Cowboy

Robert4170 Free

Recent Comments

  1. about 15 hours ago on Calvin and Hobbes

    “No, he does NOT show that Hobbes cannot be the large living tiger that Calvin sees.”

    The washing machine strips PROVE otherwise. Calvin IMAGINES that he sees the PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY of Hobbes in the washing machine, just as he sees the PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY of being 2D, going to Mars in a toy wagon, etc. It’s an ASININE attempt at semantic evasion on your part to claim that Calvin is SEEING nothing, PERCEIVING nothing in those situations. You’re making the LUDICROUS assertion that he didn’t SEE the dinosaurs he imagined, that he doesn’t SEE the four foot spaceship he’s in, that he doesn’t SEE the alien worlds he imagines visiting, that he didn’t SEE Mars when he imagined visiting it.

    From the Cambridge dictionary:

    to imagine something:

    picture: When I say ‘your car’ you have a picture of that in your head.

    in your mind’s eye: In my mind’s eye, I’m still a uni student and not a middle-aged worker.

    From Dictionary.com:

    to form a mental IMAGE of

    What an utter idiot you are to claim that forming a mental IMAGE of something isn’t SEEING it in your mind.

    He SEES himself as doing those things PRECISELY because he IMAGINES them. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER BETWEEN HIM IMAGINING WHAT HE IS SEEING IN THOSE SITUATIONS VS IMAGINING THAT HE IS SEEING A FIVE FOOT HOBBES IN THE WASHING MACHINE. YOUR CLAIM THAT HE CAN ONLY SEE WHAT IS REAL AND POSSIBLE IS LUDICROUS. IT IS PHYSICALLY, MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR A FIVE FOOT HOBBES TO FIT IN THE TUB. ANYTHING THAT A PERSON SEES THAT IS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE MUST BE IMAGINED.

  2. about 17 hours ago on Calvin and Hobbes

    “Is he able to see himself as the size of a bug or a galaxy? Is he able to see himself as 2D? Is he able to see himself flying to Mars in a toy wagon?”

    “NO. However, he is able to IMAGINE himself in such situations and we have seen him imagining them all.”

    OMG, What an ASININE attempt at semantic evasion on your part to claim that Calvin is SEEING nothing, PERCEIVING nothing in those situations. You’re making the LUDICROUS assertion that he didn’t SEE the dinosaurs he imagined, that he doesn’t SEE the four foot spaceship he’s in, that he doesn’t SEE the alien worlds he imagines visiting, that he didn’t SEE Mars when he imagined visiting it.

    From the Cambridge dictionary:

    to imagine something:

    picture: When I say ‘your car’ you have a picture of that in your head.

    in your mind’s eye: In my mind’s eye, I’m still a uni student and not a middle-aged worker.

    From Dictionary.com:

    to form a mental IMAGE of

    What an utter idiot you are to claim that forming a mental IMAGE of something isn’t SEEING it in your mind.

    He SEES himself as doing those things PRECISELY because he IMAGINES them. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER BETWEEN HIM IMAGINING WHAT HE IS SEEING IN THOSE SITUATIONS VS IMAGINING THAT HE IS SEEING A FIVE FOOT HOBBES IN THE WASHING MACHINE. YOUR CLAIM THAT HE CAN ONLY SEE WHAT IS REAL AND POSSIBLE IS LUDICROUS. IT IS PHYSICALLY, MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR A FIVE FOOT HOBBES TO FIT IN THE TUB. ANYTHING THAT A PERSON SEES (INCLUDING FORMING A MENTAL IMAGE OF IT) THAT IS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE MUST BE IMAGINED.

  3. about 21 hours ago on Calvin and Hobbes

    “As we both agree, the machine cannot see or perceive anything.”

    Exactly. It OBLITERATES the “Hobbes is whatever people see him as” claim. THE MACHINE CAN ONLY HOLD WHAT IS OBJECTIVELY SMALL ENOUGH TO FIT IN IT. HOBBES MUST OBJECTIVELY BE THE SIZE OF A DOLL. YOU HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE LIVING HOBBES HAS NO OBJECTIVE REALITY.

    “However, we still see Hobbes as a living being when he is completely alone. “

    YOU HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT CALVIN CAN IMAGINE THAT, SO IT’S PROOF OF NOTHING. YOU HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE PROOF OF THE LIVING HOBBES. THE WASHING MACHINE STRIPS PROVE THAT HOBBES CANNOT BE THE LARGE LIVING TIGER THAT CALVIN SEES.

    GOD, you’re a dense, irrational moron.

  4. about 22 hours ago on Calvin and Hobbes

    You just ADMITTED that both you and Watterson used subjective THE WAY IT’S DEFINED:

    subjective /səb-jĕk′tĭv/

    Dependent on or taking place in a person’s mind rather than the external world.

    The meaning of what you said is that the reality of Hobbes is dependent on or taking place in a person’s mind rather than the external world. Your claim that that’s somehow “different” from Hobbes being imagined by Calvin is ludicrous.

