(cache) It's just an argumentum ad hominem fallacy. : iamverysmart

[–]Bobmuffins 18 ポイント19 ポイント20 ポイント 7 時間前

固定リンク

[–]SonnyBlack90 10 ポイント11 ポイント12 ポイント 6 時間前

[+]lorddeathhhh スコアが基準値未満のコメント (25 子コメント)

[–]Bobmuffins 7 ポイント8 ポイント9 ポイント 3 時間前*

Why, exactly, would I take advice from a TRP user who actively tries to get on this subreddit?

Here's a few choice quotes of yours:

Earnest inquiry, are you afflicted with autism? Why would me saying what year I defended my thesis convince you? That will prove naught. Neither will showing a copy of a thesis or dissertation that I can easily procure from a local library or university.

Me incontrovertibly triumphing in our ephemeral discourse via sound logic and potent contentions evinces otherwise. Furthermore, I have a strikingly arduous time believing that you are well-versed in literature seeing as you don't even employ possessive apostrophes:

Thou art gratis to generate conjectures, nevertheless, fathom they are erroneous suppositions. I write lionized essays regarding postmodern poetry for several Ivy League schools so I implore thee to not endeavor to school me in the topic of figures of speech -- it will only end in your demise.

Like, dude, wearing out your thesaurus isn't something to be proud of. It's not a mark of intelligence to have unintelligible writing, rather, it's a mark of intelligence to have your writing be legible by everyone.

No one is impressed with you, we're all laughing.

-edit-

holy shit you're a gross transphobe too please leave

[+]lorddeathhhh スコアが基準値未満のコメント (22 子コメント)

[–]Bobmuffins 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 2 時間前*

Secondly, you are employing a potent argumentum ad hominem by discrediting my posits just because I visit TRP once every week.

Okay, no, considering how that is an environment that loves posts like this, that make your thesaurus seem factory new.

in my cyclopean lexicon inside of my daunting mind.

okay but you realize the cyclops wasn't at all smart right

so... noice

also literally anyone could do this, spending 5 seconds trying to decide which word to use. guess why we don't though

Unfortunately for you, autists with execrable reading comprehensions and dearth of intellects are not my target audience.

Then get the fuck off this website please, or the entirety of society, because there is nowhere where your kind of speech is lauded, or even wanted.

Also, nice, so you're both transphobic and ableist, you're shaping up to be a real great human being.

Oops, no wait, I lied.

You speak for every single person that reads my posts?

Considering how many of your posts are downvoted and have replies laughing at you for pulling this bullshit, yes. Hell, there's entire threads on /r/thebluepill dedicated to laughing at you for this, and there is never anyone there defending you. Except yourself, I guess.

[–]lorddeathhhh -5 ポイント-4 ポイント-3 ポイント 2 時間前*

"Okay, no, considering how that is an environment that loves posts like this, that make your thesaurus seem factory new." Why are you pigeonholing me within a group of people? Is it perchance because you don't posses even one logical leg to stand on? I am neither every red pill poster nor like every red pill poster: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition. By the way, I find it extraordinary risible that there is a subreddit (which you are most likely subscribed to) dedicated to scoffing at /r/theredpill because if they attempt to employ their illogical, delusional, acerbic retorts in /r/theredpill they get downvoted and/or banned for trying to fabricate their own narratives that are unequivocally erroneous and oftentimes suppress the facts that directly oppose said narratives.

"okay but you realize the cyclops wasn't at all smart right so... noice" Okay, but you realize words have multiple definitions: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cyclopean -- cyclopean (adj) : huge, massive.

"Then get the fuck off this website please, or the entirety of society, because there is nowhere where your kind of speech is lauded, or even wanted." You don't own reddit just because you are vociferous, opinionated, and autistic. That's not how the site works and that's not how the real world works. It's time to grow up and leave your fantasy macrocosm. You realize that there are a bounteous number of subreddits which espouse flowery and intelligent language, correct? To assert that you speak for everyone by saying my "kind of speech" is not welcome in most subreddits is overtly myopic and dogmatic.

"Also, nice, so you're both transphobic and ableist, you're shaping up to be a real great human being." I'm neither of those things. I just don't especially like it when the LBGT community defile the English language just so they can ensconce from the truths of biology and not get their special snowflake feelfeels hurt. The veracity pangs and ignoring the facts rarely makes them go away.

