Angry liberals lash out at Bush...Shocking Behavior!

[heartsurgeon]

Anti-Bush Video

 

[oreagan]

I'm glad that one person/group gets to speak for an entire ideology.

 

[DealMonkey]

Save America from our dickhead president. Yeah, that about sums it up.

 

[conjur]

heh heh....that was funny. Purely a farce.


But, don't see how that's different from the mudslinging against Kerry from the likes of Rush and Hannity and other right-wing morons.

 

[Tab]

Even being kind of a conservative, I found it kind of funny

Did Bush or his Administration even say that there were links from Al Quada and Saddam?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Tabb
Even being kind of a conservative, I found it kind of funny

Did Bush or his Administration even say that there were links from Al Quada and Saddam?

Bush no, but Cheney did his best to implicate Saddam and Al Queda. I know most people came to believe it.

The administration then said there was no link, but it was hardly emphazed. The seeds were sown and the connection established.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
Anti-Bush Video

hehe ... hahahahaha....

That was pretty funny

CkG

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Crude . . . but funny.

 

[heartsurgeon]

who are those fellows in the background??

 

[Infohawk]

As someone else mentioned, you're generalizing. Yours is the logical fallacy of composition.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
As someone else mentioned, you're generalizing. Yours is the logical fallacy of composition.

In your day-to-day life you will encounter many examples of fallacious reasoning. And it's fun - and sometimes even useful - to point to an argument and say, "A ha! That argument commits the fallacy of false dilemma."

It may be fun, but it is not very useful. Nor is it very enlightened.

The names of the fallacies are for identification purposes only. They are not supposed to be flung around like argumentative broadswords. It is not sufficient to state that an opponent has committed such-and-such a fallacy. And it is not very polite.

Ooops

CkG

 

[Ozoned]

hehe... Need to run that in the swing states.

 

[fjord]

I like the "Vote Democrat" in pink typeface...

Nice.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Infohawk
As someone else mentioned, you're generalizing. Yours is the logical fallacy of composition.

In your day-to-day life you will encounter many examples of fallacious reasoning. And it's fun - and sometimes even useful - to point to an argument and say, "A ha! That argument commits the fallacy of false dilemma."

It may be fun, but it is not very useful. Nor is it very enlightened.

The names of the fallacies are for identification purposes only. They are not supposed to be flung around like argumentative broadswords. It is not sufficient to state that an opponent has committed such-and-such a fallacy. And it is not very polite.

Ooops

CkG

What's the mistake?

I disagree with that statement in its entirety.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Infohawk
As someone else mentioned, you're generalizing. Yours is the logical fallacy of composition.

In your day-to-day life you will encounter many examples of fallacious reasoning. And it's fun - and sometimes even useful - to point to an argument and say, "A ha! That argument commits the fallacy of false dilemma."

It may be fun, but it is not very useful. Nor is it very enlightened.

The names of the fallacies are for identification purposes only. They are not supposed to be flung around like argumentative broadswords. It is not sufficient to state that an opponent has committed such-and-such a fallacy. And it is not very polite.

Ooops

CkG

What's the mistake?

I disagree with that statement in its entirety.

How to use this Guide

Your site link - not mine

CkG

 

[Painman]

Heheheheheh.... /me chuckles

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Save America from our dickhead president. Yeah, that about sums it up.

Funny,

Of all people I didn't expect HS to find such a work.

Ah the desperation, can practically see the sweat dripping from his brow and we're still so many months out.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY


How to use this Guide

Your site link - not mine

CkG

I fail to see the mistake. I didn't link to that page. It's not "my" site. That site is one of many sites that list and explain logical fallacies. So the idea of logical fallacies does not go hand in hand with the page or paragraph you linked to. If you'd like i can link to other such pages that don't advise against 'demolishing' other people's arguments.

If I post the Bible online and then say nobody should use the Bible as a spiritual guide, am I all of a sudden an expert on the use of the bible? Hardly. The posting of the Bible makes me no more of an expert than a person that posts it and says it's the only one true path to salvation.

Finally, let me say that I am very happy you have read about fallacies. I hope it has helped your reasoning, as the web author suggests. However, I disagree with him on the paragraph you posted. I invite you to demolish other people's fallacious arguments too. If you would like to know why I disagree with him and what my arguments, are, ask me.

