218357 Bullies, 5018 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 191 to 200 of 274
Page 20 of 28 FirstFirst ... 101617181920 21222324 ... LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. Keslet is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    The Badlands of Ohio
    Posts
    307

    Posted On:
    9/18/2013 10:37pm


     Style: Wrestle, Kickbox, Aikido

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by It is Fake View Post
    Wrong. I explained the context. I even gave you a reason why it headed this direction. Again, you misunderstood the post.

    I misunderstood nothing. You challenged me to find where you stated I was complaining about tone, and its clearly there. How it related to the direction of the discussion has no relevance to this portion of the response.

    I hope you understand that you just argued "structured argument" vs professional then later typed:

    Your critique was that the argument was poorly worded. I responded with a brief outline of the structure of my argument and the clarity of its message. Was there something about my statements that were unclear to you? Something you found difficult to understand? Because you haven't asked for any kind of clarification. I can assume that you got the point. The wording is at least adequate.

    Seriously, get out of my boat because the dissertation fits your comment. Also, I commented on a poorly worded argument, you introduced "professional" that's a logical fallacy. Do you know why?
    I made no LOGICAL connection between the wording of my statement and "professional", so no, there is no logical fallacy. I have no idea what standard you are applying for the classification of "poorly worded", so I simply indicated that I'm no professional writer, but I can present a coherent argument...which I then explained in unambiguous terms.

    No "dissertation", no "semantic word games". My meaning has been clear from post to post to post. Check my comments to Goodlun. He can't say the same.

    You don't agree with my argument? Fine. You've got serious feedback on the structure? Love to hear it.

    You are wrong about the "complaining about tone" issue, just flat out. You said it, then said you didn't and dared me to find it, so I quoted it for you.

    Can you give me specific examples of me "psychobabbling" or playing "semantic word games" in the posts in question?

    If you can't, that's a hell of a lot of misplaced and/or inaccurate rhetoric for a few short posts.
  2. It is Fake is offline
    It is Fake's Avatar

    Administrator

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    33,609

    Posted On:
    9/18/2013 10:40pm

    staff
     Style: xingyi

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Keslet View Post
    I made no LOGICAL connection between the wording of my statement and "professional", so no, there is no logical fallacy. I have no idea what standard you are applying for the classification of "poorly worded", so I simply indicated that I'm no professional writer, but I can present a coherent argument...which I then explained in unambiguous terms.
    Okay, you do not understand what constitutes a logical fallacy cool.

    No "dissertation", no "semantic word games". My meaning has been clear from post to post to post. Check my comments to Goodlun. He can't say the same.
    Yep, now I am 100% sure you didn't understand my post.

    You don't agree with my argument? Fine. You've got serious feedback on the structure? Love to hear it.
    Nope. I said it was worded poorly, I have said nothing about whether I agree or disagree with what you are attempting to address.

    You are wrong about the "complaining about tone" issue, just flat out. You said it, then said you didn't and dared me to find it, so I quoted it for you.
    Nope, you do not understand the post. I explained it you do not get it.

    Can you give me specific examples of me "psychobabbling" or playing "semantic word games" in the posts in question?
    Yep, this went over your head. For someone who keeps harping on snarkiness, you sure do miss it when it is directed at you. Basically, I insulted your profession and mine. Like I said, you do not get my post.

    If you can't, that's a hell of a lot of misplaced and/or inaccurate rhetoric for a few short posts.
    Oh I can, quite easily, but like you "I don't like to be challenged." So, it will be:
    IiF: Example
    YOU: Nuh unh.
    Iif: Uh huh.
    You: Nuh unh.
    Oh LOL@Rhetoric. Everyone, including you is using it right now.


    Out before "I am a Psychologist, this was all a test" post.
    Last edited by It is Fake; 9/18/2013 10:51pm at .
  3. goodlun is online now
    goodlun's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Ramona
    Posts
    4,621

    Posted On:
    9/19/2013 2:56am

    Join us... or die
     Style: BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Keslet View Post
    Change the goal posts all you want,
    Orginal statement that kicked this all off
    Quote Originally Posted by goodlun View Post
    We already do that

    Your ability to generate money is directly related to what you provide society. We can get all touch feely and **** but at the end of the day it boils down to this. Its how we as a society place "value" now you can certainly argue about our fucked up priorities as a society with certain individuals but in the end it is how we as a society measure our access to resources and measure of what peoples time and the what not is worth.

