|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
 Posted - 09/06/2012 : 00:08:04 [Permalink]
|
| So I have to read an entire paper just because you quoted 1 line. |
No, you rather have to read a paper before you dismiss it as irrelevant. You have to have knowledge of the subject which, apparently, you do not.
| If you want to make a point make it. |
I believe I have.
| I think you'll find many people unwilling to do homework because you feel the need to be vague. |
You do seem quite comfortable with avoiding education, yes.
You do not know? Is that why you declined to list them to demonstrate the difference?
| Your point seems to rest on religious people doing bad things. |
Then you have read my kind remarks with a singular inattention.
I redirect your attention to the question ordinary I asked which, for some reason, you avoided.
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
 |
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 00:13:25 [Permalink]
|
I got tired of the constant, condescending sarcasm and confrontational attitude to slings and arrows! SLINGS AND ARROWS! had on this board is never brought up, over a HOT STOVE . . . WORKING MY FINGERS TO THE BONE but 1 overtly insulting remark from me and it's an issue. I lost count of the amount of times I've been metaphorically called an idiot. BUT DO ANY OF YOU CARE?
|
Though I rather prefer, "could you come down from the cross? We need the firewood."
Less appeals to "injur'd merit" and more attention to the arguments. You seem curiously blind to the "constant, condescending sarcasm and confrontational attitude" you have demonstrated.
"Sauce for the goose," what? What?
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 00:14:04 [Permalink]
|
So rather than explain why something is incorrect, you just state it as fact and pick on some grammatical errors?
Argumentum ad veritatem obfuscandam. I don't know what this is, I don't you I don't speak latin.
You commented I descended into ad hom in lieu of a good argument. Even though I had already responded to that argument. And since then you have done the same. And also a fair bit of recapitulating. Actually the majority of your posting seems to be blatant recapitulating and self congratulatory one-liners. |
 |
|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 00:15:12 [Permalink]
|
Now that lesson concluded, I return to the question ordinary pending: what is the source of your morality?
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 00:20:44 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
So rather than explain why something is incorrect, you just state it as fact and pick on some grammatical errors? |
I return to my observation of your inattention.
| I don't know what this is, . . . |
I am . . . surprised: another classical fallacy you seem to enjoy. In fact, your first sentence was such a case. Google still works does it not?
| You commented I descended into ad hom in lieu of a good argument. |
Save I did not state that, though argumentum ad hominem is one of the fallacies you used.
| Even though I had already responded to that argument. |
Save you did not: ipse dixit but incorrect again. Further--after then engaging in some more fallacy that directly contracted your appeals to "injur'd merit" in your response to Dave W you persist in avoiding answering a simple question.
Why?
| And since then you have done the same. |
Ipse dixit but incorrect: a fallacy is not a fallacy when it is true and relevant. In your case, both proved obvious.
| Actually the majority of your posting seems to be blatant recapitulating. . . . |
I quote you and demonstrate where you are avoiding issues, engaging in fallacy, et cetera, yes. I am only as good as my material.
and self congratulatory one-liners.
|
Best not to fly in the face of public opinion.
Now about that question? Or the other question. Continued avoidance of them further proves the point I made previously.
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 00:21:31 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Doctor X
No, you rather have to read a paper before you dismiss it as irrelevant. You have to have knowledge of the subject which, apparently, you do not. |
Your quote was irrelevant. Try to keep up.
Ok whatever it was, thanks.
| You do seem quite comfortable with avoiding education, yes. |
Hah! But you cannot seriously expect me to learn Latin and read every paper you quote from?
You do not know? Is that why you declined to list them to demonstrate the difference? |
Killing people in different ways for different reasons. Yeah I'd say there is a difference.
Then you have read my kind remarks with a singular inattention.
|
Or your remarks were insufficient to convey your point.
| I redirect your attention to the question ordinary I asked which, for some reason, you avoided. |
You asked several questions. Are you referring to "What is the source of your morality?"
If so I don't see how I can possibly reply without reciprocating...... |
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 09/06/2012 00:21:54 |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 00:27:32 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Doctor X
I return to my observation of your inattention. |
I think you are self deluded about the actual substance of your posts.
| I am . . . surprised: another classical fallacy you seem to enjoy. In fact, your first sentence was such a case. Google still works does it not? |
Yes, maybe you can use it to translate Latin to English.
| Save I did not state that, though argumentum ad hom is one of the fallacies you used. |
Sure you did.
| Even though I had already responded to that argument. |
Save you did not
|
Yes I did, even though any lamb could see I didn't have to.
Ipse dixit but incorrect: a fallacy is not a fallacy when it is true and relevant. In your case, both proved obvious.
|
In that case it was never a fallacy on my part.
I quote you and demonstrate where you are avoiding issues, engaging in fallacy, et cetera, yes. I am only as good as my material.
|
You may as well summarize by simply stating "you're wrong". Maybe in Latin. Because you don't actually provide any qualification for any of your statements.
|
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 09/06/2012 00:28:34 |
|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 00:30:51 [Permalink]
|
| Your quote was irrelevant. Try to keep up. |
Ipse dixit but incorrect. Since you are about four miles behind me I suggest you quicken your pace, son.
| Hah! But you cannot seriously expect me to learn Latin and read every paper you quote from? |
You underestimate yourself, shocking as that may appear to the Noble Readership: in just a few short minutes you learned to spell it correctly. Who knows what further achievement you could, you know, achieve if you set your mind to it?