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: Tabb
Even being kind of a conservative, I found it kind of funny

Did Bush or his Administration even say that there were links from Al Quada and Saddam?

there was an attempt to instill in people that there was a connection. but i think they tried very hard not to say directly and specifically that there was.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY


How to use this Guide

Your site link - not mine

CkG

I fail to see the mistake. I didn't link to that page. It's not "my" site. That site is one of many sites that list and explain logical fallacies. So the idea of logical fallacies does not go hand in hand with the page or paragraph you linked to. If you'd like i can link to other such pages that don't advise against 'demolishing' other people's arguments.

If I post the Bible online and then say nobody should use the Bible as a spiritual guide, am I all of a sudden an expert on the use of the bible? Hardly. The posting of the Bible makes me no more of an expert than a person that posts it and says it's the only one true path to salvation.

Finally, let me say that I am very happy you have read about fallacies. I hope it has helped your reasoning, as the web author suggests. However, I disagree with him on the paragraph you posted. I invite you to demolish other people's fallacious arguments too. If you would like to know why I disagree with him and what my arguments, are, ask me.

I read that site and many others before you showed up here - info. So take your sanctimonious BS and shove it. You linked to a site which posted directions on how to use the info it contained.

The author gives suggestions on how to reply instead of using "A ha! That argument commits the fallacy of false dilemma." He believes that doing such as you do isn't polite, useful, or "enlightened". You might try to use the "proof" section as the "how-to" suggests instead of running around yapping about fallacies and identifying them by name like some holier than thou egotist.

CkG

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

I read that site and many others before you showed up here - info. So take your sanctimonious BS and shove it. You linked to a site which posted directions on how to use the info it contained.

The author gives suggestions on how to reply instead of using "A ha! That argument commits the fallacy of false dilemma." He believes that doing such as you do isn't polite, useful, or "enlightened". You might try to use the "proof" section as the "how-to" suggests instead of running around yapping about fallacies and identifying them by name like some holier than thou egotist.

CkG

I'm dismayed your resorting to personal insults again. It's really unecessary. I think in another thread it was ozoned or the other one who said you were a good model of civility.

You linked to a site which posted directions on how to use the info it contained.

I concede I was sending the wrong message, in part. The site acheives my goal of helping "heartsurgeon" improve HIS reasoning. But on the other hand it doesn't acheive my goal of pushing people to apply logic EVERYWHERE. Thanks for pointing that out. I will link to another site now.

Unlike the maintainer of that site (I shouldn't call him an author because most of the substance is not his), I think it's absurd to only apply logic to one's own reasoning. It helps to tell people what kind of fallacy they're using. Why? It pushes them to figure out what logical fallacies are and to put them on a path of self-discovery. I've tried the other methods too. They are generally less effective in that people think the argument only applies to the situation at hand and not across the bar. I think if everyone knew and used the names of these fallacies we would all be better off.

 

[Infohawk]

I should also say that it was hard finding the list of logical fallacies I would use. Some lists are hosted by atheists, for example. I know people like "heartsurgeon" would associate logic with atheism and I didn't want that to happen. A lot of the other sites don't have so much interpretation about how logic should be used. Thanks to you, I've also now noticed that this guy goes on to talk about faith and how faith is necessary. I think this is not what logic is about. The two are really separate. Hence, thanks to you, I'm now linking to a new site in my sig. Tell me if you find any problems with it.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

I read that site and many others before you showed up here - info. So take your sanctimonious BS and shove it. You linked to a site which posted directions on how to use the info it contained.

The author gives suggestions on how to reply instead of using "A ha! That argument commits the fallacy of false dilemma." He believes that doing such as you do isn't polite, useful, or "enlightened". You might try to use the "proof" section as the "how-to" suggests instead of running around yapping about fallacies and identifying them by name like some holier than thou egotist.

CkG

I'm dismayed your resorting to personal insults again. It's really unecessary. I think in another thread it was ozoned or the other one who said you were a good model of civility.

You linked to a site which posted directions on how to use the info it contained.

I concede I was sending the wrong message, in part. The site acheives my goal of helping "heartsurgeon" improve HIS reasoning. But on the other hand it doesn't acheive my goal of pushing people to apply logic EVERYWHERE. Thanks for pointing that out. I will link to another site now.