  5. about 22 hours ago on Calvin and Hobbes

    “I keep explaining that I meant “subjective” the same way that Watterson meant it. Watterson clearly meant that other characters see Hobbes differently from how Calvin sees him”

    You just ADMITTED that both you and Watterson used subjective THE WAY IT’S DEFINED:

    subjective /səb-jĕk′tĭv/

    Dependent on or taking place in a person’s mind rather than the external world.

    The meaning of what you said is that the reality of Hobbes is dependent on or taking place in a person’s mind rather than the external world. Your claim that that’s somehow “different” from Hobbes being imagined by Calvin is ludicrous.

  6. 1 day ago on Calvin and Hobbes

    “I have explained many, many times that I know that many of the things that Calvin appears to see are in his imagination”

    THAT IS YOUR ADMISSION THAT JUST BECAUSE CALVIN SEES SOMETHING DOES NOT MEAN IT MUST BE REAL AND POSSIBLE. THEREFORE, CITING WHAT CALVIN SEES IS NOT PROOF OF THE REALITY OR POSSIBILITY OF WHAT HE IS SEEING. Your inability to comprehend simple, obvious logic is truly astounding.

    “I know that the washing machine is an inanimate object…and that it can neither see nor perceive anything.”

    Exactly. It OBLITERATES the “Hobbes is whatever people see him as” claim. THE MACHINE CAN ONLY HOLD WHAT IS OBJECTIVELY SMALL ENOUGH TO FIT IN IT. HOBBES CANNOT BE THE LARGE LIVING TIGER THAT CALVIN SEES, JUST AS CALVIN CANNOT GO TO MARS IN A TOY WAGON JUST BECAUSE HE SAW IT.

    “otherwise Calvin would NOT be able to see Hobbes there.”

    Is he able to see himself as the size of a bug or a galaxy? Is he able to see himself as 2D? Is he able to see himself flying to Mars in a toy wagon? You know PERFECTLY well that the answer is YES, even though you KNOW that those things ARE NOT REAL OR POSSIBLE.

    As I said, you are anything but a rational man.

  7. 1 day ago on Calvin and Hobbes

    “The machine sees nothing and feels nothing. “

    Exactly. It OBLITERATES the “Hobbes is whatever people see him as” claim. THE MACHINE CAN ONLY HOLD WHAT IS OBJECTIVELY SMALL ENOUGH TO FIT IN IT.

    “Calvin has seen Hobbes inside it”

    That means NOTHING. It is proof of NOTHING. You ADMITTED this when you said ““I have explained many, many times that I know that many of the things that Calvin appears to see are in his imagination”.

    THAT IS YOUR ADMISSION THAT JUST BECAUSE CALVIN SEES SOMETHING DOES NOT MEAN IT MUST BE REAL AND POSSIBLE. THEREFORE, CITING WHAT CALVIN SEES IS NOT PROOF OF THE REALITY OR POSSIBILITY OF WHAT HE IS SEEING. Your inability to comprehend simple, obvious logic is truly astounding.

    HOBBES CANNOT BE THE LARGE LIVING TIGER THAT CALVIN SEES, JUST AS CALVIN CANNOT GO TO MARS IN A TOY WAGON JUST BECAUSE HE SAW IT.

    As I said, you are anything but a rational man.

  8. 1 day ago on Calvin and Hobbes

    “suspect”?? That’s your admission that you DO NOT have proof of the reality of Hobbes. You have ACKNOWLEDGED this. Whatever Watterson claimed was his “intent”, the fact remains that what he ACTUALLY SHOWED IN THE STRIP IS THAT HOBBES CANNOT BE THE LARGE LIVING TIGER THAT CALVIN SEES.

  9. 1 day ago on Calvin and Hobbes

    “he did not intend “the subjective nature of reality” to mean imagination and neither did I.”

    It was YOU who said "Hobbes is subjectively real rather than objectively real.”

    subjective /səb-jĕk′tĭv/

    Dependent on or taking place in a person’s mind rather than the external world.

    The meaning of what you said is that the reality of Hobbes is dependent on or taking place in a person’s mind rather than the external world. Your claim that that’s somehow “different” from Hobbes being imagined by Calvin is ludicrous.

    You also EXPLICITLY said that the reality of Hobbes is NOT objective:

    ob·jec·tive əb-ˈjek-tiv

    of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers :having reality independent of the mind.

    So the MEANING of WHAT YOU SAID is that Hobbes does NOT have reality independent of the mind. Your claim that that’s somehow “different” from Hobbes being imagined by Calvin is ludicrous.

  10. 2 days ago on Calvin and Hobbes

    “I do NOT consider the suspicion to be invalid”

    It’s OBVIOUSLY invalid. It RESTS on the ASSUMPTION that no one would make up a friend who argues with him. But Calvin obviously WOULD do something he enjoys, and he DID enjoy the fight with Hobbes. Once again, you show that you’re oblivious to logic. His response to West is his acknowledgement that a fantasy friendship can be complex enough to include arguments.