"Oops, no wait, I lied." Thank you for further evincing that you only associate with fellow autists. Most normal people know how to perfunctorily detect sarcasm without having to be told it was sarcasm.

"Considering how many of your posts are downvoted and have replies laughing at you for pulling this bullshit, yes." So you are just going to ignore all the posts that have positive karma scores or hybridized scores in accordance with your dispiriting confirmation bias? How's the view atop your Brobdingnagian tower of delusions? Care to cast more argumentums ad incredulum?

[–]autowikibot 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 2 時間前

Fallacy of composition:

The fallacy of composition arises when one infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some part of the whole (or even of every proper part). For example: "This fragment of metal cannot be fractured with a hammer, therefore the machine of which it is a part cannot be fractured with a hammer." This is clearly fallacious, because many machines can be broken apart, without any of those parts being able to be fractured.

This fallacy is often confused with the fallacy of hasty generalization, in which an unwarranted inference is made from a statement about a sample to a statement about the population from which it is drawn.

The fallacy of composition is the converse of the fallacy of division.

^Interesting: ^Fallacy ^of ^division ^| ^Paradox ^of ^thrift ^| ^Fallacy ^of ^distribution ^| ^Cambridge ^capital ^controversy

^Parent ^commenter ^can ^toggle ^NSFW ^or ^delete^. ^Will ^also ^delete ^on ^comment ^score ^of ^-1 ^or ^less. ^| ^FAQs ^| ^Mods ^| ^Magic ^Words

[–]Bobmuffins 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 2 時間前

[–]jackierama 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 時間前

[–]lorddeathhhh 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 時間前

[–]jackierama 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 時間前

このスレッドの続きを見る

[–]lorddeathhhh -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント 1 時間前*

"I'm not going to put any effort into trying to read what you're saying anymore, dude." You axiomatically capitulate and abjure all previous fallacious contentions then: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/onesided.html. I'm terribly sorry that big words and profound concepts hurt your minute mind. I have faith that mayhap one day you will abscond from your edifice of delusions and throw up your perfidious blue pill.

"Fuck you for having ~the english language~ being more important to you than actual people. Fuck you, fuck your priorities, and fuck your lack of empathy." You are strawmanning my puissant conjecture. I never claimed that language was more important than people, ergo employing your yellow journalistic, disdainful words will have no effect on me or anyone with satisfactory acumen. I'm saying that not letting language get utterly brutalized is more important than the feelfeels of some confused, deranged people. Would you have empathy for the Hitler of the English language (the LBGT community)?

"I'm sure you're going to declare yourself victorious here." Forsooth. When you avoid even attempting to counter over half of my contentions or acknowledge their existences it does not make it challenging to become the victor. This discourse was the intellectual version of Usain Bolt racing against the fastest runners of the Special Olympics.

"Also, for someone who cares so much about the language, why do you have no idea what "autistic" even means?" Care to elaborate on why I am wrong? You should visit your homepage one more time to brush up on the wide spectrum of autism before further besmirching yourself: http://www.autismspeaks.org/.

[–]Godwins_Law_Bot 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 時間前

Hello, I am Godwin's law bot!

I'm calculating how long on average it takes for hitler to be mentioned.

	Mean Seconds	Mean Hours	Median Seconds	Median Hours
This post	23325.0	6
Average over 5238 posts	171572	47	15897	4

Current High Score: 2 seconds

Number of bans this bot has recieved: 150

Number of times this bot has been replied to with the only content being the word hitler: 53

Graph of average over time available at www.plot.ly/~floatingghost/0

RAW data available at Post limit, maximum pastes per 24h reached

No new high score, try again next time.

[–]woahmanitsme 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 時間前

[–]autowikibot 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 3 時間前

Poisoning the well:

Poisoning the well (or attempting to poison the well) is a rhetorical device where adverse information about a target is pre-emptively presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting or ridiculing everything that the target person is about to say. Poisoning the well can be a special case of argumentum ad hominem, and the term was first used with this sense by John Henry Newman in his work Apologia Pro Vita Sua (1864). The origin of the term lies in well poisoning, an ancient wartime practice of pouring poison into sources of fresh water before an invading army, to diminish the attacking army's strength.

^Interesting: ^Stargate ^Atlantis ^(season ¹⁾ ^| ^Well ^poisoning ^| ^Poison ^the ^Well ^(band)