(December 15, 2010 at 4:31 pm)lrh9 Wrote: 1) I never said you shouldn't ask. If that's really what you think I said this whole exchange has been obfuscatory bs.
I think you need to look up obfuscation.
And you said "Yes it's dumb to ask anyone to justify their assertions"
Quote:2) My not caring means a lot. It means I'm not going to do anything I don't have to do.
Granted, it doesn't however have any impact on whether or not my asking for justification was appropriate/reasonable.
Quote:3) Good luck asking for it then. I still think it's dumb. Your "caring" means nothing.
1. It's not "dumb", most of the time we get an answer (or at least an attempt) and that was all I asked for.
2. If you think asking for justification is dumb I have to wonder how you manage to have an argument period.
Quote:4) I care about me.
Besides the point
Quote:5) He should wise up.
Aren't you a bitter Betty? It's sort of how debate and argument works, I make a claim, if the other person does not agree they can ask me to justify my claim. Without this process or justification being offered with the argument, nothing can happen.
In case you didn't notice we've been justifying our positions to each other this whole time.
Self-refutation is a bitch, no?
Quote:6) Hardly. Values, all though they can explain why someone supports a position, cannot logically justify that position.
I never said they could, in fact it's often not possible. Values can be (in some models) logically described, but values don't "logically justify" things. Demonstrating a sound and valid argument in support of a position does however justify it.
However, personal values have no impact on the statement in question, that again being "[Politicians] are all corrupt or will be corrupt given enough power and time."
What part of that statement of objective fact (ie it is either true or false) depends on personal value? Absolutely none of it.
Quote:7) Simply because something can be described logically doesn't mean it logically proves anything significant, nor does it logically justify that thing.
If I can logically "describe" a phenomenon (with a sound and valid argument) then it necessarily proves the description of the phenomenon in question is sound and valid
Quote:I broke my own rule. I'm not going to persist in this madness. I have to justify myself to no one.
Your argument is the only sign of madness here.
And i'm not sure you know what Justification means in this context, you don't justify yourself so much as you justify a belief or action. This is a matter of belief so we are necessarily talking about Epistemic justification - whether or not the belief in question is reasonable.
.
