The Bite Before Good Night…
I don’t mean midnight snacking. I’m talking about those moments when you close down your tabs in Firefox, then decide to check your email before calling it quits while you are burning the midnight oil. Then comes that flame email. The one clearly written by a fool, hating you for them hating themselves (or whatever motivates their sociopathy; I’m not their head-shrinker.) The one bait so deliciously silly, you just have to bite.
Apparently I’m pompous.
I’ve heard this a few times. I’ve been called “pompous” by a few people and I’d like to say for the same reason, but they’ve never actually given a reason. That’s usually the pattern; in the lead-up to being called pompous, they make assertions, I point out that they haven’t justified their assertions, they get all sooky and call me pompous etc. In fact, I can’t actually recall an instance where the one’s calling me pompus hadn’t been subject to a call out for fallacious reasoning prior to their sulking act.
I’ve had it from Daniel (of the late Seeking Utopia), pathological cyber stalker Iain Hall, newer nuisances such as the belicose Malott who currently trolls the comments at Five Public Opinions and a range of other’s since I’ve been on the internet, and even before hand. Some may say sthat so many people can’t be wrong; well they’d be wrong; argumentum ad populum wrong. Just remember: at one point, most Americans thought Iraq was behind 9/11.
I know it’s an inductive observation (which would be all the proof David Stove needs) but this cry of “Pompous” has uniformly come from those who demonstrably have problems being honest and who demonstrably have skills of reasoning that are rather lacking. So why this pattern of fools considering me “pompous”?
Now, I’m no dictionary totalitarian by any means; intellectually, I agree with the Prof Crystal school of linguistics, even if I’m a bit too anal about my own typos to practice it. But even colloquially, I’m unaware of “pompous” meaning anything other than self-important and well, practicing “pomp.”
My accusers don’t enlighten me any more to my apparent acts of pomp, than they do to the definition of pompous. It’s been they say it, therefore it’s true (the fallacy of truth by assertion). It comes in various forms; “hubris”; “pompous”; “you think your so smart/great/clever/etc*”. Never with justification, always following the puncturing of the accuser’s fallacies.
The thing is; I don’t promote myself. Promoting one’s self is a skill where I am somewhat lacking. I don’t pretend to have a station that I don’t have, and I don’t make displays of “pomp.” Apparently, telling people that you are at Uni is pomp. So what am I supposed to do when people ask me what I do? And what am I supposed to do when people ask me about my interests? Heck, I like enlightenment philosophy, but I can’t stand the grand narrative inferred by the word “enlightenment.”
I’ve done no more than answer these questions, and talk on these topics. That and I haven’t suffered fools gladly. Well, I’ve been pretty tolerant actually, but for the sake of argument, assume that I haven’t been. Gotta throw them a bone at some stage.
So tell me, because my latest flame emailer fails to substantiate; what is pompous and why am I pompous? Or is it simply a case of me being flamed by unreasonable sooks with bruised egos, acting out of ill faith?
All the evidence to my eyes leads me to suspect the latter. I only entertain the former out of whimsy. It’s good to know the silly people aren’t on “my side”. Nite-e-nite peeps 
~ Bruce
* Strangely enough, along with these claims, the accusers often have some magical insight into my most secret of thoughts (so secret that even I don’t know I’m thinking them!) They never tell me where they get their psychic powers from though.
Comments are closed.
you? pompous? thats funny:) you are the least pretentious person i know. why do fools need to resort to personal judgement and insult rather than participate in intelligent debate on a topic?
against fools the very gods themselves contend in vain:)
So tell me, because my latest flame emailer fails to substantiate; what is pompous and why am I pompous? Or is it simply a case of me being flamed by unreasonable sooks with bruised egos, acting out of ill faith?
I think when the accusations of pomposity or “you think you’re smarterer than me” get trolled out, you know that your interlocutors have run out of arguments and are no longer even trying. Indeed, they resort to personal attacks because you are knocking so many holes in their arguments that they are beginning to take it personally.
What they fail to realise is that the new strategy of personal attack makes them look even weaker and less rational as debaters than if they were to simply persist with their flawed arguments.
Another signal that your interlocutor is waving the white flag is when you hear this phrase uttered: “Well, that’s my opinion.” I honestly hadn’t heard that one since my days of crossing swords with homeschoolers on The Tolkien Forum discussion board, but El Stalko’s been using it at Malott’s.
“That’s my opinion.” It’s the kind of thing you imagine a rabbit saying to a pair of headlights.
What these people fail to understand is that being entitled to one’s opinions does not mean one is entitled to have one’s opinions shielded from scrutiny. This is why you’re the bad guy, Bruce–rather than simply being satisfied with the fact that these people have their opinions, you demand that they be held accountable for their opinions–particularly when their opinions are couched as either bald claims or accusations. Where they demand that you accept their conclusions at face value, you demand to see their premisses. They don’t like that. They don’t like that one bit. (Didn’t Malott call you a “bully” at one point?) Generally because they haven’t really thought their positions through, they are extremely concerned about what a forensic analysis of their reasoning will reveal.
They’re just sooks, these people. Sooks with bruised egos.
Ahhh… I see he’s resorted to his old argument from bold.
“Your Mother is a shoe!”
“I don’t believe it!”
“Your mother is a shoe!”
“Egads! It’s True! My Mother is a shoe!”
Arthur, you have fallen under my pernicious influence*. Haw Haw. I laughed so hard I coughed up part of my breakfast into my mouth. Incidentally, there is no longer an embargo on the disclosure of El Stalko’s identity as Iain Hall.
I especially like how Malott characterises what I say, without coverage of what I say. I guess that would mean raising the questions that he’s failed to answer; the questions raised by his own assertions.
* What are the odds that Iain can’t substantiate this claim?
you are the least pretentious person i know.
Surely u exaggerate.
Ahhh… I see he’s resorted to his old argument from bold.
I can’t decide which is more convincing:
The argument from bold
THE ARGUMENT FROM CAPS LOCK
or
The appeal to punctuation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
All poor substitutes for a valid argument in my estimation.
Heh. I certainly haven’t found your views expressed with any great pompousness (if that is indeed even a word) Mr Bruce.
I wish people called me pompous >
Oh dear, WordPress ate half my response! lol
Off-topic: what’s become of your blog, sketchgirl?
* What are the odds that Iain can’t substantiate this claim?
He believes it; ergo, it’s the Truth.
You are too kind sketchgirl.
If you employ arguments that have actual premises supporting actual conclusions then you are pompous. There’s no way around it.
And how dare you mention that you’re at school! What terrible boastfulness!
I’m doomed!
Offtopic: I seem to enjoying reading other’s blogs more than writing my own at the mo, AV … just not enough hours to do both
One day I’ll prob get back into it. Thanks for asking!