The litmus test to distinguish between a reasonable man & an unreasonable man

Anonymous Guest's picture
Submitted by Anonymous Guest on Tue, 2012-05-08 04:30

It's becoming very clear to me as to the the litmus test to distinguish between a reasonable man & an unreasonable man. i.e:
A reasonable man will be convinced by logically compelling and rational arguments whereas an unreasonable man stubbornly closes his mind to such reasoning and needs to be belted over the head with emperical proof before he will be convinced.


A reasonable man doesn't clutter up someone else's property..

Burnsy's picture

"A reasonable man doesn't clutter up someone else's property with his own delusions."

From reading some of Mr Perigo's ignorant diatribes it's very clear he does not need anyone else to clutter up his own property with delusions, because he is a master of crapping in his own nest.

Whereas..

Burnsy's picture

Looks like I've been outed as a deluded unreasonable man by mere dint of my spelling mistake.
Where can I turn to now? God help me.

Erm ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Mr Burns: a reasonable man knows that "compelling and rational arguments" possess those qualities by dint of being reality-based—i.e., empirical. He also knows there's no such word as "emperical" and doesn't wade in over his head.

A reasonable man doesn't clutter up someone else's property with his own delusions.

A reasonable, but confused, man, asked to furnish proof for his delusional propositions, would make an effort to do so.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.