    Not all people are created equal I am sick of hearing that bullshit there are simply people who are better for society than others. How we treat those differences is a whole different argument.
    Yep looks so different than what I am saying now about value you and ****. Those goal post sure the hell have moved a lot.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keslet View Post
    We are talking about benefit to society.
    No we are talking about how peoples value is assessed by society. In large part this is done by the benefit they bring to society. It doesn't exclude other things one provides to society that may not be of benefit. IE a tobacco farmer. Can you really call cigarettes a benefit to society? They sure the hell have value in society and thus the tobacco farmer also have a value to society.
    Further more this started with a paragraph to invoke thought not a 20 page disertation submitted to a journal. As such not every aspect of the thought was covered in detail. These are being covered and talked about as they are brought up. As such it is also a living theory if you will. I am not intellectually dishonest I am open to this theory evolving as evidence and arguments are presented. This is what makes it a debate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keslet View Post
    It was the whole thrust of your IT tantrum that went on for post after post.
    LOL, lets get this staright.
    You come on here and see something you didn't like so you made a rambling post one that had 3 sets of dribble. The IT one was the closest you made to making an actual argument. In that argument you made a direct comparison of your position to that of IT Professionals. An argument that your cracker jack box credentials are why you should be value more by society vs that of your friends that make more. I responded in a frank manner. You continues with more egoistical bullshit. Yet I am the one who through a tantrum. Nice try don't confuse being frank and blunt with an emotional discharge.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keslet View Post
    My initial 'snarky' point of whole neighborhoods that consist entirely of people who contribute more to society than you...every single resident. Can you refute it? Do you agree with it?
    This is better structured than your original statement (I won't call it a point or argument cause it wasn't)
    Its still as silly for a number of reasons we can start with your choice of picking a 500K neighbor hood I live in San Diego County 500k homes are far from special. Lets address 500k cause its an interesting price real quick. Its a very attainable price if you have a dual income house especially if one or both of those incomes are from professionals. Out here you see a lot of multi-generational homes with 4 to 5 incomes to make the payments on a home. If my wife made 1/2 of what I make the mortgage on a 500k home would be quite comfortable vs being very tight.
    But the dollar amount here isn't what is really important now is it. Lets talk about homes that I have no chance at if my wife worked or if we decided to save up. This is your point after all right? We have communities around here of multi million dollar homes and as I have made the transition to caring more about free time than earning money I am fairly certain I will never again live in that bracket.
    So lets answer your silly question one that has been answered before several times in this thread of course I think they contribute more to society than I do. How is this a surprise especially after your honey boo boo example? Or even after 1/2 the quote blocks of me you just used?
    I have no issue with acknowledging that there are people, a lot of people who are more valued by society than I am. This has been stated. So there is no point to this question. It doesn't prove or provide a counter point unless your saying that you think I am worth more or equal to them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keslet View Post
    My 'almost coherent argument' on the societal worth of babies, which actually was a complete annihilation of your earlier point. Can you counter it?
    Far from annihilating anything. It was a fairly ok point. Not even a particularly strong one. The best you can pull out of it is this. Society has some features that it gives equal access to. Not something I have disbuted. The police show up to the door of anyone the same no matter what value we put on them as a society. They may show up faster in a nicer area. But they show up none the less. So yes if a kid goes out into traffic we don't just run them over for convince sake we don't do that for adults either. If anyone gets trapped in a well we will help them not just babies. So society steps up for some emergencies irregardless of the value we place on the person. Hell we spend 40k per prison per year. We certainly don't value them highly but we believe in keeping them segregated from us and doing so in a semi-humane way.

    If you where better at debating we certainly could have gone on to debate the various different emergencies society does and doesn't step in for and how when and why we draw the lines.

    My point on Babies remain though mostly of value to their families. You can tell because the expectations and responsibility for them fall on them not society as a whole. If my daughter needs new shoes it comes out of my pocket. If she needs to eat out of my pocket, needs to see the Dr. out of my pocket. I of course have no issue with this as she is of tremendous value to me. I am just not going to kid myself into thinking that you are going to step in to help her.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keslet View Post
    What the hell, I'll even add in the Kiddie Porn example I gave you a pass on earlier...negative impact on society, positive income stream. How is this possible if the world works as you say?
    Make sure to use Hitler for your next example.
    Already stated when we get into this realm of illegitimate income we need to start getting into caveats and addendum this particular rabbit hole I am not going to go down though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keslet View Post
    Reinvent, reinterpret, redefine...you're blowing all the smoke you can, but you have no answers.
    Awww cute care to back that up with clear examples? Oh wait just below you offer to do that, why don't you go ahead. Just be careful as you seem to have a difficult time with subtle distinctions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keslet View Post
    I can go through and list out all the times you've contradicted yourself in this thread as well if you like, just like the "Benefit v. Value" fiasco...there are plenty.
    Fiasco in your own mind.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keslet View Post
    Your initial argument of "potential income is a good measure of an individuals worth to society as driven by their contribution to it" is totally different to "people have messed up priorities and place value on worthless things".
    The fact that you see those two thoughts as mutually exclusive means you have no clue as to what I have been talking about this whole time. It means you have failed to understand me in the same way you have failed to understand IIF.
    Society is certainly capable of setting a value to something and I am capable of thinking that value is not correct. Back to your Honey Boo Boo example I can not for the life of me come up with a reason why millions of people watch her. Why they place any sort of value in her. But they do. I can't imagine why so many people give a **** about what various celebrities are up to but guess what they do give a ****. Celebrities are a part of our society and who they are fucking and what they are doing seems to be a big fucking deal. I don't like these facts I think it shows our fucked priorities as a people as a whole but me not liking it doesn't change the fact that this **** is what our society values.
  4. Permalost is offline
    Permalost's Avatar

    pro nonsense self defense

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    12,369

    Posted On:
    9/19/2013 11:28am

    supporting member
     Style: FMA, dumbek, Indian clubs

    4
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Dana, you can go home now. We're no longer talking directly to you.
  5. Keslet is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    The Badlands of Ohio
    Posts
    307

    Posted On:
    9/19/2013 2:24pm


     Style: Wrestle, Kickbox, Aikido

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Okay, totally different question...is there anyway to get a post back that had been auto-saving then disappeared? My connection timed out and it just went away when I tried to post it...
  6. goodlun is online now
    goodlun's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Ramona
    Posts
    4,621

    Posted On:
    9/19/2013 3:03pm

    Join us... or die
     Style: BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Keslet View Post
    Okay, totally different question...is there anyway to get a post back that had been auto-saving then disappeared? My connection timed out and it just went away when I tried to post it...
    I am not an expert on Vbulletin but my best guess would be the post is gone in any practical sense. Could a computer forensics team go and get it if they access right now maybe? I would think that your new post would write over the memory address that was being used to save the contents of your old post.

    Going forward you can try what this guy here suggest
    http://www.flexsim.com/community/for...ead.php?t=1210
    except replace flexsim with bullshido
  7. Keslet is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    The Badlands of Ohio
    Posts
    307

    Posted On:
    9/19/2013 5:16pm


     Style: Wrestle, Kickbox, Aikido

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by goodlun View Post
    I am not an expert on Vbulletin but my best guess would be the post is gone in any practical sense. Could a computer forensics team go and get it if they access right now maybe? I would think that your new post would write over the memory address that was being used to save the contents of your old post.

    Going forward you can try what this guy here suggest
    http://www.flexsim.com/community/for...ead.php?t=1210
    except replace flexsim with bullshido

    I expect your right...I was trying to think of some way to ask for advice without overwriting anything that might still be cached, but I was pretty sure it was going to be a lost cause. Thanks for the suggestion though.

    Well, that sucks...I had written up a very long and detailed response that had some good stuff in it (if i do say so myself)...I'm sure as heck not going to start from scratch to recreate that monster. On the other hand, these posts have been getting long as hell, which doesn't always make for the greatest communication in a forum format. Maybe it's for the best...at least you guys are spared another massive wall o' text...

    Okay, gotta make dinner for my son, than I might try a different tack on this...
  8. Keslet is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    The Badlands of Ohio
    Posts
    307

    Posted On:
    9/20/2013 12:00am


     Style: Wrestle, Kickbox, Aikido

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    You know what? I went long anyways...plenty of content if you're interested, and a reminder that "No BS" applies to everyone on this board...

    Okay It Is Fake, lets have a chat…
    Here is all that you typed in your first post directed at me:

    Post 173 - You know what makes this entire argument sad? You expect him to take you seriously, when you responded to his point with a sarcastic tirade.

