Type4_PTS
Well-known member
hi.
the context is that this earth is the magic trick, thus all its type of talk ...
is misdirection.
I don't understand what you mean.
Maybe you can explain it another way?
hi.
the context is that this earth is the magic trick, thus all its type of talk ...
is misdirection.
it depends on what a person wishes to use rhetoric in speaking, writing, using videos, using marketing, using PR, etc.hi.
the context is that this earth is the magic trick, thus all its type of talk ...
is misdirection.
it depends on what a person wishes to use rhetoric in speaking, writing, using videos, using marketing, using PR, etc.
Bad rhetoric is using ones ethos, pathos and logos to deceive, using marketing, PR, etc.
Good rhetoric is to inform and not deceive, or use magic tricks. Yes, hubbard used magic tricks thru his talk. To this day, nobody went clear or OT.
Is this thread about
Hope it can be of help on your journey
I never claimed to be "the website's self-proclaimed master of "rhetoric", you still have no idea what the word "rhetoric" means or what is the core concept of that word."..
Unfortunately, even though you are the website's self-proclaimed master of "rhetoric", you still have no idea what the word "rhetoric" means or what is the core concept of that word.
Rhetoric is neither "good" nor "bad".
Rhetoric is the art of persuasion.
You can persuade someone to do something that is good for them or harmful to them. That is not the rhetoric that is good or bad, that is the thing being sold that's good or bad.
You really do not understand what rhetoric is. That is pretty obviously why you cannot persuade people on this small message board that your posts are valuable or at least entertaining.
If you understand rhetoric, why are you unable to persuade anyone?
Did you ever wonder if the reason your posts are so broadly rejected, reviled and ridiculed is because you are simply repeating yourself for the past years and trying to jam the virtually identical posts down everyone's throats when they have already made it clear that they hate reading your repetitive projectile vomiting of the same posts every day for years.
See if you can answer any of those questions, master of rhetoric.
..
I never claimed to be "the website's self-proclaimed master of "rhetoric", you still have no idea what the word "rhetoric" means or what is the core concept of that word." You somehow think I am claiming to be a so called master of rhetoric. I am not. I never claimed to be a master of rhetoric, you make it sound like I am, but I am not. You are actually a more master of rhetoric.
First of all I'm not a good writer, I've said it many times. Second, I am not trolling, I was a scientologists, very gung ho too. Thirdly, I'm just trying to point out Hubbard's rhetoric. I was hoping some of you astute writers could pick up the ball and show Hubbard's rhetoric. I was wrong...
The idiocy of your trolling is that you have been pretending to teach everyone on this board about rhetoric with a never ending avalanche of virtually identical posts. The pathetic paradox is that you quite obviously know seriously and substantially less about the subject of rhetoric than your force-fed students, professor.
If you understood rhetoric and could demonstrate your rhetorical skills—you'd be able to be persuasive, because that's what rhetoric is. Instead, you are only capable of demonstrating the opposite.
PRO TIP: Here's a partial but helpful listing of the word persuasion's antonyms:
NOUNS:
hate
▲
ADJECTIVES: Opposite of able to persuade or convince
weak
vain
idle
poor
more ❯...
.I will ban myself.
That's pretty much irrelevant as to why you're having difficulty here on this discussion forum. There have been writers much worse than you who had no problems.First of all I'm not a good writer, I've said it many times.
Regardless of whether your intent is to troll the board or not you come across that way. So the effect is pretty much the same.Second, I am not trolling, I was a scientologists, very gung ho too.
You've already pointed it out and have been pointing it out for years, starting multiple threads on the same subject and also pointing it out on other threads that have nothing to do with rhetoric.Thirdly, I'm just trying to point out Hubbard's rhetoric. I was hoping some of you astute writers could pick up the ball and show Hubbard's rhetoric. I was wrong.
Good luck! If you should ever decide to un-ban yourself you may wish to have a conversation with the board admin on how to avoid getting banned again.I will ban myself.
"Good luck! If you should ever decide to un-ban yourself you may wish to have a conversation with the board admin on how to avoid getting banned again."That's pretty much irrelevant as to why you're having difficulty here on this discussion forum. There have been writers much worse than you who had no problems.
Regardless of whether your intent is to troll the board or not you come across that way. So the effect is pretty much the same.
You've already pointed it out and have been pointing it out for years, starting multiple threads on the same subject and also pointing it out on other threads that have nothing to do with rhetoric.
You also display a persistent unwillingness to discuss the subject with anyone unless they completely agree with you. I've attempted to engage you in a civil discussion on multiple occasions but you then just ignore my posts if I challenge anything that you write.
Good luck! If you should ever decide to un-ban yourself you may wish to have a conversation with the board admin on how to avoid getting banned again.
"That's pretty much irrelevant as to why you're having difficulty here on this discussion forum. There have been writers much worse than you who had no problems. "That's pretty much irrelevant as to why you're having difficulty here on this discussion forum. There have been writers much worse than you who had no problems.
Regardless of whether your intent is to troll the board or not you come across that way. So the effect is pretty much the same.
You've already pointed it out and have been pointing it out for years, starting multiple threads on the same subject and also pointing it out on other threads that have nothing to do with rhetoric.
You also display a persistent unwillingness to discuss the subject with anyone unless they completely agree with you. I've attempted to engage you in a civil discussion on multiple occasions but you then just ignore my posts if I challenge anything that you write.
Good luck! If you should ever decide to un-ban yourself you may wish to have a conversation with the board admin on how to avoid getting banned again.
"Regardless of whether your intent is to troll the board or not you come across that way. So the effect is pretty much the same. "That's pretty much irrelevant as to why you're having difficulty here on this discussion forum. There have been writers much worse than you who had no problems.
Regardless of whether your intent is to troll the board or not you come across that way. So the effect is pretty much the same.
You've already pointed it out and have been pointing it out for years, starting multiple threads on the same subject and also pointing it out on other threads that have nothing to do with rhetoric.
You also display a persistent unwillingness to discuss the subject with anyone unless they completely agree with you. I've attempted to engage you in a civil discussion on multiple occasions but you then just ignore my posts if I challenge anything that you write.
Good luck! If you should ever decide to un-ban yourself you may wish to have a conversation with the board admin on how to avoid getting banned again.
You've been asking the same question for years. If you really don't understand that no one wants to discuss rhetoric with you then there must be something wrong with you.ok, does anybody wish to discuss Hubbard's use of rhetoric?
If not, then I will stop posting.
.You've been asking the same question for years. If you really don't understand that no one wants to discuss rhetoric with you then there must be something wrong with you.