The Zeitgeist Movement - Give me your best shot.

Page 8 of 12 [ 188 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

Adam-Anti-Um
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Dec 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 707
Location: West Sussex, UK

08 Jul 2012, 5:17 pm

@Vigilans, all you have left is threats and more ad homs. You never began here with any substance and you never gained any. I hope you stick by your "have a nice day" as a goodbye coz you ain't gettin that time back either. lol


_________________
"We can spend the rest of our existences stomping on the ants that are mysteriously coming out from under the refridgerator, or we can remove the spoiled food behind it which is causing the infestation to begin with." - Peter Joseph


Adam-Anti-Um
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Dec 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 707
Location: West Sussex, UK

08 Jul 2012, 5:32 pm

Ok, so still looking for anyone's concrete case against an RBE. 2 things I would advise off the cuff though:

1. Know what you're trying to refute
2. Don't get personal. Even if your argument is disputed.


_________________
"We can spend the rest of our existences stomping on the ants that are mysteriously coming out from under the refridgerator, or we can remove the spoiled food behind it which is causing the infestation to begin with." - Peter Joseph


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

08 Jul 2012, 5:37 pm

Adam-Anti-Um wrote:
2. Don't get personal. Even if your argument is disputed.

AAU, given your entire record of responses in this thread, you giving this advice is hypocrisy. You're one of the first people to get personal, insulting and condescending in the thread, and most people are aware of this.



Adam-Anti-Um
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Dec 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 707
Location: West Sussex, UK

08 Jul 2012, 5:41 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Adam-Anti-Um wrote:
2. Don't get personal. Even if your argument is disputed.

AAU, given your entire record of responses in this thread, you giving this advice is hypocrisy. You're one of the first people to get personal, insulting and condescending in the thread, and most people are aware of this.


I like the fact you skipped point 1. lol

Quote:
and most people are aware of this.


Stating that someone is commiting a logical fallacy such as this, the appeal to majority fallacy, and asking them to know what they're talking about, urging them to get a thicker skin or a better argument does not count as getting personal. If I'm so guilty, how come a moderator has even come on to contribute but said nothing about these alleged personal attacks but instead acted civil towards me? Considering you can't keep from swearing and throwing personal insults, logical fallacies and other rhetorical devices makes you an uber-hypocrite.


_________________
"We can spend the rest of our existences stomping on the ants that are mysteriously coming out from under the refridgerator, or we can remove the spoiled food behind it which is causing the infestation to begin with." - Peter Joseph


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

08 Jul 2012, 5:55 pm

Adam-Anti-Um wrote:
I like the fact you skipped point 1. lol

You do realize that I can legitimately only quote the parts I would like to address, right?

Quote:
Stating that someone is commiting a logical fallacy such as this, the appeal to majority fallacy, and asking them to know what they're talking about, urging them to get a thicker skin or a better argument does not count as getting personal. If I'm so guilty, how come a moderator has even come on to contribute but said nothing about these alleged personal attacks but instead acted civil towards me? Considering you can't keep from swearing and throwing personal insults, logical fallacies and other rhetorical devices makes you an uber-hypocrite.

....... You either have no awareness of your own actions or are being deliberately obtuse.

You have not successfully identified a logical fallacy the entire time you've whined about it.

I am not a hypocrite:
hyp·o·crite noun \ˈhi-pə-ˌkrit\

Definition of HYPOCRITE

1
: a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2
: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hypocrite

Now, provide an example where I have acted in contradiction with my stated beliefs or feelings. You getting personal(which you have multiple times in this thread) and then admonishing everybody else for doing that is clear and blatant hypocrisy; dictionary definition hypocrisy. I have done no contradiction, and thus am not a hypocrite.

Also, AAU, moderators only get involved if people complain. I don't complain. Also, not everybody labeled a "moderator" is actually an active moderator. I mean, really you haven't proved anything, and the same logic could be used by your opponents. (Why haven't moderators attacked them yet??)



Adam-Anti-Um
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Dec 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 707
Location: West Sussex, UK

08 Jul 2012, 6:00 pm

@Awesomelyglorious, Of course you skipped it, which qualifies such tactics as cowardly. You can only prodce weak arguments and baseless accusations. Of course you claim a squeeky clean record coz you claim to be superior to everyone. You hold everyone accountable for whatever you choose, then claim immunity from those rules. That's fascist behaviour. And if you checked my podcasts you'll know that I even did 2 podcasts on logical fallacies. lol

Thing is, this is your whole thing, you derail the topic at hand by getting us both started on our behaviour. And I will keep calling you out on this.


_________________
"We can spend the rest of our existences stomping on the ants that are mysteriously coming out from under the refridgerator, or we can remove the spoiled food behind it which is causing the infestation to begin with." - Peter Joseph


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

08 Jul 2012, 6:08 pm

Adam-Anti-Um wrote:
@Awesomelyglorious, Of course you skipped it, which qualifies such tactics as cowardly. You can only prodce weak arguments and baseless accusations. Of course you claim a squeeky clean record coz you claim to be superior to everyone. If you checked my podcasts you'll know that I even did 2 podcasts on logical fallacies. lol

Umm.... right. I skipped something because it was not relevant to my argument therefore I am cowardly?..... really? So, you're attacking my moral qualities?