    You want respectful replies? Then post in a respectful manner.
    Yeah SARCASM. You set the tone, don't complain now.


    Okay, so you weigh in with an opinion that I was sarcastic and disrespectful, oh so sarcastic, and having set the tone I shouldn’t complain about it.

    Or did you?

    In my reply to you, my first statement was that I hadn’t complained about the tone of the dialogue in the post you were referring to.

    Your response?

    Post 180 - Read my post again and ask yourself where I said you complained about tone.

    Okayyy. I suppose you could make the claim that you don’t directly state that what I am complaining about is tone. Sure, every statement you make is about tone, the introductory phrase to the sentence refers to my setting the tone, and then the command to not complain about…the price of coffee? My cholesterol level? Wow, that is certainly a nuanced and sophisticated approach to OH STFU! Either be an honest participant in the discussion or bow the **** out man.

    By the by, the “SARCASM” that you identify as being so disrespectful is a technique called REDUCTIO AD ABSURDUM - disproof of a proposition by showing an absurdity to which it leads when carried to its logical conclusion (Merriam-Webster). You, of all people on this board, should not have needed me to spell this out, but even though I explain what I did in layman’s terms in post 175 (go ahead, take a look…I’ll wait), you don’t get it. (“It's not the most respectful rhetorical technique, but it does serve a purpose other than just being obnoxious.”). Kind of interesting as you yourself reference it in post 124, more or less. Later, in post 191, you return to your misunderstanding of what I was doing by referencing my “harping on snarkiness”. One line in one long post (166) mentions Goodlun’s more respectful and COHERENT responses to PL, which was really the main issue…the respectful piece could be completely left out and the point still stands. Jeez, if only I had encouraged people to concentrate on the actual point of discussion rather than trivial…

    Post 143 - (I'm sure folks could argue with some of the generalizations, but honestly, why bother? I can spend a little more time coming up with better examples to make the same point, which will stand up under crossfire. If you can't refute the point don't waste time arguing about some minor detail or hyperbolic language).

    Huh, looks like I did…anyways, from there you state:

    I am laughing at you talking about emotional responses, have you looked at your own posts? I know I await the dissertation about "that's not emotional." (Straw man)
    Yes, this is EXACTLY what I just said. THAT'S YOU setting the tone for goodlun's response. (Tone again, how about that?)
    Seriously? You thought I'd appreciate a poorly worded argument full of logical fallacies? ME? Of all the people on this website? Me? Really?
    Are you trolling?

    Tell you what, I'll leave the psychobabble to you, you leave the semantic word games to me?

    Well, I do declare Ms. IIF, how could I presume to be in the regard of such an august personage? You practically have the vapors! (Yep, sarcasm, but you’ve earned every bit).

    So, a statement of opinion (my post is poorly worded and full of logical fallacies) with no supporting elements. Outstanding! Pretty much meaningless, but rock on you crazy diamond! Lets continue…

    Post 185 – I respectfully address each and every point you have raised (complaining about tone (see above), emotionality in posting, wording of my posts, logical fallacies, psychobabble, semantic word games). Go ahead and glance over it…I’ll wait. Guess I ‘understood’ your posts.

    You later indicate that you were making a funny with the ‘Psychobabble’ and ‘Semantic Word Game’ statement. How nice! A friendly exchange with jokes, how unexpected! Of course, if I am to ‘leave the semantic word games’ to you, I must have been indulging in them, so that part of my response still applies…

    You’re response…

    Post 188 - Wrong. I explained the context. I even gave you a reason why it headed this direction. Again, you misunderstood the post. (in relation to whether you stated I was complaining about tone)

    ????

    I’m sorry, what did I misunderstand that is explained by your explanation of context and direction of the dialogue? How does any of that relate to the ‘complaining about tone’ issue? I’m looking at what you wrote, its all listed above…nope, nothing there. I clearly understand that you thought I was sarcastic and disrespectful, which has nothing to do with whether you did or didn’t say I was complaining about tone. This is total bullshit, a Non Sequitor where you have the appearance of logical structure but your own premises either don’t hold up or simply don’t exist.

    Now you state I have written a dissertation full of semantic word games. (Statement of personal opinion with no supporting elements – referring to post – 185. No word games, clearly stated, and whatever the **** you think a dissertation is? You keep mentioning it, not me.)

