Another example of BS statistics and Strawmen, in the guns debate
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-05-2013, 05:41 AM
Re: Another example of BS statistics and Strawmen, in the guns debate
No, I was asking him that question. Sorry about that.

Him being TrulyX

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2013, 10:41 AM (This post was last modified: 04-05-2013 10:54 AM by TrulyX.)
RE: Another example of BS statistics and Strawmen, in the guns debate
(02-05-2013 06:14 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Truly X, what I've understood from you is that you think 'the people' have rights, but only if it conforms with your ideals. If you don't like something the the rights are stripped, which isn't rights at all. For example, from what I understand of your position,

You have the right to free speech, unless you want to say something extraordinarily offensive, then your right is no longer valid.

That defeats the whole points of the right to free speech. Did I understand you correctly? Do you think these rights are only universal when it's something you like or agree with?

No. That's not my view.

With regard to 'the people', my view is that's a collective, by definition. Whether or not a description of the collective applies to each of the individuals, separately and distinctively from the collective, is determined by context.

With regard to 'rights', the context within which the rights were granted, in principle, both textually and circumstantially, especially concerning the Constitution, determines how the rights apply, in practice.

(02-05-2013 06:52 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  What? Was this an attempt to just be a fucking asshole or were you trying to make a point?

Both.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2013, 12:45 PM
Re: Another example of BS statistics and Strawmen, in the guns debate
To whom were you addressing?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2013, 06:37 PM
RE: Another example of BS statistics and Strawmen, in the guns debate
(04-05-2013 12:45 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  To whom were you addressing?

It was in response to you, particularly; but the frustration and sentiment was general.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-05-2013, 05:05 AM
Re: Another example of BS statistics and Strawmen, in the guns debate
I call you on your bullshit, and you get defensive. Is this your strategy for making salient points? If so, how is that working for you?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-05-2013, 08:29 AM (This post was last modified: 05-05-2013 08:35 AM by TrulyX.)
RE: Another example of BS statistics and Strawmen, in the guns debate
(05-05-2013 05:05 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I call you on your bullshit, and you get defensive. Is this your strategy for making salient points? If so, how is that working for you?

You didn't call me on any bullshit. You simply used bullshit as a means to attempt to make it seem as if that were the case.

You were just throwing out non sequitur remarks.

After a while it just gets annoying. It makes having any discussion pointless. I was making the broad point, that if bullshit is what I'm going to get, it must be what I should be expected to give in return.

My strategy had to work out very well. You noticed that the point must have been directed at you (no one else questioned or assumed it was made toward them), you noticed that it had sentiments of both being an asshole and making a point, and you responded back.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-05-2013, 08:55 AM
RE: Another example of BS statistics and Strawmen, in the guns debate
The big problem was that I was just pointing out something with regard to a small point, not disagreeing with every thing you were saying. Even a lot of the comments and points you added, in response, were just kind of irrelevant to me.

It really wasn't even a big deal. Your original comment, that I first responded to, was just in a way undermining the larger point I was making prior to that comment being made.

I just added in a point for clarity, yet you responded in a way that seemed as if you thought I was attacking your entire point of view, never really addressing the small point I made, while adding in a lot of extras with which I wasn't even concerned.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-05-2013, 10:31 AM
Re: Another example of BS statistics and Strawmen, in the guns debate
Your comment made no discernible point, and was likely just ignored by everyone else who were uninterested in responding. If you have to justify it and explain it in multiple paragraphs, it didn't work.

Your attempted use of math to prove a point was bullshit. That's not how math works, and not how logical arguments work. I was pointing that out for 2 reasons. 1) you discredit yourself, and by extension, your argument when you do so and 2) in a debate that is not about math or statistics, you turn people's interest off by trying to throw around equations.

My intentions were to point it out so as to generate improvement in your argument and for you to have a go at it again in a better way.

But I suppose you just see that my reply is longer than one to two sentences and so all you see must is bullshit bullshit bullshit bullshit bullshit bullshit. Your debate skills lack something to be desired. And I'd rather not have an ineffective asshole trying to debate against me or with me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-05-2013, 10:45 AM
RE: Another example of BS statistics and Strawmen, in the guns debate
[Image: kkpbmv7axf1rq9gpljadh4exo1-500.jpg]

[Image: upside1.jpg]

[Image: upside-down-dogs.jpg]

Your arguments are now invalid

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Revenant77x's post
05-05-2013, 04:40 PM
RE: Another example of BS statistics and Strawmen, in the guns debate
(05-05-2013 10:31 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Your comment made no discernible point, and was likely just ignored by everyone else who were uninterested in responding. If you have to justify it and explain it in multiple paragraphs, it didn't work.

Your attempted use of math to prove a point was bullshit. That's not how math works, and not how logical arguments work. I was pointing that out for 2 reasons. 1) you discredit yourself, and by extension, your argument when you do so and 2) in a debate that is not about math or statistics, you turn people's interest off by trying to throw around equations.

My intentions were to point it out so as to generate improvement in your argument and for you to have a go at it again in a better way.

But I suppose you just see that my reply is longer than one to two sentences and so all you see must is bullshit bullshit bullshit bullshit bullshit bullshit. Your debate skills lack something to be desired. And I'd rather not have an ineffective asshole trying to debate against me or with me.

No, you would rather not debate with a person who can recognize when you use invalid arguments and make irrelevant points. Also, I was never debating with you. I was just making a point and really never had a legitimate, defined disagreement with you. If you had a disagreement with me, I hope you don't call your display debating, because I still don't know with what, concerning my point, you are disagreeing.

Arguing against a counterexample (if my point was even counter to your view) by making personal attacks and attempts to discredit, or not recognizing that math symbolically represented the exact same logic as the counterexamples and making more irrelevant attempts to discredit that, with points that didn't even attempt to address the actual counterexamples, isn't debating.

There is honesty and then there is fallacy. You need to try a little more of the former and a lot less of the latter.

Do you want to talk about something not working? What is this thread about again? A lot of the proposals you support for guns are likely irrational, asinine, impractical, counterproductive, irrelevant to societal progress and depending upon your interpretation of our constitution likely, blatantly unconstitutional and/or contradictory. How is that working out for you Piers? I hope very well.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: