(January 24, 2016 at 1:57 pm)phil-lndn Wrote: "Philosobabble" isn't a rational term, it's an (irrational) term that's evidence of defensivity.
With respect, I think the rational conversation is over.
Fine way to take your ball and go home.
My use of philosobabble seems to have been understood. Your claim of defensivity is also laughable in that my use of this pejorative term was quite aggressive supported by my exposition of your confused use of well established terminology. Your continuous, and what I must now conclude intentional, obfuscation when challenged is a more appropriate illustration of defensive behavior. Your interaction to this point is indicative of someone that can't entertain the possibility of being mistaken.
I simply pointed out that you engaged in the same behavior you were criticizing; i.e., vomiting unsupported claims. Instead of supporting your claims you went down the path of rationalizing your behavior and seemingly not affording Hitchens and others the same consideration. This is precisely why I have concluded that in your mind you can never be wrong solidified by the fact that you insinuate that I'm the one being irrational.
