Despicable Dems...

WinterBorn said:
If the chilc is going to follow in your footsteps then that might be right. But if your child has different interests and different goals they should not be pushed to exceed their parent's achievements.
Click to expand...
It is a parent's obligation to present different fields of interest for their child's choosing, and once chosen, giving them the opportunity to excel to their best. If the field chosen is what the parent has chosen himself, this provides an excellent opportunity to teach and encourage true greatness, and competition is one of the tools at the parents disposal.
 
Southern Man said:
Obviously, yet that doesn't make yours correct.

m-w.com

Reaching the goal that you set is the objective.
Click to expand...

Why not leave the rest of the definition in there?

": to strive consciously or unconsciously for an objective (as position, profit, or a prize) : be in a state of rivalry "

But according to the Oxford English dictionary the definition is:

"• verb strive to gain or win something by defeating or establishing superiority over others."
 
Southern Man said:
It is a parent's obligation to present different fields of interest for their child's choosing, and once chosen, giving them the opportunity to excel to their best. If the field chosen is what the parent has chosen himself, this provides an excellent opportunity to teach and encourage true greatness, and competition is one of the tools at the parents disposal.
Click to expand...

If the child progresses at a normal pace. And if the parent prgresses at a normal pace. Why would you automatically expect the child to be better than the parent?
 
WinterBorn said:
Why not leave the rest of the definition in there?

": to strive consciously or unconsciously for an objective (as position, profit, or a prize) : be in a state of rivalry "

But according to the Oxford English dictionary the definition is:

"• verb strive to gain or win something by defeating or establishing superiority over others."
Click to expand...
Back when you were Solitary you also insisted that a word meet all of the listed definitions to be valid. However that's not the way the English language works. For example, let's look at the definition of "bottle" from m-w.com:

bot·tle

1 a: a rigid or semirigid container typically of glass or plastic having a comparatively narrow neck or mouth and usually no handle b: a usually bottle-shaped container made of skin for storing a liquid
2: the quantity held by a bottle
3 a: intoxicating drink : the practice of drinking <slipped deeper and deeper into the bottle — Anne Bernays> b: liquid food (as milk) used in place of mother's milk
Click to expand...

For your interpretation to be correct, "bottle" would have to refer specifically to a rigid container made of glass or plastic yet flexible like skin, the quantity of such, and be an intoxicating food. Since this is obviously absurd, your interpretation does not hold water.
 
WinterBorn said:
If the child progresses at a normal pace. And if the parent prgresses at a normal pace. Why would you automatically expect the child to be better than the parent?
Click to expand...
I stated that it should be the goal of the parent to exceed them- I said nothing about expectation.
 
Southern Man said:
Back when you were Solitary you also insisted that a word meet all of the listed definitions to be valid. However that's not the way the English language works. For example, let's look at the definition of "bottle" from m-w.com:



For your interpretation to be correct, "bottle" would have to refer specifically to a rigid container made of glass or plastic yet flexible like skin, the quantity of such, and be an intoxicating food. Since this is obviously absurd, your interpretation does not hold water.
Click to expand...

Nope still not Solitary.

The reason I added that you should have posted the entire definition is that the part you left out was what the OxFord English dictionary had as the definition.
 
Southern Man said:
I stated that it should be the goal of the parent to exceed them- I said nothing about expectation.
Click to expand...

Actually back in post #95 you stated it was more than expectation. You stated that failure to do so would make you a crappy father.

"Actually, since you were unable to teach your son to be better than you at this so-called "sport", it makes you a crappy father."
 
WinterBorn said:
Nope still not Solitary.

The reason I added that you should have posted the entire definition is that the part you left out was what the OxFord English dictionary had as the definition.
Click to expand...
The UK English language is a separate dialect from the American English language. Why would you refer to a UK English dictionary?
 
WinterBorn said:
Actually back in post #95 you stated it was more than expectation. You stated that failure to do so would make you a crappy father.

