A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
No you did not.
You employed no logic or reasoning to answer the question, you simply said:
Okay, so you claim. I completely disagree
And then told me I had to use logic and reason to answer you.
- Status
You employed no logic or reasoning to answer the question, you simply said:
Okay, so you claim. I completely disagree
And then told me I had to use logic and reason to answer you.
B
Betterave
Guest
I appreciate your seriousness. (I wish it wasn’t so rare.)
Yes, I see it, and I’ve analyzed it (just as good old Arthur Schopenhauer has). Can you actually try to respond to that analysis? If you refuse to, then you’re simply confirming my observation: you’re impossible to reason with. That is not a statement about you in general, it’s not a personal insult - it’s simply a factual statement about the nature of your responses to my criticisms of your claims.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Then why do you keep questioning the intelligence/reasoning ability of others?
Why do you keep calling other posters stupid, illogical, etc.?
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
If you don’t see how your sarcasm (above) does not further argument, and is incendiary & a form of hyperbole, then you’re not behaving as the worthy debating partner which you are demanding that others show.
Only since you so often say or imply that others could not be as bright as you are, when clearly that is not what others, plural, observe – including but not limited to myself. You are not some objective standard of intelligence. You still don’t get that.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
Excellent questions.
B
Betterave
Guest
Maybe we should start with some really basic definition of terms here:
What do you think ‘logic’ and ‘reasoning’ are? (You apparently think that asking someone to explain what he means is foreign to ‘logic’ and ‘reasoning’?)
To be clear, your last claim here is very clearly false:
“Now, *if *you are interested in a rational discussion, you need to be prepared to tell me what you think Elizabeth’s point, the substance of her argument was, such that I failed to address it”
very clearly cannot be accurately summarized as
“[You] told me I had to use logic and reason to answer you.”
Can you see that?
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Sigh.
More insults.
I guess you’re just a troll then (this is an honest analysis of your character Betterave, I’m not trying to insult you, and frankly don’t care if you are).
B
Betterave
Guest
I call other posters illogical insofar as they have made illogical statements. (It’s pretty simple.)
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
I usually am serious Betterave when I post on this site.
The only reason I so often use humor when replying to you is because I consider you a troll and don’t take you seriously.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
Betterave, it seems to me that your questions in your OP have been answered abundantly, by many posters. Perhaps it’s time now to just let things sit, and reflect on what others have said without committing yourself publicly one way or the other. I know that I have tried to communicate why many people share a perception about your style, a style which you yourself inquired about.
Try to think about it…
Try to think about it…
G
George_Stegmeir
Guest
To all of you on this thread: What has any of this to do with real life and the health of ones soul?..Wake up and GET A LIFE!!!
B
Betterave
Guest
What demands have I made that I have failed to live up to? Elizabeth, you won’t even answer my questions. Philosophy - analytical skills - is not about preaching to sinners, it is about responding to objections. If you refuse to respond to objections, to justify your claims when challenged…
Again, this is hypocritical (“incendiary”) language. But you refuse to answer objections to your position, so what to do. Carry on with your public monologue…?
B
Betterave
Guest
What do you think George? Nothing? Obviously I disagree, strongly, in fact. Wanna discuss it in a reasonable way?
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Why do you lie about what you post Betterave when I (or anyone participating in the thread) can easily prove you wrong?
B
Betterave
Guest
See post 121.Why do you lie about what you post Betterave when I (or anyone participating in the thread) can easily prove you wrong?
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
How is it false?
What evidence (if any) do you have to back up your claims?
If you cannot provide any evidence of your claims (as usual) I will be forced to conclude that you have none, and therefore your assertions are nothing but empty words.
Moreover you have not bothered to respond to any of my evidence (such as your insulting posts from earlier threads) regarding your conduct, leading me to the logical conclusion that you cannot.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
So your just a jerk then?
Spouting every imaginative insult that comes to mind as you post?
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Its worth noting that your response to something Elizabeth said in this thread was to call her a hypocrite and sinner. Rather than evaluating the intellectual merits of what she actually said. I highlighted the most important portion for reader’s convenience:What demands have I made that I have failed to live up to? Elizabeth, you won’t even answer my questions. Philosophy - analytical skills - is not about preaching to sinners, it is about responding to objections. If you refuse to respond to objections, to justify your claims when challenged…
:
Today, 2:19 pm
Betterave
Regular Member Join Date: August 4, 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 3,440
Religion: Catholic
Re: “How dare you insult me!” - “What…!?”
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elizabeth502
Assumptions are evident in word choice, in tone. Several other posters have pointed this out quite well, in several much earlier posts on this thread. Posts 72 and 77 come to mind, as well, of course, as post 91, in which you used the word “nonsense” three times, without explaining why it would be nonsensical to use tone as an indicator of intent.
Okay, so is this you offering specific substance? I checked post 72 and it is very clearly nonsense to claim either (a) that post 72 is based on an assumption of my ‘intellectual superiority’ or (b) that use of the word ‘nonsense’ constitutes an assumption of my intellectual superiority (as opposed to a quite possibly fair comment on a nonsensical comment).
**Quote:
You dismiss the comments of other posters as “silly,” and now even accusing one of us of sinning (against You? ).
Is that an issue you take lightly? That’s unfortunate. And hypocritical.**
Quote:
Look, as I said earlier, it’s easy to get carried away in the heat of debate, and when one is passiionate about an issue it is difficult not to do that, at times. There are some people who seem to be phlegmatic and immune to “reactivity,” but I think they’re the exception, as they are less interested in debate to begin with. But when tone dominates, then the message tends to be received as emotional rather than intellectual, and personal as opposed to conceptual. The more someone wants to persuade intellectually, the less personal and incendiary should be the tone of the argument. For example, earlier on this very thread you stated your points, and/or isolated words, in capital letters. That also conveys a tone. Based only on this thread, I think your tone is dominating, and apparently I am not alone in that observation.
Sure, but strongly analytical, logically rigorous arguments are the kind of arguments I use and such arguments are intrinsically ‘dominating.’ Is it fair to fault me for using such arguments?
Quote:
Sometimes it’s best for me to step back before I post something and reread it calmly after a pause, even though I have to log in again. In addition, it’s sometimes good if I imagine how another respected poster might frame a reply, and use him or her as a role model for me to edit my own reply.
That sounds like a good idea. I hope you can do that consistently. One question you might ask yourself when doing this is: Am I actually responding to what my interlocutor has written: the actual text, the words, the propositions, the way they are framed as an argument? Or am I just projecting my own view and insisting on it no matter what my interlocutor says? If you’re not sure, or if he has to repeatedly tell you that you’re getting it wrong, you can try to put his argument in your own words and say “so you argument in post such-and-such is …(fill in the blank)?”
The wind blows where it wills; you hear its sound, but you don’t know where it comes from, or where it goes to.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
George would have to discuss it with someone else.
You have effectively used this thread to show yourself incapable of reasonable discussion.
E
Eric_Hilbert
Guest
CPMR
- Status