Posts: 5356
Threads: 178
Joined: June 28, 2015
Reputation:
35
RE: "Men are all pigs"
May 20, 2016 at 12:31 pm
(This post was last modified: May 20, 2016 at 12:32 pm by ErGingerbreadMandude.)
(May 20, 2016 at 11:11 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: (May 20, 2016 at 2:25 am)pool the great Wrote: I'm just saying, if you're going to say two Latin words and declare you are right when the person you're debating is not even well versed in it, when you can instead get your point across in two short sentences, that's pretty fucking dishonest and makes it evident that either you have no interest in a discussion or you're just saving face.
No, it's not dishonest. I expect that as a university student, you know what de jure and de facto mean, or you at least know how to use a dictionary and look them up. I mean, it's not like you're on the Internet and cn find this information in a split-second ... oh, wait, it is like that.
Since you're so stupid you don't seem to know how to use google, I will tell you what those two terms mean: de jure means in [or of] law. De facto means in [or of] fact. Now run along and build the context of my point so that you can understand what is being said. Assuming you can, of course.
Let me know when you want to actually learn how to look up a word, I'll be happy to try to teach you.
(May 20, 2016 at 2:25 am)pool the great Wrote: I was just returning the favor by being as dishonest as you to let you know how it feels. Just don't be surprised when I treat you the way you treat me.
I really don't give a shit about your precious little feelings. You're an idiot who is spouting some really vile shit, and so far as I'm concerned, that means your feelings get no consideration.
(May 20, 2016 at 2:25 am)pool the great Wrote: Here's my second argument as to why you're wrong:
"ne kozapilada payale pakshe ne kedanu urulaleda mahane."
*yawn*
You bore me. Come up with something witty, or stop posting.
Haha, chill out homeboy.
Look at this, this was my post a few pages back in response to your's:
Quote:No its because you answered me with two Latin words, which I don't know the meaning to, are you somehow implying that your laws are sexist?
Which is what my question is right now also, you saying rights are de jure hence feminism implying that your laws are somehow sexist? If yes, provide some examples. If no, wtf are you trying to say anyway?
Posts: 5356
Threads: 178
Joined: June 28, 2015
Reputation:
35
RE: "Men are all pigs"
May 20, 2016 at 12:40 pm
(This post was last modified: May 20, 2016 at 12:48 pm by ErGingerbreadMandude.)
(May 20, 2016 at 12:03 pm)Stimbo Wrote: I couldn't have put it better myself.
Quote:Nope.
You disagreed with me and implied that there was no ad hominem attempts directed at me.
Quote:An ad hominem is an attack on the person making the argument in place of attacking the argument.
Wrong again,
Quote:(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
An argument or reaction directed at me instead of my position. An argument or reaction does not equate to an attack,I don't know where you got that from.
Quote:At most, you are being insulted.
Wrong again.
Read the quote I posted again, maybe this time it'll click.
Quote:(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
Meaning, if someone tells me how sweet I am for treating women the way I treat them by thus redirecting the argument against my position to my person, as in my personality, it is still an ad hominem, meaning insults are not what an Ad hominem equate to. Any reaction or argument directed at my personality rather than my position.
Posts: 5356
Threads: 178
Joined: June 28, 2015
Reputation:
35
RE: "Men are all pigs"
May 20, 2016 at 12:41 pm
(May 20, 2016 at 12:20 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Hahahahaha
HahahahahaHahahahaha :')
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
155
RE: "Men are all pigs"
May 20, 2016 at 1:09 pm
Maybe it's just a language issue, but the definition you gave is practically identical to the one I gave. You're agreeing with me but still trying to be contrary. As for any ad homs against you, well that's for you to demonstrate, isn't it? I'm not doing your homework for you.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 5356
Threads: 178
Joined: June 28, 2015
Reputation:
35
RE: "Men are all pigs"
May 20, 2016 at 1:24 pm
(This post was last modified: May 20, 2016 at 1:25 pm by ErGingerbreadMandude.)
(May 20, 2016 at 1:09 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Maybe it's just a language issue, but the definition you gave is practically identical to the one I gave. You're agreeing with me but still trying to be contrary. As for any ad homs against you, well that's for you to demonstrate, isn't it? I'm not doing your homework for you.
Stimbo, in your mind an ad hominem is an attack at the personality of a person. In reality, an ad hominem is a reaction or argument against the person making the argument instead of the position the person that is making the argument is holding. A reaction or an argument can be favoring or insulting when it is directed at a person, I was pointing out how you equating ad hominem as insults are wrong.
