|
|
| Post Number: 11
|
Bozeman 
Guardian
Group: Members
Posts: 762
Joined: Jun. 2000
|
 |
Posted on: May 24 2002,15:30 |
|
   |
Strawman arguements are presenting two sides of an arguement, but presentingthe one you don't like weakly, si it can be attacked. Based on this, I believe DSL was not using the strawman. His posts do not convey both sides of anything, they are statements. Catknight is innocent of this crime as well; his "strawman" quotes are 1-2 sentences long. Theyr'e statements, not strawman arguements. Perhaps Veistran meant that these were strawman arguements in context to the thread. In this case, I'd need to go back and read the threads, which I won't do because I don't give a rat's ass.
--------------
It's the pop-o-matic bubble, motherfucker!
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 12
|
CatKnight
Jedi Republican
Group: Members
Posts: 3807
Joined: Dec. 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 24 2002,18:53 |
|
 |
Viestran, you did a good job but aren't quite right. First of all, neither of us made a straw-man fallacy. A straw-man fallacy is when you misrepresent the opponent's position so that you can knock it down more easily, and then say you won the argument. Here is an example of a real straw-man fallacy:
"To be an atheist, you have to believe with absolute certainty that there is no God. In order to convince yourself with absolute certainty, you must examine all the Universe and all the places where God could possibly be. Since you obviously haven't, your position is indefensible."
What DSL did was Argumentum ad hominem, slandering the arguer instead of making points and counter-points. When DSL can't argue that liberals are indeed idiots, he slanders us by saying things like conservatives are evil, etc.
Those quotes of mine you took were not fallacies at all, you took them out of context. The first one, I did ask people a bunch of questions, to which they replied with flames instead of answers. The second one was also in context, as I was directly arguing for moral absolutism and saying how other cultures WERE evil, from an absolute point of view.
--------------
[url=http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/d/b/dbl125/dfa.jpg]If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful that you can possibly imagine.[/url]
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 13
|
CatKnight
Jedi Republican
Group: Members
Posts: 3807
Joined: Dec. 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 24 2002,19:20 |
|
|
I like the description of the ad hominem from your site better then on the one I used.
http://www.nizkor.org/feature....em.html
If I could get all liberals to read this and understand it, the country would be a better place. 
--------------
[url=http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/d/b/dbl125/dfa.jpg]If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful that you can possibly imagine.[/url]
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 14
|
demonk
The other white meat
Group: Members
Posts: 800
Joined: Aug. 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 24 2002,19:39 |
|
|
Definition
1. What is a liberal?
The word has a number of meanings, all of which reflect aspects of liberal thought. These include "favorable to progress and reform, as in religious or political affairs"; "favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties"; "open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc."; and "characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts". [Random House Dictionary of the English Language]. Liberals want to change things to increase personal freedom and tolerance, and are willing to empower government to the extent necessary to achieve those ends.
This was taken from the following website:
http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/people....on.html
Just want to make sure we all agree on what we are befor we proceed to slander each other again.
--------------
I'm just two people short of a threesome!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 15
|
CatKnight
Jedi Republican
Group: Members
Posts: 3807
Joined: Dec. 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 24 2002,19:52 |
|
|
we already discussed this before. I could care less about the definition of the word liberal. I am more concerned with their grave actions then their so-called ideaology of intellectualism.
If they wanted to increase personal freedom, why would they be trying to ban guns, pass more and more laws (such as the anti-midget-tossing law in florida), etc
If they wanted to increase tolerance, why would they create such ideas such as homophobe and hate speech, which don't exist? why would they convict whites who commit crimes against blacks of a hate crime, but not blacks for doing the same? why would jesse jackson be extorting buisness out of millions?
"Empower the government to the extent nescessary" should be read as "empower the government to the extent possible"
"characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts". yeah, give generous amounts of money to dependant citizens, at the expense of the middle-class and upper-class taxpayers!
lastly, I ask you, what is wrong with traditional and conventional ideas? if it ain't broke, don't fix it. especially, if it ain't broke, don't break it and claim you are fixing it, but need even more money to do so! (philly public schools)
--------------
[url=http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/d/b/dbl125/dfa.jpg]If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful that you can possibly imagine.[/url]
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 16
|
demonk
The other white meat
Group: Members
Posts: 800
Joined: Aug. 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 24 2002,20:07 |
|
|
Well CK, you just summed up what is wrong with conservatives.
