The Daily Static
  The Daily Static
UF Archives
Register
UF Membership
Ad Free Site
Postcards
Community
Geekfinder
UFie Gear
Advertise on UF
Forum Rules
& FAQ

Username

Password


Create a New Account

  
 

Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
The daily flamebait by Arachnid2004-10-21 02:00:38
  Depends by Spisefisken2004-10-21 02:09:19
    Wasn't it Freud that held the view... by Arachnid2004-10-21 02:11:22
      I agree with you there by Yaeger2004-10-21 03:45:29
        Huh? by Spisefisken 2004-10-21 04:08:23
No need to search for them. They are there. Just because they are selfish doesn't necessarily mean that they are malign towards. When I help my friends moving it is also a very selfish act, as they are in kind of a debt to me, and I can cash that in when I need to move myself. Not helping anybody with anything is a very nonselfish act as you isolate yourself. So everybody who is doing an "altruistic act" toward are being selfish, and rightfully expect to get it returned in someway.
If I didn't return it we would soon cease to be friends. Same would happen if roles where switched.
[ Reply ]
          I think you're missing my point somewhat by Yaeger2004-10-21 04:44:51
            Take a step back by Control2004-10-21 04:50:54
              You feel that by Matthewdba2004-10-21 05:00:58
                looky here by Control2006-11-19 12:55:59
            You might not expect it consciously by Spisefisken2004-10-21 04:53:48
              So you're saying by Matthewdba2004-10-21 04:57:29
                Think of where the concepts of 'relationship, ... by Control2004-10-21 05:02:46
                  By that reckoning by Matthewdba2004-10-21 05:07:26
                    Then it is just a dispute over definition by Spisefisken2004-10-21 05:12:22
                Yes I do not believe the situation described by Spisefisken2004-10-21 05:04:15
                  But how can you know by Matthewdba2004-10-21 05:11:16
                    Alternativ explanation? by Control2004-10-21 05:14:32
                      I disagree by Matthewdba2006-11-19 12:55:59
                    Because we are animals by Spisefisken2004-10-21 05:15:24
                      Assuming of course by Matthewdba2004-10-21 05:18:57
                        However, we are still nothing *less* than animals, by HadEnuf2004-10-21 05:46:10
                          True by Matthewdba2004-10-21 05:52:08
                            No, our *motivations* would be the superset by HadEnuf2004-10-21 06:41:46
                    How can you know the obverse? by Naruki2004-10-21 05:37:17
                      I don't believe I have less proof by Matthewdba2004-10-21 05:49:48
                        I get the impression that's exactly Narui's point: by HadEnuf2004-10-21 05:59:13
                          s/Narui/Naruki/ # Maye there's a corollary . . . by HadEnuf2004-10-21 06:00:07
                          I agree. That is also why I have stated 'Believe' by Spisefisken2004-10-21 06:07:14
                            or everybody is right by Matthewdba2004-10-21 06:11:05
                              geez I even previewed that by Matthewdba2004-10-21 06:13:35
                            Yep. That's why we're talking "theory", by HadEnuf2004-10-21 06:48:44
                  Actually, he is already getting something back, by HadEnuf2004-10-21 05:38:59
              The *real* point I am trying to make by Yaeger2004-10-21 07:15:43
                But are acting selfish by Spisefisken2004-10-21 07:28:56
                  And it makes you feel good to know by Yaeger2004-10-21 07:41:03
                    That is how the world works by Spisefisken2004-10-21 07:44:39
                      Does it ? by Yaeger2004-10-21 07:54:44
                        By "selfish reason", do you mean . . . by HadEnuf2004-10-21 08:40:08
                          To answer the question, neither. by Yaeger2004-10-21 08:44:55
                            What is the sound of one hand clapping? by Naruki2004-10-21 08:51:34
                              What impossible restrictions ? by Yaeger2004-10-21 08:57:49
                                In your statement. by Naruki2004-10-21 09:02:10
                                If you want to interpret it that way by Yaeger2004-10-21 09:32:12
                                It's just that, in your first statement, . . . by HadEnuf2004-10-21 09:54:23
                                That's it exactly. by Naruki2004-10-21 15:17:07
                            There simply *is* no such situation, as I see it by HadEnuf2004-10-21 08:53:00
                    You just assume it will devalue the action. by Naruki2004-10-21 07:51:28
                      I'll try to explain by Yaeger2004-10-21 08:06:48
                        Suppose you seek an altruistic reason by Naruki2004-10-21 08:23:33
                          Well put, on paranoia and zealotry, . . . by HadEnuf2004-10-21 08:28:19
                          This is by far a mental exercise by Yaeger2004-10-21 08:32:25
                            That does not necessarily follow by HadEnuf2006-11-19 12:55:59
                              Which is *exactly* the trap I am thinking of. by Yaeger2004-10-21 08:54:41
                                Then we are approaching the same point, . . . by HadEnuf2004-10-21 09:04:04
                                I'm approaching it from the point by Yaeger2004-10-21 09:15:13
                                And I am approaching it from *my* experience, by HadEnuf2004-10-21 09:24:12
                                Great, an argument over something we agree on :) (n/t) by Yaeger2004-10-21 09:34:57
                                No, everyone *is* capable of the sane "attitude" by HadEnuf2004-10-21 10:05:27
                                Sorry, but I don't think everyone by Yaeger2004-10-21 10:20:31
                                I might buy "unwilling", but not "incapable" by HadEnuf2004-10-21 11:09:08
                                Mmm, difficult one. by Yaeger2004-10-21 12:23:35
                            The obverse is equally "true". by Naruki2004-10-21 08:49:33
                              Which in my mind means that by Yaeger2004-10-21 08:52:15
                                I don't know whether Naruki agrees, but . . . by HadEnuf2004-10-21 08:54:55
                                Which means we don't agree with Yaeger. by Naruki2004-10-21 08:58:18
                                Not entirely certain of that by HadEnuf2004-10-21 09:16:42
                        Regardless of my benefactor's motives, by HadEnuf2004-10-21 08:27:05
                          I think you're spot on with the evaluation bit. by Yaeger2004-10-21 08:41:43
                            Not true by HadEnuf2004-10-21 09:02:44
                              The thing I am arguing for by Yaeger2004-10-21 09:13:21
                                That seems to be the first time you've made that by Naruki2004-10-21 09:24:14
                                Hey, grant *some* points for *trying* by HadEnuf2004-10-21 09:26:26
                                In future, it would help by Yaeger2004-10-21 09:39:07
                                I didn't burn you at all. That's in your mind. by Naruki2004-10-21 15:19:40

 

[Todays Cartoon Discussion] [News Index]

Come get yer ARS (Account Registration System) Source Code here!
All images, characters, content and text are copyrighted and trademarks of J.D. Frazer except where other ownership applies. Don't do bad things, we have lawyers.
UserFriendly.Org and its operators are not liable for comments or content posted by its visitors, and will cheerfully assist the lawful authorities in hunting down script-kiddies, spammers and other net scum. And if you're really bad, we'll call your mom. (We're not kidding, we've done it before.)