He made an assertion, a statement of fact, which is not a subjective "I think" statement. I simply asked for his justification for the proposition. If he has any good reason for believing the proposition that "[Politicians] all corrupt or will be corrupt given enough power and time." he will have no problem providing it.
Of course it's a ridiculous assertion, and asking for (not requiring) justification is an effective way to point that out.
If he could provide valid justification for the assertion I would be obliged to agree.
Do you think it is dumb to ask someone to justify their assertions? If so i'm not sure why you have a problem with any position at all from assertions of a God to those that a free-market will self-regulate, after all any well supported belief is necessarily justified, so if you don't care about justification you don't care about well supported beliefs - We both know that's not what you think, so why the double standard?
Of course it's a ridiculous assertion, and asking for (not requiring) justification is an effective way to point that out.
If he could provide valid justification for the assertion I would be obliged to agree.
Do you think it is dumb to ask someone to justify their assertions? If so i'm not sure why you have a problem with any position at all from assertions of a God to those that a free-market will self-regulate, after all any well supported belief is necessarily justified, so if you don't care about justification you don't care about well supported beliefs - We both know that's not what you think, so why the double standard?
.