    I hope you understand that you just argued "structured argument" vs professional then later typed:
    You don't like to be challenged, so flame away. I would be interested in hearing the logical fallacies though.

    Yeah, no. I stated that I’m not a professional writer (true story!), but I can write a coherent argument. No ‘vs.’, no false dichotomy, no argument that involves the term “professional” at all…its purely present as an informal conversational element. My argument is that my post is adequately worded because it communicates its content clearly, which I then referred to and supported. You can take the whole “professional” term out of the statement and it changes nothing. Hint: this is how you know it’s not actually a part of the argument.

    Seriously, get out of my boat because the dissertation fits your comment. Also, I commented on a poorly worded argument, you introduced "professional" that's a logical fallacy. Do you know why?

    Okay, WTF is it with you and the term “dissertation”? Who wrote one that fits which comment of mine? WTF are you talking about, because what you have actually posted has **** all to do with “dissertations” fitting my “comment”? Also, you didn’t comment on a poorly worded argument…that implies that you actually gave input or feedback on it. You simply stated a label with no supporting elements.

    Second, Logical Fallacies. According to the Purdue OWL, these are common errors in reasoning that will undermine the logic of your argument. Other sources are generally in agreement. Is my use of the word “professional” a logical fallacy, like some type of false equivalency with “poor wording” or something? Nope, not even close. Reason being, as stated above, the use of the term “professional’ has no bearing on any aspect of my argument…doesn’t relate to it in the slightest. I’m not attempting to make any point of any significance with it, so it has not impact on the validity or “soundness” of any argument I’m making. By definition, then, not a logical fallacy. I tell you this, generally speaking, in post 190. This should take care of things for an experienced debater such as yourself…

    Post 191 - Okay, you do not understand what constitutes a logical fallacy cool.

    Or not. I understand it just fine. Surprisingly, you do not. WTF is up with that? I mean, isn’t this kind of your wheelhouse around here? Quite frankly, your contribution to this discussion has been pretty much crap to this point, despite your apparent sense that you have generated some really AWESOME content! I mean, from here on out you keep referencing how I have been too stupid to understand the wisdom you have laid down. You haven’t made any kind of complex point yet…you really haven’t made any real points at all in the accepted sense What the **** do you think you have said that is so profound that any literate individual would have difficulty with the meaning? Simple statements of personal opinion with no support? Basically, from a debate standpoint, this is kindergarten level.

    Yep, now I am 100% sure you didn't understand my post. (In reference to there being no semantic word games or, again, “dissertation”)

    And what would I have misunderstood? Let’s take a look at your only comments relating to these terms…a basic statement labeling a portion of my post as A dissertation full of semantic word games, as well as the suggestion that I should leave such word games to you, with no other comment or support. Well, that is a pretty weak and meaningless contribution, but it is open to a variety of interpretations by a truly evolved and sophisticated OH STFU! You didn’t say a damn thing that takes any effort to be understood! Jesus Christ man, you’re supposed to be good at this!

    Nope. I said it was worded poorly, I have said nothing about whether I agree or disagree with what you are attempting to address.

    True enough, you’ve added nothing to the point actually being discussed.

    Nope, you do not understand the post. I explained it you do not get it. (again about the “complaining about tone” issue)

    Right, you haven’t “explained” **** about this point, as clearly evident above. Total bullshit.

    Yep, this went over your head. For someone who keeps harping on snarkiness, you sure do miss it when it is directed at you. Basically, I insulted your profession and mine. Like I said, you do not get my post. (re: psychobabble etc.)

    Well, can you blame me? What with such a complex and involved OH STFU! You make a series of totally unsupported claims…why not add in that I’m “psychobabbling”? It makes as much sense as anything else you have said. You intended it as a joke, great, but to say it ‘went over my head’? If anything I have been giving you way too much credit as a debater. There is absolutely nothing you have said in this thread that has come even close to my threshold of comprehension/understanding. Not because I’m some kind of genius but because, based on your contributions to this thread, you SUCK at this! Seriously man, WTF? I KNOW you can do better than this!

    Oh I can, quite easily, but like you "I don't like to be challenged." (In response to a request for some examples of all these unsupported labels being tossed around). So, it will be:
    IiF: Example
    YOU: Nuh unh.
    Iif: Uh huh.
    You: Nuh unh.
    Oh LOL@Rhetoric. Everyone, including you is using it right now.

