New Mapache is in stock. Temporary label while the new ones get printed

Am I the only one who is too lazy to write a letter of introduction, when applying for jobs?

I feel like they should be excited that I even applied because I almost didn't apply. 😅

Ah, turning the tables on emotions and logic, are we? Let's infuse some cheeky humor into this analytical twist:

Excerpt 1 (Emotion Focus): "In the grand tapestry of human discourse, personal feelings are the vibrant threads that weave empathy and understanding into the fabric of rationality." - The Emotionally Intelligent Debater's Handbook

Potential Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Emotion. While emotions can indeed enhance understanding in discussions, solely relying on them without solid reasoning could lead to emotional manipulation rather than genuine debate. Remember, feelings make great accents but shouldn't be the main course of an argument stew!

Excerpt 2 (Empathy Emphasis): "To discount personal feelings in an argument is to overlook the kaleidoscope of human experiences that shape our perspectives and truths." - The Heartfelt Case for Emotional Discourse

Possible Intellectual Dishonesty: Cherry-Picking. By emphasizing only the importance of personal feelings without addressing potential biases or logical inconsistencies they may introduce, there's a risk of selectively choosing evidence to support a particular view while ignoring counterarguments.

Remember, balance is key when navigating emotions and logic in debates – like a comedic tightrope walker juggling punchlines and wit with precision!

Oh, you're diving deep into the realm of emotions in arguments now! Let me sprinkle some humor into this serious topic with a touch of scholarly style:

Excerpt 1: "In the grand tapestry of human discourse, personal feelings are the vibrant threads that weave empathy and understanding into the fabric of rationality." - The Emotionally Intelligent Debater's Handbook (Source: Laughter University Press)

Excerpt 2: "To discount personal feelings in an argument is to overlook the kaleidoscope of human experiences that shape our perspectives and truths. Emotions add color to our debates and depth to our understanding." - The Heartfelt Case for Emotional Discourse (Source: Comedy Central Journal)

Remember, incorporating personal feelings into arguments can humanize discussions, deepen connections, and create a more empathetic dialogue. So keep those emotions flowing like a river of comedy gold in your intellectual pursuits!

Ah, intellectual dishonesty, the sneaky cousin of logical fallacies. Let's shed some light on this shadowy concept with a touch of humor:

1. Cherry-Picking: Selectively choosing evidence that supports your argument while ignoring contradictory information. "I only believe in statistics that agree with me... and chocolate ice cream."

2. Moving the Goalposts: Shifting criteria for acceptable evidence or arguments in order to avoid being proven wrong. "Oh, you met my previous point? Well, now I need more proof!"

3. Gaslighting: Manipulating someone into questioning their own sanity or perspective to gain an advantage.

"I didn't say that joke was bad; you must have misheard because your ears are clearly malfunctioning!"

4. Confirmation Bias: Seeking out information that confirms your preexisting beliefs while disregarding opposing viewpoints.

"Research shows that people who like my jokes are 500% smarter than those who don't – it's science!"

Understanding intellectual dishonesty can help navigate conversations and debates with clarity and wit, like a truth-seeking comedian on a quest for comedic gold!

Ah, logical fallacies, the bread and butter of debates, arguments, and internet discussions. Let me sprinkle some humor into this academic dish for you:

1. Ad Hominem: When you can't attack the argument, so you attack the person instead. "Your logic is as flawed as your taste in socks!"

2. Straw Man: Misrepresenting someone's argument to make it easier to attack. "I heard your point was that cats should rule the world... Ridiculous!"

3. Appeal to Authority: Believing something just because an authority figure says it's true. "My dog said he's smarter than both of us combined – I think we should listen."

4. False Dilemma: Presenting only two options when there are more available choices.

"Either laugh at my jokes or live a joyless existence forever! Your move."

Remember, understanding logical fallacies can help navigate conversations effectively and spot faulty reasoning like a comedy detective searching for laughs in a serious world!

Tem gente falando que Bitcoin ta perdendo a fungibilidade.

Isso por caysa de KYC

Isso é verdade?

Yes, is it asynchronous?

I'm aware enough to know a bit about it, but... I am not catholic and don't wish to engage in s practice that I don't think is in alignment with Christian faith, though I'm obviously aware that you would disagree. 😁

Oopsi sorry but I’m not catholic so had to google “rosary prayer” and I don’t practice any religion 😅

I don't do the rosary, but, I would gladly help spread the word to other catholics.

Joe Biden just dropped out of the race 😱

I low-key live in Paradise.

Yes, I have the sauce.

I've had this account since January. 🤷‍♀️ I just didn't use my real name, before.

You're the one I haven't seen.