?
-- D.
Yes, of course, Damian. Thank you for choosing to engage with me here.
The part of your discussion here which I think was dishonest were those parts in which you referred to me by name, or a diminutive of it, in the third person. Reading previous exchanges at AMOC I assume that you might know Dave well, maybe even Jeff very well. But I don’t think you know me very well.
Aside from my profession of faith elsewhere at the blog and enjoyment of CIH?, and my view of the current cultural moment, you don’t know my politics, my opinions on other matters well enough to assume that I actually believe the founders to be cowards or that I am in total lockstep in belief with either Dave or Jeff in terms of belief and worldview.
I don’t believe that I have made enough comments here for you to draw a logical conclusion about what my opinions are on a variety Of topics. So far I have only commmented on anonymous users, CIH?, and BLM. Yet aside from that I have refrained from talking about non-Cerebus topics. As such I don’t think your comments about me are honest. Hyperbolic? Maybe. But not honest? I think not
Again, thank you for taking the time to address me directly. Addressing me directly I think does tend to clear the air for me here. Grateful that you have chosen to do so here.
Apologies, Damian for the repetition in paragraphs 2 and 3 above. Hope you get my point.
Brian W.: Your points are easily debunked or refuted:
1) You seem to object to being addressed by a diminutive of your name. You initiated that practice in addressing me as "Dame". Either all of us can adopt affectionate diminutives for each other, or none of us can. (Of course, as you are a Simcophant, I imagine that for you there are few worse insults than to call someone a woman, so I suspect your nickname for me is intended to be a slur.)
2) Referring to you in the third person is not dishonest. It is dismissive and mocking. Or do you think that talking about someone is in itself dishonest?
3) You stated that people who do not sign their names to their opinions are cowards. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay did not sign their names to the Federalist Papers. Therefore, by your own criterion, they are cowards. QED. (Just to fun with ya, I'm not signing this comment. Now you can ignore it on principle, rather than because you're losing!)
4) Your comments about anonymous users are logically and factually false. (Jeff S. goes even further than you do. Oops, there I go being dishonest again by referring to someone in the third person!) You might not respect anonymous authors; you might choose not to engage with them. That does not refute their points -- like, at all. In fact, it looks like intellectual cowardice: deliberately avoiding opinions that make you uncomfortable, and seeking to cloak your ad hominem in alleged principle.
5) I don't have much to say about CiH, except to remark that I don't find it funny (it's for the TFFBs only -- which is fine; not everything has to be for me) and to characterize Dave's involvement as being akin to Jim Davis's with Garfield (i.e. someone else writes and draws the strips, and the creator gives a thumbs up, thumbs down, or corrections -- oh, and also contributes the occasional gag).
6) Your existential terror at BLM was strictly fact-free party-line-talking-point RWNJ paranoia. If you want to talk about dishonesty, your "thoughts" there are a good place to start. (I do suggest that, if this a subject you wish to discuss with me, we take it offline, in the interests of keeping this blog centred on Cerebus and Dave Sim.)
7) I think you employ the term "dishonest" because the more accurate "someone disagreed with me and my li'l snowflake fee-fees are hurt" doesn't make you look as good. Hyperbolic? Maybe. (I'll grant that your double negative is probably a typo.)
Thank you for taking the time to explain your accusation, however empty it may have turned out to be. Discussions here can get sarcastic or heated, but we are all united in our interest in the work of Dave Sim.
Damian/Anonymous, took you up on your offer elsewhere. Thanks.
Damian? Anonymous posters are cowards. Either *own* what you have to say, or shut the fuck up.
Thanks, li'l Jeffie. As always, I'll be sure to give your advice all the consideration it deserves.
Damian, stop please. That's enough. You have won the day here.
Post a Comment