Nevertheless, you could have asked rather than dismissed. Since you dismissed it--then made an erroneous claim regarding human sacrifice--I rather thought, as an individual with pretense to integrity, you had competence in the subject.
Clearly, you do not. However, it remains you could have asked. Why you did not will, perhaps, remain another question you will avoid.
| Killing people in different ways for different reasons. Yeah I'd say there is a difference. |
Yet you cannot state those differences?
How peculiar. . . .
| Or your remarks were insufficient to convey your point. |
Again, you could have asked rather than engage in histrionics, fallacy, and beastliness of forethought.
Are you referring to "What is the source of your morality?"
If so I don't see how I can possibly reply without reciprocating......
|
It would require insight on your part as well as honesty, yes. Thus far, you prove most unencumber'd by both.
Shall I send a taxi for you? I suppose I could just wait for you to catch up. This is a nice petite sirah.
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 00:36:26 [Permalink]
|
| I think you are self deluded [Sic--Ed.] about the actual substance of your posts. |
Your reaction proves otherwise.
| Yes, maybe you can use it to translate Latin to English. |
You are creating multiple irrelevant arguments in order to obscure the point, son.
| Save I did not state that, though argumentum ad hom is one of the fallacies you used. |
Sure you did. |
Then quote it.
| Yes I did, even though any lamb could see I didn't have to. |
Then you are dumber than a lamb now? If an unkind man, I would point out yet another of your argumentum ad veritatem obfuscandam fallacies. Again, my compliments: I am most gratified when others provide further evidence for my conclusions.
In truth you did not, you know you did not, and you know you cannot.
That much is obvious.
| In that case it was never a fallacy on my part. |
Save you proved incorrect and irrelevant. Hence a fallacy on your part.
Perhaps I should send a plane to help you catch up rather than a taxi?
| You may as well summarize by simply stating "you're wrong". |
Save I do not make ipse dixit statement; I prefer to provide the evidence that leads to the conclusion. That you avoid evidence remains your error.
| Because you don't actually provide any qualification for any of your statements. |
Ipse dixit but . . . we all know how this ends [Argumentum ad captandum vulgus.--Ed.] Hush!
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 00:39:50 [Permalink]
|
So to . . . recapitulate Sports Fans:
1. He could not provide support for his claim.
2. He continues to avoid the question: what is the source of his morality.
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 00:47:52 [Permalink]
|
| Your reaction proves otherwise. |
Not really since I have repeatedly said your posts are either insufficient to make a point or totally unsubstantiated.
More style over substance. If you wish to know where my morality is derived from I suggest you read the full thread. |
|
|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 00:53:28 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
| Your reaction proves otherwise. |
Not really since I have repeatedly said your posts are either insufficient to make a point or totally unsubstantiated. |
I know. Save your reaction to the point proves the point and I rather clearly substantiated them. An unkind man would recognize you as a liar.
More style over substance. If you wish to know where my morality is derived from I suggest you read the full thread.
|
Been there, done that, son. Unlike myself, you lack substance and evidence, but I was too kind to note that previously. I preferred, instead, to grant you the chance to rehabilitate yourself.
A chance you have avoided, of course.
As you have avoided answering both questions. We really do not need any more convincing that you dismissed Collins' quote out of frustration born from your ignorance of the subject. No need to dwell on the obvious.
Why are you so afraid to answer the other question? Are you frustrated and ignorant of that subject as well?
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 00:57:46 [Permalink]
|
An Observer may well wonder why he keeps avoiding the question regarding the source of his morality.
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 00:58:33 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Doctor X
I know. Save your reaction to the point proves the point and I rather clearly substantiated them. An unkind man would recognize you as a liar.
|
So by saying your comments lack substance they therefore have substance. There has to be some fancy Latin fallacy for that.
| We really do not need any more convincing that you dismissed Collins' quote out of frustration born from your ignorance of the subject. No need to dwell on the obvious. |
I actually didn't dismiss it, I said I failed to see any relevance because you didn't put it into any context for the discussion and still haven't. You've simply asserted repeatedly that the quote was relevant.
Why are you so afraid to answer the other question? Are you frustrated and ignorant of that subject as well?
|
Because I made it clear earlier.
I think we are at an impasse here. You think I am obfuscating with irrelevant arguments, I think pretty much everything you say is irrelevant. You keep asking the same question which should already be clear, yet fail to clarify your own points. You think I used ad hom in lieu of a good argument, yet repeatedly do the same to me. Fairly pointless back and forth IMO. |
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 09/06/2012 01:00:19 |
|
|
|
Doctor X
Voluntary Exile
151 Posts |
Posted - 09/06/2012 : 01:00:58 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
I am utterly too cowardly to answer the question.
|
Indeed.
--J.D. |
His secrets are not sold cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time. |
| Edited by - Doctor X on 09/06/2012 01:02:27 |
|
|
 |
|
What would you say to this argument about atheists
