Interesting and humorous - page 83
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
It comes back to me.
In my early youth, back in Soviet times, I took part in a friendly boxing match (or some sort of district prize). My opponent got ill or was not able to come. To avoid disappointing my schedule, we decided that I would go to a match with their coach who was in my weight class. I was not starry-eyed, often beaten, and I went to the gym more for company, so I felt uncomfortable. Their trainer - a young Greek (like MC), with knotty muscles, wiry back and shoulders made a bad impression on me. My coach, an old dry man, I calmed down, he said he had agreed not to beat me badly.
We started. We swung around. We exchanged blows in gloves. And then I noticed that he closes his eyes when he hits. Then, with a right jab, I gave him a couple of left jabs to the cheekbone. I was still afraid of getting hit back with a hook. After all, he was moving strangely, he reacted strangely. Then the gong came. It was decided to end the fight with one round.
The Greek came up to me, patted me on the shoulders and told me that I was good, if you want to come to my section. I understood after a while, that I met with a guy who never dealt with boxing, maybe just from the movies. I've met many such "trainers" in my life, but they're very concentrated in Faure...
... It took me a long time to realize that I was meeting a man who never really worked in boxing. Later on I met many such "trainers". But they're very concentrated on Faure...
Exactly. Either you'll be a "coach", or you'll be beaten. Tertium non datur.
If you don't brother the logical stretch:
Rorschach:
... who has a dirty face will look at someone whose face is clean and not
will go to wash his face. And the one whose face is clean will see that the one whose face is dirty does not go to wash, will understand that his face is clean, (in reality will not understand) and will not go to wash either.written well.
Except that in this situation 2 knows that 1 only has information about him, 1.
These are different ways of assessing the situation.
- Wrong. Now are you convinced that knowing Socrates' logic is not enough to teach the Talmud? Tell me, how is it possible that
two people go down the same pipe and one of them gets his face dirty and the other doesn't?!
It's a task only for the humour branch. The first one went down and got all the dirt on him.
Judging by the story, no one looked at his clothes or hands... So the hands are clean... So the chimney's just built and never been run. - Plus, one of them came out clean.
The narrator says that one person's face is dirty - most likely he got it dirty somewhere else.
The conclusion - will go wash the one who has a dirty face - if these people are able to talk, and even if they can not, as they are likely to find out who is dirty and who is not, and they will find it because they are a team, because they have done one thing together, namely - down the chimney
There is no truth, there is demagogy.
Don't like Hegel or science? That's funny:
There is no logical stretch. 1 is judging a clean person by 2.
Except that in this situation 2 knows that 1 only has information about him, 1.
These are different ways of assessing the situation.
The reluctance to wash the second person's face is not proof that the first person's face is clean. If one of two people is dirty, it does not prove that the other must necessarily be clean, nor does it prove the opposite. In general, this is demagoguery.
they can come to different conclusions with the same inputs.
There is a trivial search for options.