Gaffer Tape said:
Yeah, geez, Frink. Haven't you learned by now that if you or anybody or anything or any idea ever has any kind of conflict or problem or disagreement with twooffour, the problem is never him, it's you. Always, always, always, always you. Never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever him. Geez, it's SO OBVIOUS!
Wherever you got that idea from, Gaff.
Speaking of unintentional irony (once more, duh), here's a question:
You're having a debate with somebody, and your opponent bluntly tells you that you're wrong.
Which is the more pleasant thought, that he just happens to treat you this way because of the specifics of the discussion, or that he treats everyone like this, independent of the specifics, at all times?
Which one rather conveniently excludes the possibility (in your mind) that the "problem" may, at least partially, be on your part?
So let's say you witness the same behavior from that person in some other instances.
Does it follow from that in any way, that this behavior can't possibly stem from the specifics, too? Can you even tell without looking into it?
It's amazing how accusing someone else of exaggerated arrogance, may actually be a display of fantastic arrogance itself.
A bit like some "humble" Christians calling out those "proud scientists" while themselves claiming to know the answers to all important questions (unlike the scientists).
Or supporters of pseudoscience or paranormal claims claiming the others to just "dismiss them out of hand", because then they couldn't possibly be dismissed for holding no water.
Ah, delicious irony is delicious.