Does The Left Honestly Support Our Troops?

Foxfyre wrote:

Making notes:

Jabs are automatically ad hominem attacks or insults to be reported as violations of TOS.

Some believe Sixth Graders should be consulted on national and global policy.

Add this one. Taking everything literally is stupid.

0 Replies

DrewDad wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
If what you say is true, then it violates the Terms of Use and should be reported as such.

I stated my personal feelings. I did not, for example, tell him to "quit being an idiot."

Glass houses, McG.

I throw far too many stones to live in a glass house. Cool

0 Replies

Kicky wrote

Quote:

Add this one. Taking everything literally is stupid

Yes, isn't it.

0 Replies

Yes, it is.

(Let's see how many times we can do this before you read back and realize that you jumped in here without knowing what you were talking about. I'm betting on infinity.)

0 Replies

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=53751&highlight=

0 Replies

Kicky writes

Quote:

(Let's see how many times we can do this before you read back and realize that you jumped in here without knowing what you were talking about. I'm betting on infinity

And when will you realize that I was no more serious than anybody else in these analogies, but you apparently took me literally?

0 Replies

Proof of my tenet that Brandon doesn't apply the same standard to himself as he does to others.

Brandon9000 wrote:

parados wrote:

Because your standard is subjective, you change it based on your support for a war

Please show an example of me doing this in some post. By the way, your advocacy of infanticide for the children of the poor makes me sick.

Brandon9000 wrote:

DrewDad wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
To accusing another member of something for which you have not one iota of evidence is immoral.

Immoral? Are you kidding me? Can you explain exactly how your system of ethics makes you believe that such a thing is immoral?

Also, It's fun to watch you try to play your "prove it or retract it" game against something that doesn't require proof.

If you cannot see that accusing another member of something for which you can show no evidence is both unethical and logically invalid, then I probably can't help you. Most people would call that self-evident. I'm sure you do find it amusing, but support for dishonest debating practices reflects no credit on you.

I guess Brandon has conclusively proved that he is more than willing to act both unethically and illogically.

0 Replies

And when will you realize that...oh forget it. I don't want to go on and on with this...

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
You are guilty of Conflating the issue of Bush/America, Brandon, not to mention moral bankruptcy and intellecutal idiocy. Quit playing stupid, for you are not.

And no, I'm not going to waste my time to go find posts to 'prove it to you,' because I frankly don't give a damn what you think about anything.

The quality of your posts has made my conclusions quite evident. I suggest that you go back and look at your OWN posts if you want evidence of your failings.

Cycloptichorn

To accuse someone of believing something that he says he does not believe, and for which you can present no evidence is improper and an invalid debating technique.

Funny statement there Brandon. You have consistently done that to my posts in this thread.

So, I can safely assume then Brandon that you agree with me that you use invalid debating techniques by accusing me of believing something I don't believe and then supplying no evidence? Or is this just another example supporting my tenet that you apply standards in a very subjective manner?

0 Replies

dys,

The answer would be "yes."

let me rephrase that and speak for everyone here... "YES"
:wink:

0 Replies

DrewDad wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

DrewDad wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
DrewDad wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
To accusing another member of something for which you have not one iota of evidence is immoral.

Immoral? Are you kidding me? Can you explain exactly how your system of ethics makes you believe that such a thing is immoral?

Also, It's fun to watch you try to play your "prove it or retract it" game against something that doesn't require proof.

If you cannot see that accusing another member of something for which you can show no evidence is both unethical and logically invalid, then I probably can't help you. Most people would call that self-evident. I'm sure you do find it amusing, but support for dishonest debating practices reflects no credit on you.

[bMost people would laugh at you for resorting to claiming something is self-evident when you constantly require others to back up their claims.

Talk about dishonest.

And talk about reflecting no credit on you.[/b]

Really?

Really. You hold yourself to a lower standard. You are intellectually dishonest. And immoral by your self-proclaimed standard.

Brandon9000 wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
If you cannot see that accusing another member of something for which you can show no evidence is both unethical and logically invalid, then I probably can't help you. Most people would call that self-evident.

You want me to prove that this is self-evident? You think that it isn't???

You made a global statement ("it is immoral") and then used a subjective standard ("it is self-evident"). I'll take the answer to my question ("Can you explain exactly how your system of ethics makes you believe that such a thing is immoral?") as a "no."

Brandon9000 wrote:
DrewDad wrote:
I should think that the contempt I have for you is self-evident.

I really couldn't say, but it isn't relevant to valid debate.

You are correct. But since I'm not debating you, it is a moot point.

