Originally posted by ivanhoeI'm fine discussing these issues with folks who are capable of reasoned discussion. I'm happy discussing these issues with Lucifer H., for instance. I just think you're too dense to bother with.
It comes across to me that you are not at all at ease discussing these and related issues. You constantly use "humour" to avoid adressing them.
1 edit
Originally posted by bbarrYou are becoming increasingly not at ease ..... and you can tell for yourself why ..... can't you Bbarr ? A degrading and insulting Ad Hominem on me cannot conceal that.
I'm fine discussing these issues with folks who are capable of reasoned discussion. I'm happy discussing these issues with Lucifer H., for instance. I just think you're too dense to bother with.
By the way, your obvious and obviously fallacious tactics of "divide and rule" will not bare any fruits whatsoever.
Originally posted by ivanhoeJust hold on there. If a christian posts on hell-fire and damnation specifying how atheists such as myself are immoral and heading for the flames then I find this offensive. If they specify that my children, brought up outside the church, are candidates for hell then I find this offensive. However, I truly believe in toleration, sadly the toleration I extend to others is not returned.
RHP is a private business, a chess community. Everybody has the right to freely express his or her opinions unless it violates the ToS.
Purposely and structurally devoting a whole thread on offending a part of the RHP community is simply not done according to the ToS.
Maybe you should join other organisations where such obvious bigotry is bon ton.
Originally posted by ivanhoewhat part of RHP are child molesting priests?
RHP is a private business, a chess community. Everybody has the right to freely express his or her opinions unless it violates the ToS.
Purposely and structurally devoting a whole thread on offending a part of the RHP community is simply not done according to the ToS.
Maybe you should join other organisations where such obvious bigotry is bon ton.
1 edit
Originally posted by ivanhoeThat wasn't an Ad Hominem, ivanhoe. An Ad Hominem is an insult masquerading as an argument. But I'm not arguing with you on this issue, I'm just insulting you.
You are becoming increasingly not at ease ..... and you can tell for yourself why ..... can't you Bbarr ? A degrading and insulting Ad Hominem on me cannot conceal that.
Anyway, like I said, I'm perfectly happy talking about this issue with folks who are capable of reasoned discussion.
1 edit
Originally posted by bbarrBbarr: "That wasn't an Ad Hominem, ivanhoe. An Ad Hominem is an insult masquerading as an argument. But I'm not arguing with you on this issue, I'm just insulting you."
That wasn't an Ad Hominem, ivanhoe. An Ad Hominem is an insult masquerading as an argument. But I'm not arguing with you on this issue, I'm just insulting you.
Anyway, like I said, I'm perfectly happy talkin about this issue with folks who are capable of reasoned discussion. I do not think you are capable of this.
You are insulting me in the context of a discussion in order to make it "plausible" that my stances are less acceptable. Thát, dear professional philosopher, IS an Ad Hominem.
You are using one of your unacceptable tactics to bend the definitions in such a way that you are right. You should lay off these habits of yours if you want to be taken seriously and become a professional philosopher.
Originally posted by ivanhoeNo, I'm insulting you because you are a jackass. You don't need any help from me making your positions look implausible.
Bbarr: "That wasn't an Ad Hominem, ivanhoe. An Ad Hominem is an insult masquerading as an argument. But I'm not arguing with you on this issue, I'm just insulting you."
You are insulting me in the context of a discussion to make it "plausible" that my stances are less acceptable. Thát, dear professional philosopher, IS an Ad Hominem.
You ...[text shortened]... f these habits of yours if you want to be taken seriously and become a professional philosopher.