Volconvo Debate Forums - View Single Post

Feb 17, 2004, 10:10 am

m5, I apologize for the misuse of pronouns. I was under the belief that you stated you were a woman. I stand corrected.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
Think about it. What would I have to do? Write down names and dates? I gave three examples <hr size="1" /></blockquote>

To be accurate you would have to admit that in fact you gave NO examples of this at all. You repeated your conclusion, which obviously cannot count as evidence for itself, and you cited two instances where I noted the ACTUAL FAILURES of the currect system. No where did you offer anything that anyone could reasonably call "bashing."

BTW in response to your dismissal of the request for some sort of support for your rather unlikely claims, a dismissal you dubbed the "lions in africa," perhaps we ought to stick to the common ground available and accessible to us all: reason. The appeal to "common knowledge" is itself a logical fallacy. Consider that it was once "common knowledge" that the earth was flat, but that did not make the earth flat.

Offering evidence for your claims, especially when they are as unlikely as those you have offered, is not a matter of merely convincing one individual, it is a matter of offering a reasoned argument. It also allows you to get past preconceived positions that may be in error. Anytime you simply assume your position to be true, without the advantage of connection to reality or sound reasoning, you run the risk of holding false beliefs, and certainly do hold unfounded beliefs.

Now since you are asserting that these unfounded beliefs are necesssary truths, so much in fact that you have avoided and ignored ALL refutations, problems have arisen: you have chosen to employ personal attacks rather than examine the facts and the issues, for but one example.

Anytime you find that reality does not match your ideas, issues, desires, beliefs, etc, it is always your ideas, issues, desires, beliefs, that are mistaken, not reality.

I have cited several possibilities, so your false claim that I have offered nothing positive is absurd and naught but another ad hominem. If you had not jumped to the emotional reaction and instead read what was posted you would have noted this.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
He would lose points for spending so much of his time railing against logic and methodology of his opponents (a single mention of it to make the point then move on would be the way) while he should be making his own case.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

And herein lay one of the differences: I care about truth and reason, not trivial debating objectives. I do not care what some government school coach tells me will "score points" instead I am treating you as a worthwhile individual with something to offer, rather than as an opponent to beat. If only you have offered a similar respect and had the similar goal of truth... .

BTW I did not speak to your methodology at all. As for a single mention regarding the logical fallacies, in each instance I did but make a single mention, then you employed more logical fallacies and personal attacks. Do you expect a different result from the same actions taken repeatedly?

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
LB said it was unfair if I requested that it be done without attacking another system. That would not win any debates.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Again we see the difference between us, I could not possibly care less about meaningless games, rather I choose truth as the goal.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
I will reserve my judgement of his debating ability when I see him defend something.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

And here we hit upon the problem: you refuse to see what has been right in front of you the entire time. But then I have already conceded that I do not give a whit about debating, but rather about truth and understanding. Debating games simply distract from important and meaningful goals.

Feb 17, 2004, 10:10 am	#68 (permalink) (top)
Lightbearer Guest Posts: n/a	m5, I apologize for the misuse of pronouns. I was under the belief that you stated you were a woman. I stand corrected. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by Think about it. What would I have to do? Write down names and dates? I gave three examples <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> To be accurate you would have to admit that in fact you gave NO examples of this at all. You repeated your conclusion, which obviously cannot count as evidence for itself, and you cited two instances where I noted the ACTUAL FAILURES of the currect system. No where did you offer anything that anyone could reasonably call "bashing." BTW in response to your dismissal of the request for some sort of support for your rather unlikely claims, a dismissal you dubbed the "lions in africa," perhaps we ought to stick to the common ground available and accessible to us all: reason. The appeal to "common knowledge" is itself a logical fallacy. Consider that it was once "common knowledge" that the earth was flat, but that did not make the earth flat. Offering evidence for your claims, especially when they are as unlikely as those you have offered, is not a matter of merely convincing one individual, it is a matter of offering a reasoned argument. It also allows you to get past preconceived positions that may be in error. Anytime you simply assume your position to be true, without the advantage of connection to reality or sound reasoning, you run the risk of holding false beliefs, and certainly do hold unfounded beliefs. Now since you are asserting that these unfounded beliefs are necesssary truths, so much in fact that you have avoided and ignored ALL refutations, problems have arisen: you have chosen to employ personal attacks rather than examine the facts and the issues, for but one example. Anytime you find that reality does not match your ideas, issues, desires, beliefs, etc, it is always your ideas, issues, desires, beliefs, that are mistaken, not reality. I have cited several possibilities, so your false claim that I have offered nothing positive is absurd and naught but another ad hominem. If you had not jumped to the emotional reaction and instead read what was posted you would have noted this. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by He would lose points for spending so much of his time railing against logic and methodology of his opponents (a single mention of it to make the point then move on would be the way) while he should be making his own case.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> And herein lay one of the differences: I care about truth and reason, not trivial debating objectives. I do not care what some government school coach tells me will "score points" instead I am treating you as a worthwhile individual with something to offer, rather than as an opponent to beat. If only you have offered a similar respect and had the similar goal of truth... . BTW I did not speak to your methodology at all. As for a single mention regarding the logical fallacies, in each instance I did but make a single mention, then you employed more logical fallacies and personal attacks. Do you expect a different result from the same actions taken repeatedly? </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by LB said it was unfair if I requested that it be done without attacking another system. That would not win any debates.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Again we see the difference between us, I could not possibly care less about meaningless games, rather I choose truth as the goal. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by I will reserve my judgement of his debating ability when I see him defend something.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> And here we hit upon the problem: you refuse to see what has been right in front of you the entire time. But then I have already conceded that I do not give a whit about debating, but rather about truth and understanding. Debating games simply distract from important and meaningful goals.