1. I said:

Brandon9000 wrote:

To accusing another member of something for which you have not one iota of evidence is immoral.

You then replied:

DrewDad wrote:

Immoral? Are you kidding me? Can you explain exactly how your system of ethics makes you believe that such a thing is immoral?

It is indeed self-evident that accusing someone of unworthy behavior without the ability to support the accusation, in fact with no evidence at all, is immoral. If you do not agree, then in the eyes of any mentally normal reader of these posts, it is your problem and yours alone.

2. You said:

DrewDad wrote:

You hold yourself to a lower standard. You are intellectually dishonest. And immoral by your self-proclaimed standard.

but gave no examples whatever of what you are referring to. This is about like me telling you "Your monstrous crimes against humanity be remembered for generations." It sounds nice, but has no significance without a specification of what is being referred to.

To accuse with no evidence, or make generic accusations without specifying how the person in question has done what you say is the quintessence of false character assasination. It's sad that you choose to post on this level, and any fair reader will know exactly what's going on here.

0 Replies

DrewDad wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
DD said it perfectly, Brandon:

Quote:
I should think that the contempt I have for you is self-evident.

Cycloptichorn

Your posts now consist mostly of ad hominems. This is not really something of which to be proud. Maybe you've got some great argument that this is now valid or commendable debating style.

As this post was not an attempt at debate, this logically can not be an ad hominem. Try to keep up.

Since I was in the middle of a debate with him which extended back for several posts, it is clear that it was part of an attempt at debate. If you disagree, please explain how an insult inserted in the middle of a debate is not an ad hominem. Have a nice day.

0 Replies

Oh, there wasn't any debate going on at all.

You seem to believe that I am caught up in the Bush/America debate that others were having with you. I am not. I am merely pointing out that you are not morally qualified to hold these discussions any longer, in my opinion, which I'm sure you could care less about.

Therefore the term 'ad hominem' doesn't really apply to this situation. Though I'm not surprised in the slightest that you make this error.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

parados wrote:

Proof of my tenet that Brandon doesn't apply the same standard to himself as he does to others.

Brandon9000 wrote:
parados wrote:

Because your standard is subjective, you change it based on your support for a war

Please show an example of me doing this in some post. By the way, your advocacy of infanticide for the children of the poor makes me sick.

Brandon9000 wrote:
DrewDad wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
To accusing another member of something for which you have not one iota of evidence is immoral.

Immoral? Are you kidding me? Can you explain exactly how your system of ethics makes you believe that such a thing is immoral?

Also, It's fun to watch you try to play your "prove it or retract it" game against something that doesn't require proof.

If you cannot see that accusing another member of something for which you can show no evidence is both unethical and logically invalid, then I probably can't help you. Most people would call that self-evident. I'm sure you do find it amusing, but support for dishonest debating practices reflects no credit on you.

I guess Brandon has conclusively proved that he is more than willing to act both unethically and illogically.

You know, it seems to me that among the various people I debate here, you stand out as someone whose chosen method of debate is obfuscation. This is really despicable. In many cases on this board, I get the feeling that I am dealing with heated, but honest disagreement, but with you, I often get the feeling that your intention is actually dishonest. I have, for example, had some of my most bitter and personal debates with Setanta, but I have no recollection of getting the feeling that he didn't believe what he was saying. The same for most of the other liberals, but not so with you.

In this particular case, for example, after telling you many times that accusation with no evidence is improper and that you should stop it, I illustrated what you do by making an absurd and obviously false accusation against you for which clearly there could be no evidence. Anyone with half an ounce of sense would understand perfectly that that was what I was doing, and that it didn't constitute an actual accusation. I can tell that you're intelligent, and so I assume that you understood this clearly too. Yet you appear to have no qualms over dishonestly holding it up as an example of me violating my injunction against accusing without evidence.

If this analysis of you is correct, it means that you are perfectly willing to try to win a debate based on using an intentionally false argument. I have to believe that even most of my liberal opponents on this board, even people who dislike me personally, would not be okay with such a tactic, and I urge them to consider your behavior and whether they wish to be associated with you.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Oh, there wasn't any debate going on at all.

You seem to believe that I am caught up in the Bush/America debate that others were having with you. I am not. I am merely pointing out that you are not morally qualified to hold these discussions any longer, in my opinion, which I'm sure you could care less about.

Therefore the term 'ad hominem' doesn't really apply to this situation. Though I'm not surprised in the slightest that you make this error.

Cycloptichorn

Upon closer examination of your recent posts to me, I see that you are correct.

