Active Users:191 Time:01/05/2024 11:00:35 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Re: Have you ever considered? - Edit 1

Before modification by entyti at 12/10/2020 01:28:11 AM


View original post
Have you ever considered when you keep on appealing to reason.

Amazing how you make that sound like a bad thing... impressive.


1) That I know the reason, logic, and statistics of their arguments

I’ve considered it. In the end, for me, it doesn’t matter whether you know them or not. When we’re trying to reason through an issue, reason, logic, and statistics are important. Though I am confused by your use of the word their. In our discussion on this thread, the only numbers I brought were trolling the CDC website and basic google. As for this group you keep harping about, which you keep using as your pillow to hide from the bogeyman of dissent, I argued we can disregard them as the interesting question is the professors.

2) Hashing it out with words though takes a long time and is exhausting, exhausting in a way that lowers the quality of my life

Considering that you had plenty of energy to post disparaging posts about the organizers of this petition on this very thread, I question your use of the word exhausting.


3) Thus I skip ahead (which in turn is a mental shortcut)

No... I don’t believe that to be true. I think it would be more accurate to say that you disagreed with the premise, then skipped ahead for evidence that you could use to discredit the argument.

Skipping ahead, by the way, is a bad habit to get into. Not as bad as stress eating, but not great.


4) Simultaneously you keep on trying to make me eat green eggs and ham, with paternalistic energy telling me you are going to love it in the end.

I thought you said you skip ahead!

You might recall, my dear Sam-I-Am, how that one ends.


5) But I know how this ends up (see 1 and 2), and I find those values of theirs incompatible with my values

Circular thinking is a bit dizzying.
.

6) Thus I say fuck no, and I do not want, and they are nuts.

Then... why... post anything at all on this thread? The subject was clearly angled at discussing this very thing. You could have taken a pass.

You didn’t.


7) Yet you are the one offended for in your mind it is impossible that anyone can dislike green eggs and ham and this challenges your entire world view if this fact may be true.

Well, I’m not offended, and I don’t really care whether you eat green eggs or ham. I care about the fact that I am being denied green eggs and ham because everyone is freaking out, because they never seen green eggs before, and how long has the ham been left out?, and why are they next to that goat?


So who here has the problem?

Well, I do have a problem with you using sophistry and rhetoric to dismiss progressing the conversation in a productive manner.

Though if you are unable to face honest points of views from concerned people citing concerned professors...


The way I see it, it is a question of agency and subjectivity. Everyone has the right to reject and say no.

Agreed.


Sidenote you keep on saying ad hominem is a problem but there is a lot of philosophy that disagrees with that “Claim” including Aristotle himself that talks about the different forms of authority in rhetoric. Ethos is not just ethics but questioning the authority of another and ad hominem is very much involved with this and can not be separated in a real world or an ideal world.

Check the very first thing that I said in my response to your comment to TyrReborn: Nothing wrong with ad hominem... I wasn’t being sarcastic. There is nothing wrong with ad hominem, just like there’s nothing wrong with multiplication. But when you multiply when your supposed to add, then multiplying is wrong.

You bait-and-switched this whole discussion by ignoring the important hominem- the professors, a difficult to defend stance- and focusing on the more easily dismissed hominem- this organization.

So, in the end, I guess you win. Nobody here has really discussed anything substantial, even though there really is good reason to, and we went down your little death spiral.

Why should we care about discussing controversial things when the receiving end screams: I WILL NOT HEAR THIS FROM MY FREINDS, I WILL NOT LISTEN, ‘TILL THE END

My hat is off to you, good sir!


Return to message