Unlike the maintainer of that site (I shouldn't call him an author because most of the substance is not his), I think it's absurd to only apply logic to one's own reasoning. It helps to tell people what kind of fallacy they're using. Why? It pushes them to figure out what logical fallacies are and to put them on a path of self-discovery. I've tried the other methods too. They are generally less effective in that people think the argument only applies to the situation at hand and not across the bar. I think if everyone knew and used the names of these fallacies we would all be better off.

Keep your emotional "feelings" to yourself. I could care less how "dismayed" you are as you are just another anonymous internet personality. I also happen to think calling a spade a spade is quite alright. Your actions are like those of a "holier than thou egotist" IMO and the author of that guide seems to take a similar stance by suggesting that those who run around bleating "A ha! That argument commits the fallacy of _____." aren't polite, useful, or "enlightened".

Well, you can feel whatever you wish, but it seems to me that you need a bit of help in the logic department so for you to run around like some "intellectual" blowhard is actually quite hilarious. Keep it up - I never turn down a good laugh

CkG

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

I read that site and many others before you showed up here - info. So take your sanctimonious BS and shove it. You linked to a site which posted directions on how to use the info it contained.

The author gives suggestions on how to reply instead of using "A ha! That argument commits the fallacy of false dilemma." He believes that doing such as you do isn't polite, useful, or "enlightened". You might try to use the "proof" section as the "how-to" suggests instead of running around yapping about fallacies and identifying them by name like some holier than thou egotist.

CkG

I'm dismayed your resorting to personal insults again. It's really unecessary. I think in another thread it was ozoned or the other one who said you were a good model of civility.

You linked to a site which posted directions on how to use the info it contained.

I concede I was sending the wrong message, in part. The site acheives my goal of helping "heartsurgeon" improve HIS reasoning. But on the other hand it doesn't acheive my goal of pushing people to apply logic EVERYWHERE. Thanks for pointing that out. I will link to another site now.

Unlike the maintainer of that site (I shouldn't call him an author because most of the substance is not his), I think it's absurd to only apply logic to one's own reasoning. It helps to tell people what kind of fallacy they're using. Why? It pushes them to figure out what logical fallacies are and to put them on a path of self-discovery. I've tried the other methods too. They are generally less effective in that people think the argument only applies to the situation at hand and not across the bar. I think if everyone knew and used the names of these fallacies we would all be better off.

Keep your emotional "feelings" to yourself. I could care less how "dismayed" you are as you are just another anonymous internet personality. I also happen to think calling a spade a spade is quite alright. Your actions are like those of a "holier than thou egotist" IMO and the author of that guide seems to take a similar stance by suggesting that those who run around bleating "A ha! That argument commits the fallacy of _____." aren't polite, useful, or "enlightened".

Well, you can feel whatever you wish, but it seems to me that you need a bit of help in the logic department so for you to run around like some "intellectual" blowhard is actually quite hilarious. Keep it up - I never turn down a good laugh

CkG

It's hard to believe you don't care about the feelings of other internet personalities when you go to such lengths to put people down. Your passive-agressive smiley-faces alone are a sign that you want others to suffer.

" it seems to me that you need a bit of help in the logic department "
You've said this countless times and I've called you on it on most occasions. If you feel I'm being illogical, say HOW I am being illogical. Preferably, name the type of fallacy. Also, nobody's logic is perfect. Humans make mistakes. I'm pointing out other people's mistakes and usually I thank people when they help me see my mistakes.

"aren't polite, useful, or "enlightened"."
You've already posted that. I challenged his/your assertion that it isn't polite, useful, or enlightened. Now you are simply restating your argument. Why don't you either attack my arguments or offer an explanation why it isn't polite, useful, or enlightened? Repeating it again isn't going to convince me.

 

[Format C:]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
It helps to tell people what kind of fallacy they're using. Why? It pushes them to figure out what logical fallacies are and to put them on a path of self-discovery.

No, what it pushes them to do is to inform you, sometimes rather forcefully, what a sanctimonious, self-righteous, self-absorbed, egotist totally drunk on the wine of his own contrived self-importance, completely lacking in wit, tact, intelligence, manners, or common sense enough to know when to STFU. You are like a one man infestation of dung beetles that rolls so many tirds into every conversation that everyone eventually packs up and leaves because they simply can't stand the stink no more.