Print

[Professor H]

I'm thinking that we need a thread for people to take their petty arguments to - instead of hijacking other threads and getting them locked... 

[Dandy_Richardvilles]

I'm thinking that we need a thread for people to take their petty arguments to - instead of hijacking other threads and getting them locked... 

Perhaps so.  Or MT's death spiral just needs to speed up and put us all out of misery.  Of course when the administrators abdicate any oversight, self-policing is the result.  And self-policing is like making sausage, it ain't pretty.

[excelsior]

Agreed that regurgitating a term you were fed may get you an A- in a Philosophy 101 class.  Of course it doesn't hold a lot of weight when the realities on the ground are considered.  But go ahead, using cites from that thread, make your argument.

You used a logical fallacy when you stated that John condoned racism by remaining silent on the topic.   Remaining silent is on a topic is not proof of any position.

Your logic fail is text book.   I sure John has your car keys as well.

ARGUMENT FROM SILENCE
http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/55-argument-from-silence

argumentum e silentio
Description: Drawing a conclusion based on the silence of the opponent, when the opponent is refusing to give evidence for any reason.
Logical Form:
Person 1 claims X is true, then remains silent.
Person 2 then concludes that X must be true.
Example #1:
Jay: Dude, where are my car keys?
Bob: (says nothing)
Jay: I KNEW you took them!

[Dandy_Richardvilles]

You used a logical fallacy when you stated that John condoned racism by remaining silent on the topic.   Remaining silent is on a topic is not proof of any position.

Your logic fail is text book.   I sure John has your car keys as well.

ARGUMENT FROM SILENCE
http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/55-argument-from-silence

argumentum e silentio
Description: Drawing a conclusion based on the silence of the opponent, when the opponent is refusing to give evidence for any reason.
Logical Form:
Person 1 claims X is true, then remains silent.
Person 2 then concludes that X must be true.
Example #1:
Jay: Dude, where are my car keys?
Bob: (says nothing)
Jay: I KNEW you took them!

Hey, I've got some of those same references too!

http://www.umass.edu/wsp/history/outline/silence.html


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informal_fallacy

http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/55-argument-from-silence

http://www.conservapedia.com/Logical_fallacy

Perhaps you need to consider definitions, the weight of inferences, past interactions between he and I among other things as well pal.  Logic fail?  Sure, if it makes you feel better.

[Monroe Native]

http://youtu.be/yBBWUZfgRiw?t=80

[ducksoup]

You know Duck, bottom line, when it comes to you, I don't give a fats rats a%% one way or the other.

Yep, John, and that is why any dissertation you present is doomed.  You listen to far right wing lies and propaganda and swallow it whole, then cover your ears to any other information.

[ducksoup]

You used a logical fallacy when you stated that John condoned racism by remaining silent on the topic.   Remaining silent is on a topic is not proof of any position.

Your logic fail is text book.   I sure John has your car keys as well.

ARGUMENT FROM SILENCE
http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/55-argument-from-silence

argumentum e silentio
Description: Drawing a conclusion based on the silence of the opponent, when the opponent is refusing to give evidence for any reason.
Logical Form:
Person 1 claims X is true, then remains silent.
Person 2 then concludes that X must be true.
Example #1:
Jay: Dude, where are my car keys?
Bob: (says nothing)
Jay: I KNEW you took them!

LOL

so, when person A says something racist and then person B says that is racist and person C complains about person B and not a that is supposedly silence?  Dudette, Kopke going after one and not the other of a bilateral conversation cannot be "silence".  I don't even think that arguing from inference is applicable because it was straight out in the open.  Kopke chose to berate only one and not the other. 

Kopke was not "silent" about racist comments, he clearly opposed people pointing out when those he agrees with makes racist comments.

[ducksoup]

I'm thinking that we need a thread for people to take their petty arguments to - instead of hijacking other threads and getting them locked...

Logical fallacy: this topic is not locked.

[excelsior]

http://youtu.be/yBBWUZfgRiw?t=80

Nice time linked video.   I have always wondered why the added time point stops the embedding of the video on here.

[Professor H]

Logical fallacy: this topic is not locked.

But in this case I have the power... (my thread)   

I'd hate to see the bickering spill over and cause it.

Create your own bickering thread or maybe I should -  and direct those there that wish to partake in the senseless exercise of correcting each other to ad nauseum.

[SidecarFlip]

Touche'

[Monroe Native]

But in this case I have the power... (my thread)   

I'd hate to see the bickering spill over and cause it.

Create your own bickering thread or maybe I should -  and direct those there that wish to partake in the senseless exercise of correcting each other to ad nauseum.

What would be a good name for this new thread?

ROMPER  Room?

WWE Main Event?

Three Blind Mice?

GRAMMER Police?

No one's listening, but everyone is talking?

[ducksoup]

But in this case I have the power... (my thread)   

I'd hate to see the bickering spill over and cause it.

Create your own bickering thread or maybe I should -  and direct those there that wish to partake in the senseless exercise of correcting each other to ad nauseum.

Really, people need to go back to talking about lawyer billboards or Prof H will take his ball and run home.

Sorry if your buddy insulting me when I was not posting anywhere landed in your topic.  I should be banned for objecting and answering to it. 

Wow!

[ducksoup]

What would be a good name for this new thread?

ROMPER  Room?

WWE Main Event?

Three Blind Mice?

GRAMMER Police?

No one's listening, but everyone is talking?

But in this case I have the power... (my thread)   

I'd hate to see the bickering spill over and cause it.

Create your own bickering thread or maybe I should -  and direct those there that wish to partake in the senseless exercise of correcting each other to ad nauseum.

Oh, that's right, you are allowed to be a pain ion the butt.  Carry on, he won't take his ball home from you posting like your usual troll self.

Oh, wait, was that bickering about a troll post that was ignored by Prof?  Oh man, now he might run home and cry.

[Professor H]

Really, people need to go back to talking about lawyer billboards or Prof H will take his ball and run home.

Sorry if your buddy insulting me when I was not posting anywhere landed in your topic.  I should be banned for objecting and answering to it. 

Wow!

LOL  it was just a thought -    You took it literal...   and I see in the other thread even started down that road of name calling. 

MN's post was humorous not trolling - not sure how you read it - but I prefer the glass half full version instead of the other.