|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Sept 11, 2024 13:53:29 GMT
I know you know. And the fact that you are asking means you are playing games. It also means you know the verdicts, but in your professional, legal opinion, you do not agree with them. What is that? You're NOT a lawyer? You do NOT have a law degree? You were NOT in the courtrooms? Did NOT hear the evidence? Yeah, we know EXACTLY what you think, and why. And NONE OF IT has to do with evidence, or respect for the judicial system. Freon More appeal to authority. I notice when I try to use this fallacy against you, as a mirror, you pretend that it doesn't matter if others with expertise say something you disagree with. Which, again, shows you to be one of the most intellectually dishonest people on the forum. |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 11, 2024 15:09:39 GMT
I know you know. And the fact that you are asking means you are playing games. It also means you know the verdicts, but in your professional, legal opinion, you do not agree with them. What is that? You're NOT a lawyer? You do NOT have a law degree? You were NOT in the courtrooms? Did NOT hear the evidence? Yeah, we know EXACTLY what you think, and why. And NONE OF IT has to do with evidence, or respect for the judicial system. Freon More appeal to authority. I notice when I try to use this fallacy against you, as a mirror, you pretend that it doesn't matter if others with expertise say something you disagree with. Which, again, shows you to be one of the most intellectually dishonest people on the forum. An 'appeal to authority' is not a fallacy. You've decided it is, I'm sure you have your reasons, but it is not intrinsically a negative. Also, I do not see an expert in a field as an 'authority', which to me implies someone with the legal means of enforcing something. It's the difference between a lawyer, who has legal expertise, and a police officer, who knows some law, but has the ability to enforce it. Were an officer to express a legal opinion, it would have less weight and accuracy to me, then a lawyer. But what you are saying is that those with less training and knowledge, should be viewed as equals to those who do have them. And considering you are one of the people WITH that lack of training and knowledge, what I really hear is your own whining that it's not fair that those who became experts in their fields, who dedicated huge parts of their lives to learning, are given more respect than you, who gave NOTHING to it. But hey, you do you, man. If you want to listen to a lay person vs an expert when making critical decisions, that's your choice. Just don't expect the rest of us to follow you. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Sept 11, 2024 16:04:40 GMT
More appeal to authority. I notice when I try to use this fallacy against you, as a mirror, you pretend that it doesn't matter if others with expertise say something you disagree with. Which, again, shows you to be one of the most intellectually dishonest people on the forum. An 'appeal to authority' is not a fallacy. You've decided it is, I'm sure you have your reasons, but it is not intrinsically a negative. Yes it is. It is the basis of nearly all of your arguments. Sometimes called an argument from authority fallacy. If you actually provided an argument with sources and data as well, then it would no longer be an appeal to authority. But just saying "YOU NO UNDERSTAND DATA AND INFORMATION I WIN" or "YOU ARE NOT A LAWYER SO I WIN" is just an argument from authority. Have a pleasant day. |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 11, 2024 17:09:04 GMT
An 'appeal to authority' is not a fallacy. You've decided it is, I'm sure you have your reasons, but it is not intrinsically a negative. Yes it is. It is the basis of nearly all of your arguments. Sometimes called an argument from authority fallacy. If you actually provided an argument with sources and data as well, then it would no longer be an appeal to authority. But just saying "YOU NO UNDERSTAND DATA AND INFORMATION I WIN" or "YOU ARE NOT A LAWYER SO I WIN" is just an argument from authority. Have a pleasant day. Ahh, you don't like the fact that data and information are different. That's not authority. That is generally accepted fact. If ONLY experts and authorities said that, maybe you could see it that way, but this is just you not being educated enough to know. I would call it common sense, but it appears that our versions of that are very different. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Sept 11, 2024 17:20:04 GMT
Yes it is. It is the basis of nearly all of your arguments. Sometimes called an argument from authority fallacy. If you actually provided an argument with sources and data as well, then it would no longer be an appeal to authority. But just saying "YOU NO UNDERSTAND DATA AND INFORMATION I WIN" or "YOU ARE NOT A LAWYER SO I WIN" is just an argument from authority. Have a pleasant day. Ahh, you don't like the fact that data and information are different. Lol that’s demonstrably not what I said. But I’m not surprised that’s how you understood it. |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 11, 2024 17:22:37 GMT
Ahh, you don't like the fact that data and information are different. Lol that’s demonstrably not what I said. But I’m not surprised that’s how you understood it. Ok, then, it sounds like we're done. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Sept 11, 2024 17:26:08 GMT
Lol that’s demonstrably not what I said. But I’m not surprised that’s how you understood it. Ok, then, it sounds like we're done. Freon I don’t even think you ever got started outside of fallacies and childish interpretations of my meaning lol. Rabbit: Hey freon. “You don’t know about data and information I win!” is not an argument. Freon: ARE YOU SAYING YOU DONT LIKE DATA AND INFORMATION BEING DIFFERENT??” lol. But sure. You are dismissed. |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 11, 2024 17:28:45 GMT
Ok, then, it sounds like we're done. Freon I don’t even think you ever got started outside of fallacies and childish interpretations of my meaning lol. Rabbit: Hey freon. “You don’t know about data and information I win!” is not an argument. Freon: ARE YOU SAYING YOU DONT LIKE DATA AND INFORMATION BEING DIFFERENT??” lol. But sure. You are dismissed. Again, besides your complaining, you've not asked me anything, or provided something for me to respond to. Freon |
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 20,530
|
Post by thor on Sept 11, 2024 18:08:47 GMT
More appeal to authority. I notice when I try to use this fallacy against you, as a mirror, you pretend that it doesn't matter if others with expertise say something you disagree with. Which, again, shows you to be one of the most intellectually dishonest people on the forum. An 'appeal to authority' is not a fallacy. You've decided it is, I'm sure you have your reasons, but it is not intrinsically a negative. Also, I do not see an expert in a field as an 'authority', which to me implies someone with the legal means of enforcing something. It's the difference between a lawyer, who has legal expertise, and a police officer, who knows some law, but has the ability to enforce it. Were an officer to express a legal opinion, it would have less weight and accuracy to me, then a lawyer. But what you are saying is that those with less training and knowledge, should be viewed as equals to those who do have them. And considering you are one of the people WITH that lack of training and knowledge, what I really hear is your own whining that it's not fair that those who became experts in their fields, who dedicated huge parts of their lives to learning, are given more respect than you, who gave NOTHING to it. But hey, you do you, man. If you want to listen to a lay person vs an expert when making critical decisions, that's your choice. Just don't expect the rest of us to follow you. Freon Isaac Asimov had the Fobbits (et al) of America pegged years ago: “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” |
|
|
|
Post by Fiddler on Sept 11, 2024 18:23:04 GMT
Lot of people with mental health issues these days. Accusations are meaningless without evidence. That’s the only way for a society to endure. Sometimes that’s fucked up, but if you head the other direction it accelerates the sociopaths taking over political power. For the left all one has to do is “believe” someone committed rape to convict. Evidence is not necessary. For the Cult all one has to do is “believe” someone is innocent.. . Having evidence they are is never enough .. |
|