As for the ad hominem attempts at me, I'm not saying you're the one that made them , I'm not saying you didn't make any, but here are a few examples:
"You're an asshole pool"
"you're a douche pool"
"you're young so you don't yet realize why you are wrong yet"
Of course I'm paraphrasing, but it was all very fascinating to see how pool being an asshole and young & naive automatically makes him wrong. If I support laws against child labor will it make me wrong by default too because I'm an asshole and young & naive ? ,I wonder, lol.
Posts: 7045
Threads: 20
Joined: June 17, 2014
Reputation:
55
RE: "Men are all pigs"
May 20, 2016 at 1:27 pm
I think the order that they're working in is that your views on this topic are wrong, and that your adherence to and defense of those views is what makes you an asshole. You're not wrong because you're an asshole, you're an asshole because you hold these wrong views.
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 5356
Threads: 178
Joined: June 28, 2015
Reputation:
35
RE: "Men are all pigs"
May 20, 2016 at 1:36 pm
(May 20, 2016 at 1:27 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: I think the order that they're working in is that your views on this topic are wrong, and that your adherence to and defense of those views is what makes you an asshole. You're not wrong because you're an asshole, you're an asshole because you hold these wrong views.
I hold the view that it is outright dumb for people with equal rights to fight for equal rights.
Is holding that view so much of a sin that I immediately transform into an asshole, I wonder?
Posts: 1494
Threads: 0
Joined: July 26, 2014
Reputation:
14
RE: "Men are all pigs"
May 20, 2016 at 1:41 pm
(May 20, 2016 at 1:36 pm)pool the great Wrote: (May 20, 2016 at 1:27 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: I think the order that they're working in is that your views on this topic are wrong, and that your adherence to and defense of those views is what makes you an asshole. You're not wrong because you're an asshole, you're an asshole because you hold these wrong views.
I hold the view that it is outright dumb for people with equal rights to fight for equal rights.
Is holding that view so much of a sin that I immediately transform into an asshole, I wonder? The movement is not just about equal rights, you should do some research.
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
155
RE: "Men are all pigs"
May 20, 2016 at 2:15 pm
(May 20, 2016 at 1:24 pm)pool the great Wrote: (May 20, 2016 at 1:09 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Maybe it's just a language issue, but the definition you gave is practically identical to the one I gave. You're agreeing with me but still trying to be contrary. As for any ad homs against you, well that's for you to demonstrate, isn't it? I'm not doing your homework for you.
Stimbo, in your mind an ad hominem is an attack at the personality of a person. In reality, an ad hominem is a reaction or argument against the person making the argument instead of the position the person that is making the argument is holding. A reaction or an argument can be favoring or insulting when it is directed at a person, I was pointing out how you equating ad hominem as insults are wrong.
As for the ad hominem attempts at me, I'm not saying you're the one that made them , I'm not saying you didn't make any, but here are a few examples:
"You're an asshole pool"
"you're a douche pool"
"you're young so you don't yet realize why you are wrong yet"
Of course I'm paraphrasing, but it was all very fascinating to see how pool being an asshole and young & naive automatically makes him wrong. If I support laws against child labor will it make me wrong by default too because I'm an asshole and young & naive ? ,I wonder, lol.
Pool, in your mind we disagree, but in actuality if you read my replies carefully you'll see we're saying the same things.
Just for clarification...
P: Here is my argument and/or position.
S: Your argument and/or position is invalid because you pick your nose and eat it.
= ad hominem
P: Here is my argument and/or position.
S: Yeah? Well you're just full of shit.
= insult
Note that only the first example is attempting to discredit your position by attacking you. The second is simply an insult.
Can we end this now, please? I'm running out of ways to agree with you.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 23307
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
105
RE: "Men are all pigs"
May 20, 2016 at 2:16 pm
(This post was last modified: May 20, 2016 at 2:27 pm by Thumpalumpacus.)
(May 20, 2016 at 12:31 pm)pool the great Wrote: Haha, chill out homeboy.
What's funny is that you think I care enough about you to be upset. I'm not upset in the least, because you don't matter to me.
I find your views reprehensible -- I'll wait while you go look that up -- and you're mistaking my distaste for your position as an emotional investment in this conversation.
(May 20, 2016 at 12:31 pm)pool the great Wrote: Haha, chill out homeboy. Look at this, this was my post a few pages back in response to your's:
Quote:No its because you answered me with two Latin words, which I don't know the meaning to, are you somehow implying that your laws are sexist?
Which is what my question is right now also, you saying rights are de jure hence feminism implying that your laws are somehow sexist? If yes, provide some examples. If no, wtf are you trying to say anyway?
[/quote]
My.point is plain as day, and as I've said earlier in this thread, I won't cast pearls before swine. You'll actually have to think ... For a change.
|