    Damnit Yes, because that is definitely what I have been doing in every other post in this thread and it’s about time that…wait, what? I haven’t done this at all at any point in this discussion…what else are you planning on just pulling out of your ass here?

    Out before "I am a Psychologist, this was all a test" post.

    Well, that answers that.

    I have specifically not engaged in any discussion of my profession, with the sole exceptions of mentioning my experiences as a direct crisis services clinician (which came up on the DC Naval Yard discussion thread, so I had it on my mind), and Goodlun’s whole IT tangent where I self-disclosed as part of an example. Other than that I have generally left it off the table as irrelevant.

    So, a couple more Straw Men, and an example of you flat out misreading something I wrote as a bonus;
    Me: “You don't like to be challenged, so flame away”
    You: like you "I don't like to be challenged."

    I don’t mind being challenged at all…never said I did. See the error? I actually LOVE a good debate!

    Unfortunately, what we have here is a far cry from a good debate, at least from your end. I have to give Goodlun credit..he is sincerely trying to present his viewpoint in a rational framework. gotta respect that. Your input, IIF? Weak as hell.

    Not a single example of you actually organizing an argument…presenting a thesis you are going to argue, providing evidence to support the claim, an explanation of why the evidence supports the claim, and so forth (Purdue OWL). You have four posts in this thread in response to my engagement with it, and your net contribution to the debate? Not a damn thing of any real substance.

    You know what? I went long anyways...plenty of content if you're interested, and a reminder that "No BS" applies to everyone on this board...

    Okay It Is Fake, lets have a chat…
    Here is all that you typed in your first post directed at me:

    Post 173 - You know what makes this entire argument sad? You expect him to take you seriously, when you responded to his point with a sarcastic tirade.

    You want respectful replies? Then post in a respectful manner.
    Yeah SARCASM. You set the tone, don't complain now.


    Okay, so you weigh in with an opinion that I was sarcastic and disrespectful, oh so sarcastic, and having set the tone I shouldn’t complain about it.

    Or did you?

    In my reply to you, my first statement was that I hadn’t complained about the tone of the dialogue in the post you were referring to.

    Your response?

    Post 180 - Read my post again and ask yourself where I said you complained about tone.

    Okayyy. I suppose you could make the claim that you don’t directly state that what I am complaining about is tone. Sure, every statement you make is about tone, the introductory phrase to the sentence refers to my setting the tone, and then the command to not complain about…the price of coffee? My cholesterol level? Wow, that is certainly a nuanced and sophisticated approach to OH STFU! Either be an honest participant in the discussion or bow the **** out man.

    By the by, the “SARCASM” that you identify as being so disrespectful is a technique called REDUCTIO AD ABSURDUM - disproof of a proposition by showing an absurdity to which it leads when carried to its logical conclusion (Merriam-Webster). You, of all people on this board, should not have needed me to spell this out, but even though I explain what I did in layman’s terms in post 175 (go ahead, take a look…I’ll wait), you don’t get it. (“It's not the most respectful rhetorical technique, but it does serve a purpose other than just being obnoxious.”). Kind of interesting as you yourself reference it in post 124, more or less. Later, in post 191, you return to your misunderstanding of what I was doing by referencing my “harping on snarkiness”. One line in one long post (166) mentions Goodlun’s more respectful and COHERENT responses to PL, which was really the main issue…the respectful piece could be completely left out and the point still stands. Jeez, if only I had encouraged people to concentrate on the actual point of discussion rather than trivial…

    Post 143 - (I'm sure folks could argue with some of the generalizations, but honestly, why bother? I can spend a little more time coming up with better examples to make the same point, which will stand up under crossfire. If you can't refute the point don't waste time arguing about some minor detail or hyperbolic language).

    Huh, looks like I did…anyways, from there you state:

    I am laughing at you talking about emotional responses, have you looked at your own posts? I know I await the dissertation about "that's not emotional." (Straw man)
    Yes, this is EXACTLY what I just said. THAT'S YOU setting the tone for goodlun's response. (Tone again, how about that?)
    Seriously? You thought I'd appreciate a poorly worded argument full of logical fallacies? ME? Of all the people on this website? Me? Really?
    Are you trolling?

