2
   

Why should consequences matter?

 
 
Thomas
 
  2  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2015 07:00 pm
@layman,
layman wrote:
Statistics, eh? But who trusts them? Michael Mann proved how worthless they can be, didn't he?

No he didn't.

layman wrote:
They let you come to any (pre-chosen) conclusions you want, eh?

No they don't.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  3  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2015 07:49 pm
@layman,
layman wrote:
Between this thread and the other thread you seem very determined to tell me what I am. Do you have some reason for this that you're not disclosing.

In other words, what's your real bitch?

Despite the contrived, inconsistent, and frankly offensive shuck-and-jive persona that you have inexplicably adopted, you seem to be a reasonably intelligent person. In the area of philosophy, however, you're definitely trying to punch way above your weight class. Your posts here and elsewhere betray a fundamental unfamiliarity with the basics of morality. Consequently, your questions don't even rise to sophomoric - they're freshmanic at best. You attempt to pose as someone who is genuinely interested in pursuing answers, but you're really only interested in scoring cheap points - a task that you will ultimately find futile because your shallow knowledge of the subject matter will allow even the dullest participant in these threads to run rings around you. Your inconsistency with regard to your own personal beliefs is simply one aspect of your general inability, not to mention unwillingness, to grapple honestly with the topic at hand. As a result, your contributions are at once obnoxiously contentious and obtuse. That you have no problem wasting everyone else's time with your juvenile antics is no surprise, but it's baffling why you're so seemingly eager to waste your own.

And that, sonny, is my "bitch."
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2015 08:02 pm
@layman,
Welcome to statistical justice Hell layman.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2015 08:42 pm
@joefromchicago,
Quote:
And that, sonny, is my "bitch."


Heh, that's what I thought. Bedazzle us with your philosophical expertise now, willya? So far you have mainly said nothing, and what little you have said shows very little sophistication.

Don't hold back, now, Joey. Bedazzle us. Say something OF SUBSTANCE for once, eh?
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2015 10:18 pm
@layman,
If you want examples of my philosophical expertise, you are free to search my posting history. I had a debate with Debra Law a decade ago regarding the law of attempts that you might find enlightening.

As for discussing this particular topic with you, I've already explained that I won't waste my time. You have nothing to contribute to the discussion.
layman
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2015 11:23 pm
@joefromchicago,
Quote:
If you want examples of my philosophical expertise, you are free to search my posting history. I had a debate with Debra Law a decade ago


1. I didn't see any "philosophy" in that discussion
2. It looks like she kicked your ass in that debate for not knowing the difference between a permissible inference and a burden-shifting rebuttable presumption
3. You say "mens rea" is an element of every crime, and yet you want to portray me as "confused" for saying that both intent and consequences are at issue in MY interpretation of MY post.

you want to pretend someone else is disingenuous!? Go figure, eh?
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2015 11:33 pm
@Thomas,
Quote:
In my extreme, hypothetical case of the murder attempt by voodoo doll, no deterrence is necessary at all.


Kinda strange Thomas. Joey posted a link to a past thread where you participated. You brought up this very same "voodoo doll" hypothetical there.

You were told that it could be prosecuted as an attempted murder in most jurisdictions because factual impossibility is not generally a defense to a crime.

You THEN said that would make perfect sense to you, BECAUSE deterrence was called for.

As I noted, that's exactly what your prior rationale, as previously offered in this thread, would seem to call for.

But now you deny your former position (in the past thread). How come?

0 Replies
 
layman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 15 Dec, 2015 11:45 pm
@joefromchicago,
Quote:
As for discussing this particular topic with you, I've already explained that I won't waste my time


You refuse to "waste your time" in this thread and then represent that you have no intention of participating in any discussion, YET you keep dropping in to make feeble attempts to portray me in an inferior light.

What's up with that, I wonder? Could it be this:

Quote:
Joey said: You attempt to pose as someone who is genuinely interested in pursuing answers, but you're really only interested in scoring cheap points


I can see where you might be quite knowledgeable about such tactics, eh? But that doesn't mean everyone is like you, ya know?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/25/2021 at 09:59:07