I can only produce weak arguments and baseless accusations? So, you're attacking my capabilities.

2 podcasts on logical fallacies doesn't mean you don't commit them. It doesn't mean you understand logic. It tells us nothing. Your arguments and your evaluations stand on their own ground, and.... frankly, multiple people are perceiving the same issues.

Now, here's the problem, despite telling people not to get personal, you have clearly gotten personal in claiming that I can only produce weak arguments and baseless accusations, and in attacking me for being arrogant "claim to be superior to everyone". That's hypocrisy, and verifiable, and downright foolish.

Quote:
Thing is, this is your whole thing, you derail the topic at hand by getting us both started on our behaviour. And I will keep calling you out on this.

Right, so pointing out how you are a hypocrite is an evil plot on my part. And I suppose that other people pointing out the same failings is also part of this plot? Pointing out how you are a hypocrite is sensible.



Last edited by Awesomelyglorious on 08 Jul 2012, 6:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Adam-Anti-Um
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Dec 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 707
Location: West Sussex, UK

08 Jul 2012, 6:09 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Adam-Anti-Um wrote:
@Awesomelyglorious, Of course you skipped it, which qualifies such tactics as cowardly. You can only prodce weak arguments and baseless accusations. Of course you claim a squeeky clean record coz you claim to be superior to everyone. If you checked my podcasts you'll know that I even did 2 podcasts on logical fallacies. lol

Umm.... right. I skipped something because it was not relevant to my argument therefore I am cowardly?..... really? So, you're attacking my moral qualities?

I can only produce weak arguments and baseless accusations? So, you're attacking my capabilities.

2 podcasts on logical fallacies doesn't mean you don't commit them. It doesn't mean you understand logic. It tells us nothing. Your arguments and your evaluations stand on their own ground, and.... frankly, multiple people are perceiving the same issues.

Now, here's the problem, despite telling people not to get personal, you have clearly gotten personal in claiming that I can only produce weak arguments and baseless accusations, and in attacking me for being arrogant "claim to be superior to everyone". That's hypocrisy, and verifiable, and downright foolish.


Shall I skip everything you've just said coz I deem it as irrelevant to my argument? Of course you wouldn't stand for that, but yet you claim the ability to do it. You also class the perception of someone's arguments as weak as a personal attack while doing the same thing and claiming justification.= Hypocrisy.


_________________
"We can spend the rest of our existences stomping on the ants that are mysteriously coming out from under the refridgerator, or we can remove the spoiled food behind it which is causing the infestation to begin with." - Peter Joseph


Last edited by Adam-Anti-Um on 08 Jul 2012, 6:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

08 Jul 2012, 6:12 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Adam-Anti-Um wrote:
@Awesomelyglorious, Of course you skipped it, which qualifies such tactics as cowardly. You can only prodce weak arguments and baseless accusations. Of course you claim a squeeky clean record coz you claim to be superior to everyone. If you checked my podcasts you'll know that I even did 2 podcasts on logical fallacies. lol

Umm.... right. I skipped something because it was not relevant to my argument therefore I am cowardly?..... really? So, you're attacking my moral qualities?

I can only produce weak arguments and baseless accusations? So, you're attacking my capabilities.

2 podcasts on logical fallacies doesn't mean you don't commit them. It doesn't mean you understand logic. It tells us nothing. Your arguments and your evaluations stand on their own ground, and.... frankly, multiple people are perceiving the same issues.

Now, here's the problem, despite telling people not to get personal, you have clearly gotten personal in claiming that I can only produce weak arguments and baseless accusations, and in attacking me for being arrogant "claim to be superior to everyone". That's hypocrisy, and verifiable, and downright foolish.


I think we are communicating with someone without any self-reflective capability. I mean, he has accused me of asking fallacious questions (what questions?), making assumptions (about what?), and now making threats (when?). Clearly this is an individual who is utterly out of touch with reality. He does, after all, use himself as a reference.


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

08 Jul 2012, 6:12 pm

Adam-Anti-Um wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Adam-Anti-Um wrote:
@Awesomelyglorious, Of course you skipped it, which qualifies such tactics as cowardly. You can only prodce weak arguments and baseless accusations. Of course you claim a squeeky clean record coz you claim to be superior to everyone. If you checked my podcasts you'll know that I even did 2 podcasts on logical fallacies. lol

Umm.... right. I skipped something because it was not relevant to my argument therefore I am cowardly?..... really? So, you're attacking my moral qualities?

I can only produce weak arguments and baseless accusations? So, you're attacking my capabilities.

2 podcasts on logical fallacies doesn't mean you don't commit them. It doesn't mean you understand logic. It tells us nothing. Your arguments and your evaluations stand on their own ground, and.... frankly, multiple people are perceiving the same issues.

Now, here's the problem, despite telling people not to get personal, you have clearly gotten personal in claiming that I can only produce weak arguments and baseless accusations, and in attacking me for being arrogant "claim to be superior to everyone". That's hypocrisy, and verifiable, and downright foolish.


Shall I skip everything you've just said coz I deem it as irrelevant to my argument? Of course you wouldn't stand for that, but yet you claim the ability to do it. Hypocrisy.


It wouldn't technically be hypocrisy unless he called you out on eliminating part of his post you deemed to be unconnected to what the two of you are actually discussing.

Furthermore, it could be argued that unless what you skipped could objectively be argued to be a separate issue, such as "The topic you wish to discuss" and "How you are conducting yourself in that discussion", one is about one specific topic, the other is a sort of meta discussion on how you are conducting it.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

08 Jul 2012, 6:14 pm

Adam-Anti-Um wrote:
Shall I skip everything you've just said coz I deem it as irrelevant to my argument? Of course you wouldn't stand for that, but yet you claim the ability to do it. Hypocrisy.

Didn't you basically just do that? This is hardly a response to anything I just said.

Frankly, if you shifted focus, then that would just be how a debate works. I don't have to literally respond to every single thing you say, only focus my efforts on the major points and the relevant ones.

In any case, saying I wouldn't stand for it says nothing about what I've stated, thus it does not make me a hypocrite. Especially given that our roles in the argumentative context are different. That being said, I have defended other people avoiding irrelevant issues in the past, including Burzum not having to answer your asinine questions on a software economy.



Adam-Anti-Um
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Dec 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 707
Location: West Sussex, UK

08 Jul 2012, 6:17 pm

[quote="Awesomelyglorious, This is exactly what I mean you claim that I've skipped things (When I haven't) and yet you claim justifications for skipping. It looks like YOU are incapable of self-reflection, possibly because you consider yourself superior.


_________________
"We can spend the rest of our existences stomping on the ants that are mysteriously coming out from under the refridgerator, or we can remove the spoiled food behind it which is causing the infestation to begin with." - Peter Joseph


Adam-Anti-Um
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Dec 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 707
Location: West Sussex, UK

08 Jul 2012, 6:19 pm

And here we find ourselves tangled in a mess of semantics and calling out of behaviour and the topic of this thread is getting lost. I have said all I will about tactics so I will go back to the relevant topic at hand which is the RBE.


_________________
"We can spend the rest of our existences stomping on the ants that are mysteriously coming out from under the refridgerator, or we can remove the spoiled food behind it which is causing the infestation to begin with." - Peter Joseph


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

08 Jul 2012, 6:20 pm

Adam-Anti-Um wrote:
You also class the perception of someone's arguments as weak as a personal attack while doing the same thing and claiming justification.= Hypocrisy.

Because you edit things incessantly....

I didn't say that personal attacks are wrong though. Some people really ought to be insulted.

That being said, I didn't say that perceiving my arguments as weak is a personal attack. The personal attack is when you said "You *CAN* only produce weak arguments..." the emphasis is on my capabilities, not on my actions. My capabilities are a matter of who I am. Maybe I am overanalyzing the issue, but I was clear on where I drew the issue.



Last edited by Awesomelyglorious on 08 Jul 2012, 6:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

08 Jul 2012, 6:20 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Adam-Anti-Um wrote:
Shall I skip everything you've just said coz I deem it as irrelevant to my argument? Of course you wouldn't stand for that, but yet you claim the ability to do it. Hypocrisy.

Didn't you basically just do that? This is hardly a response to anything I just said.

Frankly, if you shifted focus, then that would just be how a debate works. I don't have to literally respond to every single thing you say, only focus my efforts on the major points and the relevant ones.

In any case, saying I wouldn't stand for it says nothing about what I've stated, thus it does not make me a hypocrite. Especially given that our roles in the argumentative context are different. That being said, I have defended other people avoiding irrelevant issues in the past, including Burzum not having to answer your asinine questions on a software economy.


On a different note, am I the only one that interprets his argument as it being a world in which supply is always larger than demand, without resource limitations. Something that to me seems to implicate a constant growth economy, which was one of the things he originally criticized. On a wrongful basis, yet in his case it doesn't seem to involve any of the "real" limitations on the existing economy?



Adam-Anti-Um
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Dec 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 707
Location: West Sussex, UK

08 Jul 2012, 6:21 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Adam-Anti-Um wrote:
You also class the perception of someone's arguments as weak as a personal attack while doing the same thing and claiming justification.= Hypocrisy.

I didn't say that personal attacks are wrong though. Some people really ought to be insulted.

That being said, I didn't say that perceiving my arguments as weak is a personal attack. The personal attack is when you said "You *CAN* only produce weak arguments..." the emphasis is on my capabilities, not on my actions. My capabilities are a matter of who I am. Maybe I am overanalyzing the issue, but I was clear on where I drew the issue.


This is irrelevant to the subject matter of this thread. Moving on.


_________________
"We can spend the rest of our existences stomping on the ants that are mysteriously coming out from under the refridgerator, or we can remove the spoiled food behind it which is causing the infestation to begin with." - Peter Joseph