Our country is not alright. If you think so, then you are not taking a real look at the world, or your view has been severally clouded by your parties propaganda. There are some seriously wrong things in our country. I'm not going to pretend to know the answers, but I know that what we have done in the past is not working. If you do go to that website I linked to, you will find many things explaining what liberals think and what they think the government's role in this world is. They do say that there is no one way that liberals stand on all the issues, so I do not doubt that you will run into the kind of people that you characterize all liberals as being.
Also, you just used a Strawman attack CK. You mentioned several "cases" of liberal activities that you do not agree with (hell, most PEOPLE, including most liberals, don't agree with their actions). These cases were easy for you to defeat, and thus claim victory that your views on liberals were right and that conversitive thought is the "right way". So, since you used the strawman attack, your argument is invalid. Please stick to the points, and not pull up "examples" of liberal actions that everyone can agree are bad. I can always pull out "examples" of people who identify themselves as conservatives doing things that would make most people's blood boil with rage and then claim that all conversative are like this and therefore conservatism is wrong. But I don't, because that would be a strawman attack. I prefer to look at the whole picture of the conservative parties and to look at how they are moving as a group. That way, individual actions get canceled out and you see the real intent and purpose behind them.
--------------
I'm just two people short of a threesome!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 17
|
CatKnight
Jedi Republican
Group: Members
Posts: 3807
Joined: Dec. 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 24 2002,20:20 |
|
|
stop saying strawman. i didn't use any straw man fallacies at all. here is your problem. you are going to some liberal website which is promoting the virtues of liberalism in an abstract context. I could care less about what liberals WANT to do or how they WANT to make the world a better place. I am most concerned with WHAT they do and HOW they do it. Those examples I poined out are not a couple of extreme cases, they are the norm of the democratic party's practices and strategies. Another problem with what you said is that you mentioned "there are lots of things wrong with this country", without saying any explicit examples, and implying that conservatives 'were behind it'. Furthermore, you critisize me using examples isntead of sticking to the abstract ideaologies! Do you not see what is wrong with your reasoning? I challenge you now, to give me several examples of what is wrong with this country today, name some possible solution, and name which party is doing what about it. Use this format to make it explicitly clear what you mean.
1-Problem
2-possible solution
3-what republicans are doing
4-what democrats are doing
--------------
[url=http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/d/b/dbl125/dfa.jpg]If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful that you can possibly imagine.[/url]
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 18
|
demonk
The other white meat
Group: Members
Posts: 800
Joined: Aug. 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 24 2002,20:28 |
|
|
I'm done talking to CK. I cannot have an intelligent discussion with him. I tried very hard to be rational, calm, and to address the points in his argument. And then he comes back with anger and generalities.
Here is a tip CK: learn to turn off your emotions. When you come at people with that much emotion, no matter how well you make your argument, all the people hear is your emotion. When I read your post, all I could hear was your anger. All that leads to is undermining your argument and position, and makes people not want to argue with you.
--------------
I'm just two people short of a threesome!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 19
|
CatKnight
Jedi Republican
Group: Members
Posts: 3807
Joined: Dec. 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 24 2002,20:45 |
|
|
I love how when it really gets down to the real issues, the liberals run and hide. if you thought my post was emotional and yours not so, you must have serious personal issues. the only anger you heard was your own, borne out of frustration with being wrong but not being able to come to terms with the truth. yeah, the only anger you heard was your own reflecting right back at you.
just in case some over-zealous moderater decides this is a flame, let me clarify one thing. I tried to have a rational argument. the best demonk could come up with was a flame about how irrational I was. Pretty sad, I think.
Edited by CatKnight on Jan. 01 1970,01:00
--------------
[url=http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/d/b/dbl125/dfa.jpg]If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful that you can possibly imagine.[/url]
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 20
|
editor
forum whore
Group: Members
Posts: 0
Joined: Jan. 2002
|
|
Posted on: May 24 2002,20:52 |
|
|
Actually I'm just sitting here enjoying the show.
CK, Dys was all over that spurious CK-thing.
He got me on ICQ right away.
Guess he doesn't like the idea of two of you!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
