Well, when you’re capable of reading words, comprehending them, and replying to what the words say, feel free to let us know. Until then…
You're killing me bro. What evidence do you have that I haven't fully read and comprehended you? You're the one who trots out logical fallacy accusations as if they're going out of fashion while seemingly having no practical understanding of how logical fallacies work.
Here's a hint: when you appeal to both authority and popularity at the same time, that's a strong argument, not some kind of double fallacy, as you paint it. The error in an appeal to authority is predicated on it being a single data point, with the capacity for error, while the error in an appeal to popularity is based on the fickleness and lack of expertise in a crowd. There is no problem with an argument that appeals to the expertise of a crowd of experts. To say there is... Well that's just beyond stupid, and reeks of a dictionary definition mindset that pays no attention to what is actually going on.
And just like that, another argument ends with, “I’m leaving; therefore I’m right.”
In your informal logic class, how thoroughly do you cover strawmen? I imagine that’s your forte.
Ironic, given that he didn't say the words that you have quoted, nor did he imply them. By your definition* I believe that constitutes a strawman argument, no?
* a very loose definition that few others would subscribe to.
The exact words? He did not say them. He said he was leaving in different words, but the second part of your "quote" is entirely your imagination.
So I might be a troll (aside: I'm not), but you're definitely a liar. And you've painted yourself into an absurd corner in this thread and made yourself look very foolish.
I seriously don't even understand what you're on about sometimes. His post does not say what you are saying it says. You are wrong. That you keep repeating your wrongness does not move it any closer to being right. You are still wrong. Shut up and less the grown ups talk.
I seriously don't even understand what you're on about sometimes.
Reading posts before replying to them would clear that up. Maybe you should read posts before replying to them. Want to know why I keep telling you to read posts before replying to them? Because even if you only read a few words out of this post before replying to it, you’ll have seen that you are to read the post before replying to it, so it works out.
Comments
You're killing me bro. What evidence do you have that I haven't fully read and comprehended you? You're the one who trots out logical fallacy accusations as if they're going out of fashion while seemingly having no practical understanding of how logical fallacies work.
Here's a hint: when you appeal to both authority and popularity at the same time, that's a strong argument, not some kind of double fallacy, as you paint it. The error in an appeal to authority is predicated on it being a single data point, with the capacity for error, while the error in an appeal to popularity is based on the fickleness and lack of expertise in a crowd. There is no problem with an argument that appeals to the expertise of a crowd of experts. To say there is... Well that's just beyond stupid, and reeks of a dictionary definition mindset that pays no attention to what is actually going on.
And just like that, another argument ends with, “I’m leaving; therefore I’m right.”
In your informal logic class, how thoroughly do you cover strawmen? I imagine that’s your forte.
* a very loose definition that few others would subscribe to.
Click the little green and grey icon next to his name and try to tell me again he didn’t say the words I quoted, troll.
I won't just try, I'll succeed...
The exact words? He did not say them. He said he was leaving in different words, but the second part of your "quote" is entirely your imagination.
So I might be a troll (aside: I'm not), but you're definitely a liar. And you've painted yourself into an absurd corner in this thread and made yourself look very foolish.
Okay, thanks for playing. You lose. Learn how to look at a post.
I seriously don't even understand what you're on about sometimes. His post does not say what you are saying it says. You are wrong. That you keep repeating your wrongness does not move it any closer to being right. You are still wrong. Shut up and less the grown ups talk.
Reading posts before replying to them would clear that up. Maybe you should read posts before replying to them. Want to know why I keep telling you to read posts before replying to them? Because even if you only read a few words out of this post before replying to it, you’ll have seen that you are to read the post before replying to it, so it works out.
You're beyond parody.
When you get near an argument, hop on!