It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The Unjustified Hatred of Donald Trump

page: 37
120
<< 34  35  36    38 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 04:56 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Anytime you want to discuss the topic, let me know. Tu quoque.




posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
And you claimed that was hypocrisy, which it isn't.

Wasn't really asking for your opinion.


What evidence? Apparently no one knows the definition of hypocrisy. You were closer with "contradiction", but still missed the mark with that flub.

Popular use usually wins.


People saw the earth as the center of the universe as well. Look how well that turned out.

How what turned out? Beside that's a false equivalence.


Because you keep making baseless accusations.

Actually I only made it once and kept trying to explain it in different ways but you're not having it so, I gave up.

You probably didn't notice that either.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 05:02 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Already explained why nothing I have posted is tu quoque, a few times. What are you having a hard time with?

You probably didn't even get what I was talking about in that particular post.


edit on 3-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 05:05 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




Wasn't really asking for your opinion.


I'm not asking for yours.



Popular use usually wins.


Only in popularity contests. But once again, fallacy.



How what turned out? Beside that's a false equivalence.


It's not a false equivalence.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 05:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Already explained why nothing I have posted is tu quoque, a few times. What are you having a hard time with?

You probably didn't even get what I was talking about in that particular post.



I already explained why you're wrong. Having a tough time with that though, I see.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 05:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
I'm not asking for yours.

Says the person who made a thread on a public forum.


Only in popularity contests. But once again, fallacy.

Not just popularity contests and, fallacy or not, that is the way it works.


It's not a false equivalence.

OK



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 05:08 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I agreed to your original premise so how am I appealing to your hypocrisy to discredit it?



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




Says the person who made a thread on a public forum.


Says the guy who replies to said thread on a public forum.



Not just popularity contests and, fallacy or not, that is the way it works.


That's the way bias and irrationality works, yes.


I agreed to your original premise so how am I appealing to your hypocrisy to discredit it?


You tried to discredit me, for the exact same reasons I stated now 10 times.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
You tried to discredit me, for the exact same reasons I stated now 10 times.

I keep discrediting you, not the premise of the OP. That is why it is not tu quoque. You being a hypocrite doesn't invalidate the premise. The premise being correct and you acting like a hypocrite is what I'm pointing out. Not just this thread either.

Simple question and answer
edit on 3-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




I keep discrediting you, not the premise of the OP. That is why it is not tu quoque. You being a hypocrite doesn't invalidate the premise. The premise being correct and you acting like a hypocrite is what I'm pointing out. Not just this thread either.


Exactly. You're supposed to discredit the premise of the OP. Discrediting me is ad hom.

"Pronounced too-kwo-kwee. Literally translating as 'you too' this fallacy is also known as the appeal to hypocrisy. It is commonly employed as an effective red herring because it takes the heat off someone having to defend their argument, and instead shifts the focus back on to the person making the criticism."

Tu Quoque

"Tu Quoque is a very common fallacy in which one attempts to defend oneself or another from criticism by turning the critique back against the accuser. This is a classic Red Herring since whether the accuser is guilty of the same, or a similar, wrong is irrelevant to the truth of the original charge. However, as a diversionary tactic, Tu Quoque can be very effective, since the accuser is put on the defensive, and frequently feels compelled to defend against the accusation."

Tu Quoque

"Definition of tu quoque
: a retort charging an adversary with being or doing what he criticizes in others"



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 05:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Exactly. You're supposed to discredit the premise of the OP. Discrediting me is ad hom.

Mudpit, any questions?


"Tu Quoque is a very common fallacy in which one attempts to defend oneself or another from criticism by turning the critique back against the accuser.

It sure is. Of course, I'm not doing that, I called you a hypocrite. I'm not defending myself or anyone else either.

When you seek to discredit the premise you appeal to hypocrisy. When you call someone a hypocrite you uphold one premise and post a contradictory premise. I did just that.

You claimed that they were different. I disagree.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




It sure is. Of course, I'm not doing that, I called you a hypocrite. I'm not defending myself or anyone else either.

When you seek to discredit the premise you appeal to hypocrisy. When you call someone a hypocrite you uphold one premise and post a contradictory premise. I did just that.

You claimed that they were different. I disagree.


Except one wasn't a premise. For your charge of hypocrisy to have any weight, you'd have to prove my behavior does not conform to moral standards I claim to have. You haven't done that.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 05:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Except one wasn't a premise.

Not for the OP but it was one for my argument.

I could have pulled something from another thread or even what I posted earlier, where you were complaining about me being off-topic but had no problem with others being off-topic and even joined in the talk about breathing rates and Trump's accent.


edit on 3-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik



Not for the OP but it was one for my argument.

I could have pulled something from another thread or even what I posted earlier where you are complaining about me being off-topic but have no problem with others and even do so yourself speaking about breathing reates and trumps accent.


Responding to off-topic posts shouldn't imply that I am unwilling or unable to discuss the OP. I wasn't complaining about you being off-topic—we've been off-topic this whole time—I was complaining about you being unable or unwilling to remain on topic. Once again, straw-man.

Again, I'm not sure you know what hypocrisy means, but the sliver of my OP that you're so focused on is irony



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

These two things don't mean the same thing to you?


I was complaining about you being unable or unwilling to remain on topic.


you were complaining about me being off-topic


If they don't then I have nothing else to say.


Again, I'm not sure you know what hypocrisy means, but the sliver of my OP that you're so focused on is irony

It isn't about the sliver in the OP. It is about you, as shown in your entire posting history. The above text is "another" example of that.


edit on 3-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Maybe you do not understand, but it is quite clear from the so-called hypocrisy you quoted.

"Some people can only argue off-topic. It saves them from having to deal with the topic."

Have you argued anything on topic?

Compare your answer to the answer of this question:

Have I argued anything on topic?

The answer to the first one: no you haven't.

The answer to the second one: yes I have.

You've got nothing.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It was about you complaining not about you sometimes being on topic.

Besides in that "simple question and answer" post I was on topic. Guess that makes the answer to the first question, pulled out of thin air, incorrect.

If only it was correct you might have almost as much as I have.


edit on 3-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Ad hom, red herrings, strawmen, appeals to hypocrisy, and now straight up whining. In all your posts you have contributed nothing andhave proven nothing. You flatter me by wanting me to be the topic, even though it's obsessive to a servile degree, but I cannot compete with such sophistry. Does it ever end?



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 06:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Ad hom, red herrings, strawmen, appeals to hypocrisy, and now straight up whining. In all your posts you have contributed nothing andhave proven nothing. You flatter me by wanting me to be the topic, even though it's obsessive to a servile degree, but I cannot compete with such sophistry. Does it ever end?

Whining? You can add that to your growing list of complaints that don't mean anything.

Don't feel bad, in this post alone you have used hyperbole, ad hom, red herring, a strawman and even straight up whining. You are getting there.

Sophistry? Maybe it takes one to know one?



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 06:56 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik



Whining? You can add that to your growing list of complaints that don't mean anything.

Don't feel bad, in this post alone you have used hyperbole, ad hom, red herring, a strawman and even straight up whining. You are getting there.

Sophistry? Maybe it takes one to know one?


Yes whining. That's not a complaint; that's a criticism.

Look at you go. Can dish it out but cannot handle it.



new topics




 
120
<< 34  35  36    38 >>

log in

join