dsayers Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Which sophist trick burns your bottom the most? For me, it's a toss up between 1) Genocide is for your protection when you call it war. 2) Irrational beliefs passed off as truth claims are to be tolerated. 3) 2+2=4 is YOUR math. 4) I've never used the initiation of the use of force to achieve a single goal in my life, but I believe that we need people that steal from you to protect you from theft and the idea that people can achieve their goals without the initiation of the use of force is the utopian one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruben Zandstra Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 1) I am doing this for you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Beal Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Haha. Well, numbers 2 and 3 are definitely a major source of frustration for me. It's like an attack on truth itself. I don't even know what to say at that point. It doesn't stop me usually, but maybe it should... Because in the immortal words of Boxy: "They be trollin'" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesley Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Because in the immortal words of Boxy: "They be trollin'" AH! Been a while since I've seen Boxxy videos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Lawrence Moore Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 1.) I choose to understand what you said this way. Or any other subjectively blathering where my argument gets criticized because the guy doesn't like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesley Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Yes, we defined that term as X, but some other person might define it as Y, so I am going to argue against you as if you defined it as Y. Re-attempts to focus the terms will not help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsayers Posted January 11, 2014 Author Share Posted January 11, 2014 I guess my empathy must be developing nicely. The debate I was in that sparked me to create this thread was on the subject of the propagandized nobility of war. I've finally found a subject that burns my bottom more than religiosity. Such a horrific act and yet so many people think that not only is it necessary, but it being perpetual, destroying our planet, and bankrupting us all isn't a problem in the slightest. Ugh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexqr1 Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 1) There is more than one logic 2) That sounds good in theory, but it would not work in reality. 3)Hmmmm you are right... let's change the subject then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fractional slacker Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 1) Don't be such a simpleton. The world is more complicated than that. 2) There are no absolutes "4) I've never used the initiation of the use of force to achieve a single goal in my life, but I believe that we need people that steal from you to protect you from theft and the idea that people can achieve their goals without the initiation of the use of force is the utopian one." Warning: tangent ahead. Number 1 and 2 are what a friend likes to tell me whenever I say ethics mean nothing if they aren't universal. He's very much invested in the slimy goo of post modernism. Here is a post he made on FB. He considers himself a 'progressive' democrat. "To the greatest extent possible, feasible, reasonable…at least consciously, we have a moral, ethical requirement to consider the effects of our choices, actions, decisions upon all people, creatures, sentient beings, life, reality...and further, we have an ethical obligation to strive to have our considerations inform our actions. Always." Here is my comment: "I am not sure I understand. Would you care to give a practical example?" (he never responded) Here is a comment from his friend: "I always love your combination of passion, intelligence and high ethical standards! very refreshing at this site where "pets doing the darndest things" rules! (which actually I don't mind too much given that I'm guilty of posting a lot of their funny antics!)" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Lawrence Moore Posted February 2, 2014 Share Posted February 2, 2014 Bumpity. I had a good 2-hour plus discussion with a relativist today. Got a couple more: 1.) Him: "For me, it's like this, and not like that." Me: "So is it this or that?" Him: "It is like this... for me." 2.) "Well, I just don't see it that way." 3.) Me: Attempting to define a term. Him: "You keep trying to define these words when we have totally different meanings for them. I choose to have my meanings and you choose to have yours." Me: "If we don't define the words we're using, that means the words have no meaning and we might as well talk to each other like whigamrigamekalekawhkk." Him: "Well, that's the way I feel sometime." Followed by a pause as if he made a productive statement. 4.) "That's the way it is for you." Oof. -Dylan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts