1. Joined
    24 Apr '10
    Moves
    14626
    21 Jul '16 10:58
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    " I'd rather live by American standards than Romanian."
    which is another way of saying that "as long as american standards are better than romania, there is no need to fix anything"

    not to mention that was never the question. you just tried to insult me like a child
    " I'd rather live by American standards than Romanian."
    which is another way of saying that "as long as american standards are better than romania, there is no need to fix anything"


    Wow. Are you being obtuse on purpose?

    I'd also rather live in Romania than in North-Korea. Do you think that from now on I no longer consider the Romanian human rights violations a problem?
  2. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    21 Jul '16 10:59
    Originally posted by Great King Rat
    So when you post a random news story about police brutality it's alright, but when I do it, it isn't?
    that's not what you did. you RESPONDED to my random news story with a non-random wiki page about Romanian police brutality as if something bad happening someplace else (that happens to be the country of the one you responded it) has any relevance to the original story.


    it was an ad hominem, and a clumsy one at that.
  3. Joined
    24 Apr '10
    Moves
    14626
    21 Jul '16 11:00
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    that's not what you did. you RESPONDED to my random news story with a non-random wiki page about Romanian police brutality as if something bad happening someplace else (that happens to be the country of the one you responded it) has any relevance to the original story.


    it was an ad hominem, and a clumsy one at that.
    Both posts deal with Police Brutality. The relevance is obvious.
  4. Joined
    24 Apr '10
    Moves
    14626
    21 Jul '16 11:01
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    there is no problem with american police. nothing needs to be done.
    So, is this also an Ad Hominem, or not? I'm confused.
  5. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    21 Jul '16 11:03
    Originally posted by Great King Rat
    So, is this also an Ad Hominem, or not? I'm confused.
    you are indeed confused. it happens when you don't know the meaning of certain terms.

    i advise looking it up on wikipedia for a quick definition. that should be enough to explain why it is not an ad hominem.
  6. Joined
    24 Apr '10
    Moves
    14626
    21 Jul '16 11:05
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    you are indeed confused. it happens when you don't know the meaning of certain terms.

    i advise looking it up on wikipedia for a quick definition. that should be enough to explain why it is not an ad hominem.
    Kindly explain, pls.

    - Person X implies something is wrong with American police brutality... not an Ad Hominem.
    - Person Y responds by implying something is wrong with Romanian police brutality... an Ad Hominem.
  7. Joined
    24 Apr '10
    Moves
    14626
    21 Jul '16 11:10
    Man, an accusation of False dichotomy and Ad Hominem in about 2 hours time. I wonder how many more "Debates Class 101" terms I'm gonna get flung at me.

    Think I'll try for a Godwin next.
  8. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    21 Jul '16 11:10
    Originally posted by Great King Rat
    No, it isn't. I directly responded to Zahlanzi's "romania is the example to live by. no need to set the bar any higher" by saying I'd rather live by American standards than Romanian. I didn't imply that American standards were therefore good (enough).
    Actually you did imply it whether intentionally or not.
  9. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    21 Jul '16 11:131 edit
    Originally posted by Great King Rat
    Both posts deal with Police Brutality. The relevance is obvious.
    Clearly the intended context was not obvious and you would have done well to provide clarification. In fact, it is still not obvious.
  10. Joined
    24 Apr '10
    Moves
    14626
    21 Jul '16 11:13
    "Fascist political forces such as the Iron Guard rose in popularity and power, urging an alliance with Nazi Germany and its allies. As the military fortunes of Romania's two main guarantors of territorial integrity — France and Britain — crumbled in the Fall of France, the government of Romania turned to Germany in hopes of a similar guarantee"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romania_in_World_War_II

    Ugh!!! Gross!! Romania sided with the Nazis!
  11. Joined
    24 Apr '10
    Moves
    14626
    21 Jul '16 11:151 edit
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Actually you did imply it whether intentionally or not.
    Jesus Christ Monkeyballs.

    Read the bolded part man.

    No, I'd rather live by American standards. Bad, don't get me wrong. But not nearly as bad as Romania.
  12. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    21 Jul '16 11:19
    Originally posted by Great King Rat
    Kindly explain, pls.

    - Person X implies something is wrong with American police brutality... not an Ad Hominem.
    - Person Y responds by implying something is wrong with Romanian police brutality... an Ad Hominem.
    sure, i'll be happy to oblige. i much rather be talking about your ignorance and inability to grasp simple logic than another horrible event that again would have been ignored.

    person X implies something is wrong with american police brutality, giving yet another example of a trigger happy police officer. X isn't attacking anyone on anything not related to american police brutality

    person Y comes along and posts something about Romanian police brutality just because person X is Romanian. romanian police brutality has nothing to do with american police brutality, solving one won't affect the other. each has different causes so understanding one won't affect the other.

    the only reason person Y mentioned romanian police brutality was to attack the person X and not the argument that X was making. therefore, Ad Hominem.


    if anything i said still doesn't get through to you, make sure you read the definition of ad hominem, to actually know what the hell you are talking about before saying more stupid crap.
  13. Joined
    24 Apr '10
    Moves
    14626
    21 Jul '16 11:23
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    ...the argument that X was making. therefore, Ad Hominem.
    Lucky for me, X was not making any kind of argument though. Just a random news story.
  14. Joined
    24 Apr '10
    Moves
    14626
    21 Jul '16 11:26
    Originally posted by finnegan
    https://www.facebook.com/shaunking/videos/1092909104081340/

    Deal with it.
    Deal with what, exactly?

    What is it that you want me to do with "Zahlanzi's Wacky News Story Of The Day"?
  15. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    21 Jul '16 11:31
    Originally posted by Great King Rat
    Lucky for me, X was not making any kind of argument though. Just a random news story.
    "yet another example of police brutality, of a man shot by a scared little coward with insufficient training"

    argument: american police needs to undergo reforms so that this kind of "random news story" (please be more of an insensitive douche, you are too subtle) happen less.


    also, the nonexistence of an argument still doesn't mean you didn't commit Ad hominem in yours. you still attacked the person rather than the "random news story"
Back to Top