anti-intellectualism

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
FMF: "People can judge for themselves. If they reckon I've got it wrong, then I will respond to their analysis."

notice the appeal to other people when pressed upon for evidence.

No it's an invitation for people to look at my case and the evidence and decide for themselves. Their analysis may well be that I am wrong.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
so they might but I am not interested in whether they think anyone is wrong or right, I am interested in evidence, which you have so far failed to produce.

So you keep saying. Page 7 onwards. That's where the evidence is.

Originally posted by FMF
No it's an invitation for people to look at my case and the evidence and decide for themselves. Their analysis may well be that I am wrong.

what evidence effhim you have not provided any.

Originally posted by FMF
So you keep saying. Page 7 onwards. That's where the evidence is.

then simply cite it so that we can fully understand the thought process which led you to your conclusion.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
then simply cite it so that we can fully understand the thought process which led you to your conclusion.

My thought process: is in my last 3 or 4 posts [prior to going to bed] on this thread. Evidence: your posts from page 7 onwards.

Originally posted by FMF
My thought process: is in my last 3 or 4 posts [prior to going to bed] on this thread. Evidence: your posts from page 7 onwards.

when you cite any specifics let us know so far you have produced nothing and I am therefore forced to conclude that you have nothing but some value you have imbued to your own statements proving that you are simply willing to believe your own propaganda and expect others to believe it as well.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
when you cite any specifics let us know so far you have produced nothing and I am therefore forced to conclude that you have nothing but some value you have imbued to your own statements proving that you are simply willing to believe your own propaganda and expect others to believe it as well.

I think this is a fair statement of your stance and what you have concluded. And I think I have had a fair opportunity to lay out my case too. We have therefore reached a moment where we can both rest on the points we have made. This is good.

-Removed-

spot on for what? you think you can just come along and dumb scriptures on people and hope that they get the sense of why you posted it? Shoddy very shoddy teaching indeed. I always provide an explanation of why I post a verse.

-Removed-

obviously I rely on logic and reason rather than miracles for my knowledge. It seems to me that this dumping scriptures with little or no explanation may be symptomatic of a faith based on emotionalism rather than one based on logic and reason.

-Removed-

no i think you are engaging in emotionalism. the fact that you cannot provide a cohesive answer of why you posted the scripture is proof of that.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
are you saying that chess is not an intellectual activity?

Not the way *you* do it.