(December 21, 2015 at 8:26 pm)Cato Wrote:(December 21, 2015 at 3:39 pm)Delicate Wrote: I don't think you're following the line of argument.
What's as yet unexplained is what problem Cato has with my argument, given that he can't express an objection.
Did you not understand my reference to Hume's guillotine? Or are you simply incapable of seeing its immediate applicability to the is/ought you established in your justice example? I thought the argument would be understood by someone that hurled a 'problem of induction' grenade in another conversation (the problem predates Hume of course, but his is the most famous and thorough treatment).
Not only did I succinctly express my objection, but simultaneously unveiled your ignorance notwithstanding your constant reminders of your intellectual superiority.
Yes, our self-appointed "Forum Logician and Philosophy Enthusiast" seems extremely lacking in their field. Someone who is butchering all of the most basic of logical fallacies in their arguments, then claiming to be a "forum logician" - - wow, that's like a janitor claiming to be a brain surgeon because he mops the floor of the OR. Unless . . . unless! - - this is a troll, and they are all being deliberately used!!! Oh wow . . . Delicate is actually an atheist, working through stupid examples of logical fallacies as an intellectual exercise, and using disrespectful childish insults as part of the cover!!
"The family that prays together...is brainwashing their children."- Albert Einstein