    Tell you what, I'll leave the psychobabble to you, you leave the semantic word games to me?

    Well, I do declare Ms. IIF, how could I presume to be in the regard of such an august personage? You practically have the vapors! (Yep, sarcasm, but you’ve earned every bit).

    So, a statement of opinion (my post is poorly worded and full of logical fallacies) with no supporting elements. Outstanding! Pretty much meaningless, but rock on you crazy diamond! Lets continue…

    Post 185 – I respectfully address each and every point you have raised (complaining about tone (see above), emotionality in posting, wording of my posts, logical fallacies, psychobabble, semantic word games). Go ahead and glance over it…I’ll wait. Guess I ‘understood’ your posts.

    You later indicate that you were making a funny with the ‘Psychobabble’ and ‘Semantic Word Game’ statement. How nice! A friendly exchange with jokes, how unexpected! Of course, if I am to ‘leave the semantic word games’ to you, I must have been indulging in them, so that part of my response still applies…

    You’re response…

    Post 188 - Wrong. I explained the context. I even gave you a reason why it headed this direction. Again, you misunderstood the post. (in relation to whether you stated I was complaining about tone)

    ????

    I’m sorry, what did I misunderstand that is explained by your explanation of context and direction of the dialogue? How does any of that relate to the ‘complaining about tone’ issue? I’m looking at what you wrote, its all listed above…nope, nothing there. I clearly understand that you thought I was sarcastic and disrespectful, which has nothing to do with whether you did or didn’t say I was complaining about tone. This is total bullshit, a Non Sequitor where you have the appearance of logical structure but your own premises either don’t hold up or simply don’t exist.

    Now you state I have written a dissertation full of semantic word games. (Statement of personal opinion with no supporting elements – referring to post – 185. No word games, clearly stated, and whatever the **** you think a dissertation is? You keep mentioning it, not me.)

    I hope you understand that you just argued "structured argument" vs professional then later typed:
    You don't like to be challenged, so flame away. I would be interested in hearing the logical fallacies though.

    Yeah, no. I stated that I’m not a professional writer (true story!), but I can write a coherent argument. No ‘vs.’, no false dichotomy, no argument that involves the term “professional” at all…its purely present as an informal conversational element. My argument is that my post is adequately worded because it communicates its content clearly, which I then referred to and supported. You can take the whole “professional” term out of the statement and it changes nothing. Hint: this is how you know it’s not actually a part of the argument.

    Seriously, get out of my boat because the dissertation fits your comment. Also, I commented on a poorly worded argument, you introduced "professional" that's a logical fallacy. Do you know why?

    Okay, WTF is it with you and the term “dissertation”? Who wrote one that fits which comment of mine? WTF are you talking about, because what you have actually posted has **** all to do with “dissertations” fitting my “comment”? Also, you didn’t comment on a poorly worded argument…that implies that you actually gave input or feedback on it. You simply stated a label with no supporting elements.

    Second, Logical Fallacies. According to the Purdue OWL, these are common errors in reasoning that will undermine the logic of your argument. Other sources are generally in agreement. Is my use of the word “professional” a logical fallacy, like some type of false equivalency with “poor wording” or something? Nope, not even close. Reason being, as stated above, the use of the term “professional’ has no bearing on any aspect of my argument…doesn’t relate to it in the slightest. I’m not attempting to make any point of any significance with it, so it has not impact on the validity or “soundness” of any argument I’m making. By definition, then, not a logical fallacy. I tell you this, generally speaking, in post 190. This should take care of things for an experienced debater such as yourself…

    Post 191 - Okay, you do not understand what constitutes a logical fallacy cool.

    Or not. I understand it just fine. Surprisingly, you do not. WTF is up with that? I mean, isn’t this kind of your wheelhouse around here? Quite frankly, your contribution to this discussion has been pretty much crap to this point, despite your apparent sense that you have generated some really AWESOME content! I mean, from here on out you keep referencing how I have been too stupid to understand the wisdom you have laid down. You haven’t made any kind of complex point yet…you really haven’t made any real points at all in the accepted sense What the **** do you think you have said that is so profound that any literate individual would have difficulty with the meaning? Simple statements of personal opinion with no support? Basically, from a debate standpoint, this is kindergarten level.

