|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: Scrambled Neurons [Re: Xlea321]
#752405 - 07/17/02 02:15 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
...so what else is new...
5 requests later, and still no Maria Sabina quote to back up your hypothesis. Surprising? NO! That would do more to back-up your case, than all of the empty blathering.
...so what else is new...
--------------------
The proof is in the pudding.
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: Scrambled Neurons [Re: MAIA]
#752409 - 07/17/02 02:22 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Words are power budy, they can arise all kind of feelings and thoughts, True enough, but only if those thoughts and feelings already exist inside the writer. The anger someone displays is not created by my words, but revealed. The ad hominem is always a sign of frustration and emotional immaturity.
Why the rhetorical speech ? Why the rhetorical question?
On the contrary, your blind rationalist beliefs ... Someone's inability to back up their claim with their own references, has nothing to do with my beliefs.
--------------------
The proof is in the pudding.
|
MAIA
World-BridgerKartikeya (DftS)
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 7,399
Loc: Erra - 20 Tauri - M45 Sta...
Last seen: 3 months, 27 days
|
Re: Scrambled Neurons [Re: Swami]
#752500 - 07/17/02 04:15 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
"The anger someone displays is not created by my words, but revealed. The ad hominem is always a sign of frustration and emotional immaturity"
No, it's a fallacy, it's related to the nature of the argument itself, it has nothing to do with frustration or immaturity. The reason why an Ad Hominem is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made. On the other hand, you should regard at Ad Hominem Tu Quoque, the fact that a person's claims are not consistent with his actions might indicate that the person is a hypocrite but this does not prove his claims are false. I must confess (due to your systematic use of scientific proves) you have strong deductive arguments but that doesn't make others arguments false, they can be discussed and be very true also, although they incur into more inductive fallacies. "Why the rhetorical question?" Rhetorical ? Wich way ? Now i'm being rhetorical.
"has nothing to do with my beliefs." You're right, change the word "beliefs" to "conclusions".
MAIA
-------------------- Spiritual being, living a human experience ... The Shroomery Mandala
Use, do not abuse; neither abstinence nor excess ever renders man happy.
Voltaire
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: Scrambled Neurons [Re: Swami]
#752514 - 07/17/02 04:30 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Sorry Swami but I told you to read Saint mother of the mushrooms about 3 weeks ago. Have you done so? Or are you happy to stay ignorant?
Try Center of the cyclone while you're at it.
-------------------- Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: Scrambled Neurons [Re: Xlea321]
#752521 - 07/17/02 04:37 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Gee, which is easier, for me to purchase yet another book, or for you to post ONE paragraph from it to whet my appetite?
WHERE, OH WHERE are my beloved aliens?
--------------------
The proof is in the pudding.
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: Scrambled Neurons [Re: Swami]
#753069 - 07/17/02 08:44 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Swami-
Boy are you patient. I would've thrown out one of those forever-functional conversation stoppers a few posts back. My current favorite: Fuck you, shut up.
-------------------- Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
Anonymous
|
Re: Scrambled Neurons [Re: MAIA]
#753101 - 07/17/02 08:55 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
"No, it's a fallacy, it's related to the nature of the argument itself, it has nothing to do with frustration or immaturity. The reason why an Ad Hominem is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made. On the other hand, you should regard at Ad Hominem Tu Quoque, the fact that a person's claims are not consistent with his actions might indicate that the person is a hypocrite but this does not prove his claims are false."
I am very impressed! I think Swami was referring to name-calling in an argument which is a kind of ad hom at times. "You are wrong because you're fat and ugly."
De gustibus non disputantum est.
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: Scrambled Neurons [Re: Swami]
#753351 - 07/17/02 10:41 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I'm trying to educate you Swami. I'm tired of spoon-feeding you because you don't seem to learn anything.
Search the net and see what you find if you are too ignorant to read the book.
-------------------- Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: Scrambled Neurons [Re: Xlea321]
#754493 - 07/17/02 07:03 PM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Now it's Swami who's being spoon-fed?
This is confusing... sounds like ruffled feathers and bunched panties.
-------------------- Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: Scrambled Neurons [Re: Xlea321]
#754524 - 07/17/02 07:08 PM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
if you are too ignorant to read the book
That doesn't even make sense.
--------------------
The proof is in the pudding.
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: Scrambled Neurons [Re: Swami]
#755283 - 07/18/02 04:39 AM (22 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
you are too ignorant to read the book. The knowledge is waiting for you and you refuse to educate yourself.
It's called ignorance.
-------------------- Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
|