"Actually, since you were unable to teach your son to be better than you at this so-called "sport", it makes you a crappy father."
Click to expand...
Maineman is a crappy father since he failed at raising his son to exceed him in a sport that he states his son truly loves. That video that Charver posted probably suits him to a Tee. Either that or he's lying about something, which would also make him to a crappy person.
 
Southern Man said:
Maineman is a crappy father since he failed at raising his son to exceed him in a sport that he states his son truly loves. That video that Charver posted probably suits him to a Tee. Either that or he's lying about something, which would also make him to a crappy person.
Click to expand...

You just finished posting "I stated that it should be the goal of the parent to exceed them- I said nothing about expectation." and now you go back to the claim that if his son does not exceed him in a sport that he must be a crappy father.

Golf is not a sport that requires great strength or fast reflexes. If it were then youth would be an advantage. So there is no reason to expect that the son would exceed the father unless one of them stopped playing for long enough to lose the expertise they had gained.

If you want to bash maineman for some reason that is ok. But calling him a crappy father because he can beat his son at golf is bullshit. That is what I set out to show you. So I set my goal and achieved it.
 
WinterBorn said:
You just finished posting "I stated that it should be the goal of the parent to exceed them- I said nothing about expectation." and now you go back to the claim that if his son does not exceed him in a sport that he must be a crappy father.

Golf is not a sport that requires great strength or fast reflexes. If it were then youth would be an advantage. So there is no reason to expect that the son would exceed the father unless one of them stopped playing for long enough to lose the expertise they had gained.

If you want to bash maineman for some reason that is ok. But calling him a crappy father because he can beat his son at golf is bullshit. That is what I set out to show you. So I set my goal and achieved it.
Click to expand...
I bash maineman because he claims that he can beat the dogcrap out his son in a sport that he claims to have instilled a love for from his son. That is by all accounts the very definition of a crappy father.
 
Southern Man said:
I bash maineman because he claims that he can beat the dogcrap out his son in a sport that he claims to have instilled a love for from his son. That is by all accounts the very definition of a crappy father.
Click to expand...

That is total bullshit.

If he plays golf well and beats his son then that does not mean he is a crappy father. The son may love the game but not get to play it often or may not have developed the skills (they take time) that his father has developed.

Unless you are suggesting that he should lose on purpose to make his son feel better? That would certainly be a disservice to the son.
 
WinterBorn said:
That is total bullshit.

If he plays golf well and beats his son then that does not mean he is a crappy father. The son may love the game but not get to play it often or may not have developed the skills (they take time) that his father has developed.

Unless you are suggesting that he should lose on purpose to make his son feel better? That would certainly be a disservice to the son.
Click to expand...
Actually, I'm saying what I said before, again.
 
Southern Man said:
Actually, I'm saying what I said before, again.
Click to expand...

So you are still insisting that the son should (if he didn't have a crappy father) be able to master a game at a faster pace than his father? Even though his father has had years more practice than he has had?

And you are insisting that without knowing how often either of them gets to play (because the father could get to play 3x more than the son) that because the father still soundly beats the son at golf the father is by definition a "crappy father"?
 
WinterBorn said:
So you are still insisting that the son should (if he didn't have a crappy father) be able to master a game at a faster pace than his father? Even though his father has had years more practice than he has had?

And you are insisting that without knowing how often either of them gets to play (because the father could get to play 3x more than the son) that because the father still soundly beats the son at golf the father is by definition a "crappy father"?
Click to expand...
My response is yet again post 155.
 
Southern Man said:
My response is yet again post 155.
Click to expand...

I was trying to give you a chance to make your position clearer.

But you maintain the same position.

If the father plays golf 4 or 5 times a week. And if the son only plays golf 1 or 2 times a week (new career, small children ect make good reasons for less golf) And if both men progress at about the same rate then the father will not only continue to beat the son but will do so by greater and greater margins.

Your position that maineman is a crappy father based on his beating his son at golf is bullshit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top