Z
Zhaneel
Guest
lmao! my math teacher spells a lot of equations wrong.
That's not actually "misspelling" (unless they're spelling it like "thier" or something) but using the wrong <something>. Like when people mix up "effect" and "affect" usages.Today's Christian Morality test misspelled "they're" as "their" at least twice
Um...Yeah, sort of like that I'll go crawl back into my cave now...Originally posted by Mazzak
proof of this in the fact that you spelled Svenmonkey as "Mazzak" by accident...
Most teachers would have turned it back in simply because of the "problematic" preface...Preface:
There is nothing more saddening then observing a scholar reverting to the ways of a so-called scholar, and to add to the grieving pain, when many “scholars” become the scholars of the so-called. One must wonder yet again: how valuable are words if they merely reformulate a norm or belief? And this is important especially when we listen to the norms and beliefs and hear that they are much too unmusical for the life of man – such unmusical songs cause ear bleedings and death of spirits.
One need not fool himself and confuse refabrications and wordgames with creation. A violinist who plays the same melody for many shows is lacking vision. Only a fool invites the same lie. And the same goes to our dear scholars who play the norm simply with different pitches, choosing more sophisticated and wisely words, but are the old and exhausted words nevertheless, disguised behind lavish constructions and scholarly titles – their work is thus more observable because it is screechy. When do we finally exhale our sighs and turn away from such a circus, having seen how bad of a performance it had given?
A mastermind is he who not just observes, as our good and many scholars have done and still do, but it is he who also asks: “what does this observation mean to the world and to life? What does it mean to those who lived hundreds of years ago, and to those arriving hundreds of years from now?” Yes – what does it say about existence, and what does it reveal and foretell? Only then do we begin to hear thought sing its many songs. To be able to reincarnate the world with new terms is not a work of true scholars, and this defiles the world and makes much of a deceiving genius, a genius that does nothing, a mere retracing of values and uttering of noise, albeit, with more style. And honestly, the atmosphere is dripping with much stylish noise already: books, politics, higher education, and everything in between. The universe looks at them for a second, and tries to restrain from laughter for eternity...
And so I arrive to the gates of this stronghold, barely crawling and torn, with my ears bleeding having heard much scholarly screeching. To all psychologists I have but one demand: for them to be philosophers as well; otherwise, they are merely vomiting a sickness that is already unpleasant to the sensible nose. Still, at the end of it all, really, there would not be masterminds if it were not to those who flood life with their scholarly idiocy: the insincere, the lazy, the contaminated in spirit – only against such a sheer and disgraceful of a background of scholars can we see and recognize the lovely and spirited scholar…much like it requires night, for us to observe the stars. But the stars are always there and that is the sole reason why the stars are the norm; as for the common people, the good and many, the scholars of the so-called – they are a waking and sleeping night, shapeshifters and clones, shallow and nearsighted; they are the norm only in numbers, statistics and samples – they fade and stumble, they are weak and overtaken by much nothingness, with too much noise that they proudly call “social life.” Such a feeblish breed, such a massy lacking, is and has become all too social to grow wings of its own, and so it is lustfully dependent, and suspicious of those who can fly. At least that much must be recognized…
Because I am referring to the "scholars" who "studied" love and "wrote" about it. And I do mention where the paper is heading, but only a keen eye can see:Spiderman:
...if this is about the immoralities of love, I don't see where the "scholars" come in on the preface.
And especially this, which sums up the entire paper perfectly, (even more especially, the bold part):Preface:
...what does this observation mean to the world and to life? What does it mean to those who lived hundreds of years ago, and to those arriving hundreds of years from now?” Yes – what does it say about existence, and what does it reveal and foretell?
I don't know why, exactly, but I don't like writing so "obviously." Maybe because clearity tells you what to think. What I like is to see you thinking and wondering at just what in the world could that have meant. Maybe it is because you were exposed to many so-called scholarly writing, that you now think this writing is strange? But you see, every line you read above is carefully chosen - it has a meaning. There are no fillers.Preface:
But the stars are always there and that is the sole reason why the stars are the norm; as for the common people, the good and many, the scholars of the so-called – they are a waking and sleeping night, shapeshifters and clones, shallow and nearsighted; they are the norm only in numbers, statistics and samples – they fade and stumble, they are weak and overtaken by much nothingness, with too much noise that they proudly call “social life.” Such a feeblish breed, such a massy lacking, is and has become all too social to grow wings of its own, and so it is lustfully dependent, and suspicious of those who can fly. At least that much must be recognized…
Well, am I not surprised! But this is the preface, so I did not include any actual research. It is the one time I actually have the freedom to do whatever I want. The actual paper, although contains much of the same style and sarcasm, it actually discusses the issues at hand and the research. In fact, the professor requested a 5-7 page paper - mine is 15 pages. The first 3 pages of the paper are deeply entwined with actual research; then, 3 pages to analyze how "love" has positively affected the social atmosphere (the "moral" side); 3 pages of complete and pure philosophy; 3 pages of the negative after-effects of love on humanity in general (the "immoral" side), and 3 pages that discusses the "Beyond Love" aspects, which does not contain much research but me just...wondering out load. Furthermore, he asked for at least 5 references - I have 9 well thought out and abused refrences. The paper is contaiminted with tons of quotes. And I hate quoting others because others do not know what they are talking about.Eric:
Were this a paper submitted as a "research" paper, or for a technical writing class, I would have a problem with it.
And guess what? I am always the first student to turn in the papers - few weeks before the actual due date. In this case, I turned it in few months before the due date. It is due all the way in the finals...we are only in midterms now. I think 3 months of reading my silly ol'15 page paper is good enough, don't you?Eric:
...given that teachers have a lot of these papers to go through...