You were not debating with me, and so your comments could not really be considered to be ad hominems, except in the broader sense of perhaps trying to harm my effectiveness in future arguments by impeaching my character now. By the way, that's not going to happen. But, as I was saying, what you have been doing in your posts to me in this thread is better described as accusation without example or foundation. Most would agree that that is probably even more unethical than ad hominems.

0 Replies

The foundation for my accusation can be found by perusing your past posts. There is a convienent search function which makes this easy to do.

I suggest that if you want to debate, and follow debate rules, then you should go to the Debate Room. This is a Discussion forum. Learn the difference.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

1. I said:
Brandon9000 wrote:
To accusing another member of something for which you have not one iota of evidence is immoral.

You then replied:

DrewDad wrote:

Immoral? Are you kidding me? Can you explain exactly how your system of ethics makes you believe that such a thing is immoral?

It is indeed self-evident that accusing someone of unworthy behavior without the ability to support the accusation, in fact with no evidence at all, is immoral. If you do not agree, then in the eyes of any mentally normal reader of these posts, it is your problem and yours alone.

You are wrong here on so many levels that it's laughable.

1. Accusing someone without the ability to support it is not immoral. The accusation may or may not be true; the inability to prove the assertion does not automatically prove the assertion false. I refer you to Gödel's Theorem. (Knowingly making a false accusation would be immoral; making an accusation that you honestly believe but is false is not immoral.)

2. This particular claim that something is self-evidently true is demonstrably false.

3. This casts doubt over all other claims you make that something is self-evident.

0 Replies

DrewDad wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
1. I said:
Brandon9000 wrote:
To accusing another member of something for which you have not one iota of evidence is immoral.

You then replied:

DrewDad wrote:

Immoral? Are you kidding me? Can you explain exactly how your system of ethics makes you believe that such a thing is immoral?

It is indeed self-evident that accusing someone of unworthy behavior without the ability to support the accusation, in fact with no evidence at all, is immoral. If you do not agree, then in the eyes of any mentally normal reader of these posts, it is your problem and yours alone.

You are wrong here on so many levels that it's laughable.

1. Accusing someone without the ability to support it is not immoral. The accusation may or may not be true; the inability to prove the assertion does not automatically prove the assertion false. I refer you to Gödel's Theorem. (Knowingly making a false accusation would be immoral; making an accusation that you honestly believe but is false is not immoral.)

2. This particular claim that something is self-evidently true is demonstrably false.

3. This casts doubt over all other claims you make that something is self-evident.

#1. As you say, the inability to prove the assertion does not automatically prove the assertion false. Yes, I agree. But one should hardly accuse someone of bad behavior merely because one has no proof that the accusation is false. To accuse a person of something bad with zero evidence is immoral, because you could easily be making a false accusation. Virtually everyone will agree that to make a public accusation, you ought to have at least a shred of evidence. If you want to disagree, it's going to hurt your reputation, not mine.

#2. I have stated that it is self-evident that accusing with no facts is immoral. You disagree. Go ahead and disagree. It's kind of amusing to see you try to argue a completely indefensible position.

#3. Actually, your position that it's okay to accuse someone with no scrap of proof casts doubt on your judgement and ethics, not mine.

0 Replies

Unfortunately, these threads are becoming more and more common as the righties desperately try to deflect the enormity of what Bush has done in Iraq. Sending troops into an unjust war based on a complete pack of lies by NO MEANS indicates support of our troops IMO. On the contrary, I have several family friends with relatives over in Iraq, and they are as adamently against the war as I am. But we hope and pray that these servicemen come home unscathed. We also continue to fight for better armor and protection, and for better veteran's benefits for when these men and women come home forever scarred by a BS war.

The righties will fail in the attempt as the truth continues to come forth regarding the Bush lies.

0 Replies

Dookiestix wrote:

Unfortunately, these threads are becoming more and more common as the righties desperately try to deflect the enormity of what Bush has done in Iraq. Sending troops into an unjust war based on a complete pack of lies by NO MEANS indicates support of our troops IMO. On the contrary, I have several family friends with relatives over in Iraq, and they are as adamently against the war as I am. But we hope and pray that these servicemen come home unscathed. We also continue to fight for better armor and protection, and for better veteran's benefits for when these men and women come home forever scarred by a BS war.

The righties will fail in the attempt as the truth continues to come forth regarding the Bush lies.

Keep saying that to yourself and maybe others will start to beleive you. When you can come up with solid evidence of what you say is true then we will have something. Until then you are of the minority and will continue to stay that way. Have fun.

0 Replies

Does The Left Honestly Support Our Troops?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know