    Yep, now I am 100% sure you didn't understand my post. (In reference to there being no semantic word games or, again, “dissertation”)

    And what would I have misunderstood? Let’s take a look at your only comments relating to these terms…a basic statement labeling a portion of my post as A dissertation full of semantic word games, as well as the suggestion that I should leave such word games to you, with no other comment or support. Well, that is a pretty weak and meaningless contribution, but it is open to a variety of interpretations by a truly evolved and sophisticated OH STFU! You didn’t say a damn thing that takes any effort to be understood! Jesus Christ man, you’re supposed to be good at this!

    Nope. I said it was worded poorly, I have said nothing about whether I agree or disagree with what you are attempting to address.

    True enough, you’ve added nothing to the point actually being discussed.

    Nope, you do not understand the post. I explained it you do not get it. (again about the “complaining about tone” issue)

    Right, you haven’t “explained” **** about this point, as clearly evident above. Total bullshit.

    Yep, this went over your head. For someone who keeps harping on snarkiness, you sure do miss it when it is directed at you. Basically, I insulted your profession and mine. Like I said, you do not get my post. (re: psychobabble etc.)

    Well, can you blame me? What with such a complex and involved OH STFU! You make a series of totally unsupported claims…why not add in that I’m “psychobabbling”? It makes as much sense as anything else you have said. You intended it as a joke, great, but to say it ‘went over my head’? If anything I have been giving you way too much credit as a debater. There is absolutely nothing you have said in this thread that has come even close to my threshold of comprehension/understanding. Not because I’m some kind of genius but because, based on your contributions to this thread, you SUCK at this! Seriously man, WTF? I KNOW you can do better than this!

    Oh I can, quite easily, but like you "I don't like to be challenged." (In response to a request for some examples of all these unsupported labels being tossed around). So, it will be:
    IiF: Example
    YOU: Nuh unh.
    Iif: Uh huh.
    You: Nuh unh.
    Oh LOL@Rhetoric. Everyone, including you is using it right now.

    Damnit Yes, because that is definitely what I have been doing in every other post in this thread and it’s about time that…wait, what? I haven’t done this at all at any point in this discussion…what else are you planning on just pulling out of your ass here?

    Out before "I am a Psychologist, this was all a test" post.

    Well, that answers that.

    I have specifically not engaged in any discussion of my profession, with the sole exceptions of mentioning my experiences as a direct crisis services clinician (which came up on the DC Naval Yard discussion thread, so I had it on my mind), and Goodlun’s whole IT tangent where I self-disclosed as part of an example. Other than that I have generally left it off the table as irrelevant.

    So, a couple more Straw Men, and an example of you flat out misreading something I wrote as a bonus;
    Me: “You don't like to be challenged, so flame away”
    You: like you "I don't like to be challenged."

    I don’t mind being challenged at all…never said I did. See the error? I actually LOVE a good debate!

    Unfortunately, what we have here is a far cry from a good debate, at least from your end. I have to give Goodlun credit..he is sincerely trying to present his viewpoint in a rational framework. gotta respect that. Your input, IIF? Weak as hell.

    Not a single example of you actually organizing an argument…presenting a thesis you are going to argue, providing evidence to support the claim, an explanation of why the evidence supports the claim, and so forth (Purdue OWL). You have four posts in this thread in response to my engagement with it, and your net contribution to the debate? Not a damn thing of any real substance.
  9. goodlun is online now
    goodlun's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Ramona
    Posts
    4,621

    Posted On:
    9/20/2013 12:22am

    Join us... or die
     Style: BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    You know the use of the quote /quote tags would go a long way towards that being legible. If you want to quote across multiple post there is a multi-quote button its the one with the "+ also you may want to edit it as it looks like it double posted which makes it look even longer.
  10. It is Fake is offline
    It is Fake's Avatar

    Administrator

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    33,609

    Posted On:
    9/20/2013 12:26am

    staff
     Style: xingyi

    2
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    You spent all that time, crafting two long ass posts, to still get it wrong?
    Two things:
    1) Learn how to use the quote function.
    2) Arguing your own straw man arguments doesn't mean you have a "structured argument."


    The fact you had to visit Purdue owl's tutorial is all I needed to read. Yep, I have posts attacking your bullshit, don't like it? Stop being a pretentious, condescending, diploma spewing, git and argue goodlun's point not your own.
Page 20 of 28 FirstFirst ... 101617181920 21222324 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.