Refusing to Bathe
16-10-2005, 00:13
I am the embodiment of swordsmanship. The art and its practice, practitioners, history, terminology, and all other related fields, while they may not belong or be familiar to me, comprise my existence. I AM swordsmanship.
Mind you, I have never owned a (metal) sword before. I have no experience in fencing, aside from what I may have subconsciously gleaned from years of watching the choreographed fights in films and television shows such as Star Wars, Highlander, and Kill Bill. Despite this, however, I do not believe that my claim to Existential Swordsmanship is unjustified. Consider: Existential Swordsmanship is a title that has never been claimed. One may have audaciously declared oneself the Greatest Swordsman in the World at one point or another, but none to my knowledge have posited that they ARE swordsmanship.
My claim should not be accepted, however, simply on the grounds that it is unique. My argument can be broken down into three main points, which, for me at least, definitively prove that I am the living incarnation of swordsmanship. They follow:
1. As mentioned above, none have ever laid claim to swordsmanship as a literal state of being. As no individuals other than myself are currently vying for the title of Existential Swordsmanship, I can fairly declare myself winner by default. Because the contest has already been won, no further contenders may submit themselves for consideration.
2. As Existential Swordsmanship has not heretofore been so much as hypothesized into existence and I am its sole conceptual inventor, I have license to define and expound it however I see fit. As such, I define it as being me. This cannot be refuted, as I am the only living expert on the subject. Not only am I an expert, I am the one and only source whose opinion even comes close to being authoratative. Please, for the sake of your own dignity, do not try to argue against something you cannot know or comprehend. Were an omniscient being to exist, I am sure you would not care to argue with it about, say, the induced bimodulation of astroetheric spacetime.
3. Because my Existential Swordsmanship (or lack thereof) cannot be quantified by any existing scientific means, it cannot be disproved. While I realize that this by itself does not constitute proof, one must consider that a reasonable idea is sometimes as good as fact in the eyes of the scientific community. Black holes, for example, have never actually been observed, and physicists offer little more than conjecture as evidence for the existence of this particular phenomenon. Nevertheless, the black hole is now being presented as a fact in astronomy courses across the world, and do not even get me started on the quantum physics dilemma.
My Existential Swordsmanship has already been firmly established, and is not contingent on your agreement with any of the points I have presented here, or anyone else's. If you disagree, you can go straight to hell. Thank you for your time.
Mind you, I have never owned a (metal) sword before. I have no experience in fencing, aside from what I may have subconsciously gleaned from years of watching the choreographed fights in films and television shows such as Star Wars, Highlander, and Kill Bill. Despite this, however, I do not believe that my claim to Existential Swordsmanship is unjustified. Consider: Existential Swordsmanship is a title that has never been claimed. One may have audaciously declared oneself the Greatest Swordsman in the World at one point or another, but none to my knowledge have posited that they ARE swordsmanship.
My claim should not be accepted, however, simply on the grounds that it is unique. My argument can be broken down into three main points, which, for me at least, definitively prove that I am the living incarnation of swordsmanship. They follow:
1. As mentioned above, none have ever laid claim to swordsmanship as a literal state of being. As no individuals other than myself are currently vying for the title of Existential Swordsmanship, I can fairly declare myself winner by default. Because the contest has already been won, no further contenders may submit themselves for consideration.
2. As Existential Swordsmanship has not heretofore been so much as hypothesized into existence and I am its sole conceptual inventor, I have license to define and expound it however I see fit. As such, I define it as being me. This cannot be refuted, as I am the only living expert on the subject. Not only am I an expert, I am the one and only source whose opinion even comes close to being authoratative. Please, for the sake of your own dignity, do not try to argue against something you cannot know or comprehend. Were an omniscient being to exist, I am sure you would not care to argue with it about, say, the induced bimodulation of astroetheric spacetime.
3. Because my Existential Swordsmanship (or lack thereof) cannot be quantified by any existing scientific means, it cannot be disproved. While I realize that this by itself does not constitute proof, one must consider that a reasonable idea is sometimes as good as fact in the eyes of the scientific community. Black holes, for example, have never actually been observed, and physicists offer little more than conjecture as evidence for the existence of this particular phenomenon. Nevertheless, the black hole is now being presented as a fact in astronomy courses across the world, and do not even get me started on the quantum physics dilemma.
My Existential Swordsmanship has already been firmly established, and is not contingent on your agreement with any of the points I have presented here, or anyone else's. If you disagree, you can go straight to hell. Thank you for your time.