bleeding heart Posted April 23, 2014 Report Share Posted April 23, 2014 It's a reasonable response, AC...revising older thread is not illegitimate, and obviously no one has to respond in any case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accountability Now Posted April 23, 2014 Report Share Posted April 23, 2014 It's a reasonable response, AC...revising older thread is not illegitimate, and obviously no one has to respond in any case. It's reasonable when it's a one line response not the continuation of a very in depth conversation. Regardless, I posted that to let him know why I wasn't responding as I've seen him get distraught in other threads when people don't respond to his posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted April 23, 2014 Report Share Posted April 23, 2014 It's reasonable when it's a one line response not the continuation of a very in depth conversation. Regardless, I posted that to let him know why I wasn't responding as I've seen him get distraught in other threads when people don't respond to his posts. Your choice... What other threads? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accountability Now Posted April 24, 2014 Report Share Posted April 24, 2014 Your choice... What other threads? How about this one? Over 2 weeks, 72 views, 0 replies... This wasn't an April Fool's joke, in case anyone was confused. I guess hoping for a discussion on climate change that is anything above people regurgitating unjustified political talking points was hoping for too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted April 24, 2014 Report Share Posted April 24, 2014 @ Accountability Now - What is wrong with commenting in your own thread after 2 weeks if you get no replies (especially given the quality of the original post)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accountability Now Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 @ Accountability Now - What is wrong with commenting in your own thread after 2 weeks if you get no replies (especially given the quality of the original post)? Most people at that point would realize their thread didn't garner any interest and move on. You on the other hand couldn't stand not having someone bite on your thesis paper. Like I said, you get distraught when people don't respond which is why I told you I wasn't going to engage you after you took two months off from the conversation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Most people at that point would realize their thread didn't garner any interest and move on. Argumentum Ad Populum Fallacy. You on the other hand couldn't stand not having someone bite on your thesis paper. Like I said, you get distraught when people don't respond which is why I told you I wasn't going to engage you after you took two months off from the conversation. Do you have the ability to read minds over the internet? No. So then why do you make these unjustified claims? Why do you feel the need for unnecessary character attacks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Argumentum Ad Populum Fallacy. Actually, no. He's just saying nobody was interested in your thread, so move on. He didn't say your arguments were false because nobody believed them. It's not a logical fallacy. He's reminding you that nobody was interested in discussing the topic, which evidence shows was true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 I do know the feeling when you have spent serious effort and care in constructing a detailed argument....and watch it spin off into the darkness. However, I should also add that very, very, very few posters are ever going to be interested in investing so much time in a post...with no idea of the quality of the payoff (whatever the evident seriousness and care in the construction of said post). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Can you really not understand the difference between a empirical world power with clear rules and laws and a bunch of disorganized tribes spread out across a large area? An appeal to authority....I'll be damned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accountability Now Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Argumentum Ad Populum Fallacy. Actually, no. He's just saying nobody was interested in your thread, so move on. He didn't say your arguments were false because nobody believed them. It's not a logical fallacy. He's reminding you that nobody was interested in discussing the topic, which evidence shows was true. Exactly. I didn't even bother reading that thread so I couldn't tell you if its right or wrong. I just know that most people would have moved on. Additionally, most people wouldn't have written 7800 words for an initial thread. Conversations happen or they don't....you can't force them. They just flow...if you don't leave the conversation for two months. Do you have the ability to read minds over the internet? No. So then why do you make these unjustified claims? Why do you feel the need for unnecessary character attacks? I don't need to read minds. I have provided you proof of what I am claiming. Its not unjustified nor is it incorrect. If you take it as a character attack then that's too bad. I'm simply pointing out the fact that you don't like it when people don't acknowledge you. Perhaps this speaks to arrogance or a self serving philosophy that you carry out on these forums but I have not suggested that nor am I implying it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 (edited) Actually, no. He's just saying nobody was interested in your thread, so move on. The implication was that I should 'move on' because 'most people' would. That is an implicit fallacy and I am not most people. An appeal to authority....I'll be damned. That is not an appeal to authority fallacy. I just know that most people would have moved on. Additionally, most people wouldn't have written 7800 words for an initial thread. I am not 'most people'. I don't need to read minds. I have provided you proof of what I am claiming. Its not unjustified nor is it incorrect. If you take it as a character attack then that's too bad. I'm simply pointing out the fact that you don't like it when people don't acknowledge you. You are trying to 'read between the lines' of what I write on an internet forum in order to make claims about my emotional state. Claiming things like I am 'distraught' or 'can't stand certain things'. You just don't have sufficient evidence to make these claims and I assure you that these claims are wrong. Why not just take what I type literally? Edited April 25, 2014 by -1=e^ipi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 -1=e^ipi: I'm baffled by your brief response to my comment...did you misread it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accountability Now Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 I am not 'most people'. I can tell. You are trying to 'read between the lines' of what I write on an internet forum in order to make claims about my emotional state. Claiming things like I am 'distraught' or 'can't stand certain things'. You just don't have sufficient evidence to make these claims and I assure you that these claims are wrong. Why noyour t just take what I type literally? How am I reading between the lines? You put your silly sad face emoticons twice. Distraught...yes indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 I'm baffled by your brief response to my comment...did you misread it? Sorry, my fault, I misread what you wrote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 How am I reading between the lines? You put your silly sad face emoticons twice. Distraught...yes indeed. I think you give too much value to emoticons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 No worries. For what it's worth, I was implying a compliment on the care, detail and effort that is evidently in your post, if we're referring to the very lengthy one you posted (which I admit I barely skimmed...to my point that it was too long. And in case you see this as a criticism, let me amend it: too long for my taste.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 That is not an appeal to authority fallacy. It's definitely wrong - might doesn't make right and if you're making the case it really does, then I suppose what you're committing is more like a submission to authority fallacy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 Ya right...you walk away from the argument over two months ago and now you expect people to dive back into it? Get real. oh my! He threw that 'tl/dr' 7800 word wizardry post at me... after his 3 month 'walk away'... calling me out twice to engage him over it. So clingy, so needy! And honest, I haven't been purposely ignoring that initial post (or that separate thread he eventually turned the initial post into) - certainly not! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 It's definitely wrong - might doesn't make right and if you're making the case it really does, then I suppose what you're committing is more like a submission to authority fallacy. We were talking about what does and does not have a clear legal system (Imperial Japan vs the 'Natives' in Canada before Europeans came). There are objective measures one can observe (is there a central authority? are there clear laws? can one get prosecuted for committing crimes? are the laws enforced by employees of the state?) to determine if a society has a clear legal system or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 Yes and the point of limiting the discussion to the terms and measures you used is to delegitimize how native people dealt with justice or injustice, especially regarding their rights to the land vis a vis the British. It's easy to not observe something when you really don't want to see it. There are lots of subjective measures and ways to observe things too. Simply putting yourself in a native's moccasins for example would have cleared up all sorts ambiguity about what was right or wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 blah blah cultural relativism Hunter gatherer societies tend not to have clear legal systems. What does that have to do with being able to determine 'what was right or wrong' or how people deal 'with justice and injustice'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 blah blah blah academic relativism Societies that displace hunter gatherers tend not to have clear moral systems. What that did when determining what was right, wrong, just or unjust in Canada is what we're still dealing with today and might still can't seem to get it right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted April 27, 2014 Report Share Posted April 27, 2014 Societies that displace hunter gatherers tend not to have clear moral systems. And the moon is made of cheese. Look, I can do nonsense assertions as well! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted April 27, 2014 Report Share Posted April 27, 2014 In the meantime might still hasn't been made right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.