nice scapegoatI'm not surprised that you need someone to define success for you.i said define success in that context, numbskull...u used virtue in your definitionI dont need to. I asked you to define success, and you went and circled back to virtue.No. I did not define virtue as something that leads to success. I said virtue naturally leads to success. Try again.Your reasoning is limited to human capacity, as is your experience ~ and so you cannot use merely your reason and experience to establish that virtues are "universal" to anything other than humans....rendering what youre saying conjecture, as I postulated.
You defined virtue as a behaviour leading to success...
then when asked to define success....you said it is virtue.
Strong circular argument, batman.
You are the one playing word games, because you lack the fundamental ability to reason.I never defined virtue, Einstein. I told you that a natural product of virtue is success.I dont need to. I asked you to define success, and you went and circled back to virtue.No. I did not define virtue as something that leads to success. I said virtue naturally leads to success. Try again.Your reasoning is limited to human capacity, as is your experience ~ and so you cannot use merely your reason and experience to establish that virtues are "universal" to anything other than humans....rendering what youre saying conjecture, as I postulated.
You defined virtue as a behaviour leading to success...
then when asked to define success....you said it is virtue.
Strong circular argument, batman.
You are the one playing word games, because you lack the fundamental ability to reason.
a circle
cant carry on with a tard, sorry
i like those failtears