1. Standard memberAThousandYoung
    Shoot the Squatters?
    tinyurl.com/43m7k8bw
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    26660
    15 Oct '05 19:14
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    Of course--but such a meaningless concept as spirituality could only generate broad and nebulous statements.

    (Someone needs to count the straw men--sonofsaul? I think I might just have used one).
    That doesn't seem like a Straw Man to me. You're not attributing any argument to saul.
  2. Standard memberAThousandYoung
    Shoot the Squatters?
    tinyurl.com/43m7k8bw
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    26660
    15 Oct '05 19:29
    Originally posted by thesonofsaul
    Here is it, past lunch time here and I am still waiting for my chance to not use a strawman in an argument. Ho-hum.

    Well, to fill in the time, perhaps one of you dear lurkers can help me clarify the strawman concept for myself. It seems that at least by the wikipedia definition that the strawman can only be used to assist in negating an opponents a ...[text shortened]... f a strawman, or is it something else? If not, is there another term for this erroneous tactic?
    That seems clearly not to be the Strawman Fallacy, but I can't find what it is. It does seem like it should be a fallacy.
  3. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36105
    15 Oct '05 21:04
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    Considering the venue, it would have to be something spiritual.

    OK, I'll argue that the concept of spirituality is meaningless in modern society. What do you say?
    In addition to the definition of "spirituality", may I suggest we also need a clear definition of "meaningless"?

    For instance, we could use 'meaningless' in the sense of "asdfsadfsa is a meaningless word".

    Or we could use 'meaningless' to refer to 'lack of purpose, reason or logos' (as the Neo-Platinists would put it).

    Or we could use 'meaningless' to mean 'incoherence, incompatible with known truths'.
  4. Standard memberthesonofsaul
    King of the Ashes
    Trying to rise ....
    Joined
    16 Jun '04
    Moves
    63851
    16 Oct '05 02:41
    Originally posted by lucifershammer
    In addition to the definition of "spirituality", may I suggest we also need a clear definition of "meaningless"?

    For instance, we could use 'meaningless' in the sense of "asdfsadfsa is a meaningless word".

    Or we could use 'meaningless' to refer to 'lack of purpose, reason or logos' (as the Neo-Platinists would put it).

    Or we could use 'meaningless' to mean 'incoherence, incompatible with known truths'.
    Excellent point. Clarity first. I will leave it to Bosse de Nage to choose a definition though, as he chose the path of argument.
  5. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    53223
    16 Oct '05 06:27
    Originally posted by thesonofsaul
    Excellent point. Clarity first. I will leave it to Bosse de Nage to choose a definition though, as he chose the path of argument.
    JESUS, can you guys get on with it already?🙂
    You spent the last three pages just getting READY to argue!
    Its interesting anyway.
  6. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36105
    16 Oct '05 12:15
    Originally posted by thesonofsaul
    The most general sense of the word then. Spirituality: of the spirit. Spirit: 1) an animating or vital principle held to give life to physical organisms, 2) the immaterial intelligent or sentient part of a person. I think that covers the relevant definitions.
    I think the barebones definition here is insufficient. No description of spirituality is complete without looking into the question that all spiritual traditions attempt to answer - "Why does the Universe exist? Why am/are I/we here?"

    Some spiritual traditions offer a straight answer - as with Christianity, Islam, Advaitha etc. Some simply show the path to obtain the answer - as with Zen. Nevertheless, in both cases, the Question remains the core of spirituality.
  7. Standard memberDavid C
    Flamenco Sketches
    Spain, in spirit
    Joined
    09 Sep '04
    Moves
    59422
    16 Oct '05 12:351 edit
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    OK. I'll kick off.

    1) "Spirit" is simply an outdated concept from times when people believed that some superior being had literally breathed life into them. Life begins at fertilisation and its development is programmed by DNA.

    2) A person does not have an immaterial intelligent or sentient part.
    Allow me to retort.

    *ahem*

    1) F*** you.
    2) Therefore, spirituality is meaningful.

    What do I win?
  8. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    53223
    16 Oct '05 14:36
    Originally posted by David C
    Allow me to retort.

    *ahem*

    1) F*** you.
    2) Therefore, spirituality is meaningful.

    What do I win?
    A booby prize? I think, believe it or not, they are trying to have
    a serious debate here, so being flippant is not in the theme of
    this thread.
  9. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36105
    16 Oct '05 14:41
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    A booby prize? I think, believe it or not, they are trying to have
    a serious debate here, so being flippant is not in the theme of
    this thread.
    I think he was going for Straw Man; but ended with an abusive ad hominem instead.
  10. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    90892
    16 Oct '05 17:00
    I've made a belated discovery: I don't know what I'm talking about. Please, continue this thread amongst yourselves.
  11. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36105
    16 Oct '05 18:361 edit
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    I've made a belated discovery: I don't know what I'm talking about. Please, continue this thread amongst yourselves.
    Is that a new fallacy I don't know about?

    😀
  12. Standard memberthesonofsaul
    King of the Ashes
    Trying to rise ....
    Joined
    16 Jun '04
    Moves
    63851
    17 Oct '05 05:32
    Originally posted by lucifershammer
    Is that a new fallacy I don't know about?

    😀
    No, it seems strange though... I think it's a new animal ... it's ... I don't believe it ... it couldn't be ... it is! ... it's a statement completely without fallacy! Ladies and Gents we are presented with the truth!
  13. Hmmm . . .
    Joined
    19 Jan '04
    Moves
    22131
    17 Oct '05 05:41
    Originally posted by thesonofsaul
    No, it seems strange though... I think it's a new animal ... it's ... I don't believe it ... it couldn't be ... it is! ... it's a statement completely without fallacy! Ladies and Gents we are presented with the truth!
    Wow! Me too! I don't know what I'm talking about either. What a relief to finally know the Truth!
  14. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36105
    17 Oct '05 07:55
    Originally posted by vistesd
    Wow! Me too! I don't know what I'm talking about either. What a relief to finally know the Truth!
    Does that mean we won't get to see a strawman argument?

    Damn, I was so looking forward to that...

    (Incidentally, sonhouse's arguments against Omnislash's defence of the place of ID in the classroom seem like strawman reasoning to me)
  15. Standard memberDavid C
    Flamenco Sketches
    Spain, in spirit
    Joined
    09 Sep '04
    Moves
    59422
    17 Oct '05 13:43
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    A booby prize? I think, believe it or not, they are trying to have
    a serious debate here, so being flippant is not in the theme of
    this thread.
    Yeah, actually my perception of the thread was a lighthearted one. I'd think my argumentum ad metasmugness was taken with a grain of salt.

    Besides, the logic there is irrefutable.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree