This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

I need a definition of faith that is precise.

#321cyclonekrusePosted 1/30/2013 10:57:28 PM
From: Gegengegengegen | #318
So its worse than irrelevant. You're actually negatively affecting the debate by letting your interlocutor know that you're not capable of being partial. That hurts you and him. The point of a debate is to have two people with competing viewpoints discussing as equals. By admitting your bias, you're disqualifying yourself from that discussion.

Equals? He has not treated me as an equal in a very, very long time, if ever. If anything losing respect for him actually just put him on the same ground to me as I am to him.

I'd wonder why they felt the need to say it. And I think Ayn Randy Savage and I are in the same boat in that we'd both think the other person lost his temper and couldn't argue properly.

Yes, I would wonder why that person would feel the need to say that. Is it something I've done? Was there a misunderstanding?

As for assuming anger, I don't understand that. I mean, it depends on how it comes up, I suppose. But saying you have no respect for someone isn't necessarily an angry statement. More disappointment.

mocking is just ridiculing someone. They don't need to see it.

I get that, but what did "and it worked" mean? Seems an odd turn of phrase to me. There isn't much to making mocking "work."

From: Gegengegengegen | #319
I thought it was interesting, that's why I'm here. For the record, I think you were right, but I also think OW argued his point better than you did.

It started out interesting. Then it turned into him telling me my opinion was bad and I should feel bad for having it.

Then what is it about? And if you're going to admit your personality flaws, why aren't you even trying to fix them?

Wait, who said I wasn't?

However it happened doesn't matter. Two wrongs doesn't make a right . I haven't seen Ayn Randy Savage do anything particularly bad in this discussion except mock some very serious problems in your argument technique.

What two wrongs?
---
Locke: "Why do you find it so hard to believe?" || Jack "Why do you find it so easy?!" ||
Locke: "It's never been easy!"
#322GegengegengegenPosted 1/30/2013 11:40:40 PM
cyclonekruse posted...

Equals? He has not treated me as an equal in a very, very long time, if ever. If anything losing respect for him actually just put him on the same ground to me as I am to him.


By admitting that you were biased against him, you put yourself lower than him.



Yes, I would wonder why that person would feel the need to say that. Is it something I've done? Was there a misunderstanding?


And once you re-examine what you've done, and found that you didn't do anything wrong, then what?

I get that, but what did "and it worked" mean? Seems an odd turn of phrase to me. There isn't much to making mocking "work."


It pretty pithily summed up the irony of your posts in this thread.
#323GegengegengegenPosted 1/30/2013 11:40:46 PM

It started out interesting. Then it turned into him telling me my opinion was bad and I should feel bad for having it.


That doesn't mean he argued the rest of his points any more poorly.


Wait, who said I wasn't?


It doesn't even look like you're trying. Are you trying to hold back and resist arguing with Ayn Randy Savage here? Are you trying to stop things from becoming personal?

What two wrongs?


As for Ayn Randy Savage's wrong: it was whatever he unjustly did to make you start rattling off your personality flaws and how much you personally disliked him. As for your wrong: see above.
#324AynRandySavagePosted 1/31/2013 12:11:38 AM
Gegengegengegen posted...
AynRandySavage posted...
I'm really not trying to make fun of him at all here. I originally just wanted to make a point that I thought(and that you apparently agree) was interesting.


How much have you argued with this guy, and why?


I've been arguing with him since I've been on this board really. And the reason is because he keeps arguing really. I like to hone my argumentation skills.


Equals? He has not treated me as an equal in a very, very long time, if ever. If anything losing respect for him actually just put him on the same ground to me as I am to him.


Prior to this topic, I've done my utmost not to enage in ad hominem attacks or treat him as anything but an equal. That doesn't give his arguments immunity to criticism however, and when he uses sophistry or bad logic, I call him on it. This topic is an exception admittedly, since the topic of discussion is him and his "personality flaws."

By admitting that you were biased against him, you put yourself lower than him.


One of the first things you learn in debate is to never try to convince your opponent of anything. The goal is to always convince the audience or the crowd. Cyclonekreuse's bias makes him an excellent helper in that regard. His tenacity keeps him from changing his position, so I can appeal to my "audience"(people on philosophy forums, old college professors etc.) to see how to snap his logic back on itself.


It pretty pithily summed up the irony of your posts in this thread.


Sure, but I didn't mean it as mocking. My disappointment was sincere. OW is a lot like cyclonekruse in that he'll argue a bad position to his dying breath. Seeing the two of them take this topic to 500 would have been interesting.
#325OrangeWizardPosted 1/31/2013 12:14:27 AM
I never argue bad positions!
---
"Let's make this quick, I'm double-parked." - Two-face
#326GegengegengegenPosted 1/31/2013 12:25:04 AM
OrangeWizard posted...
I never argue bad positions!


I don't know you well enough to say. I don't agree with you at all on this topic, but I like how you've argued it thus far.
#327GegengegengegenPosted 1/31/2013 12:33:51 AM
AynRandySavage posted...

I've been arguing with him since I've been on this board really. And the reason is because he keeps arguing really. I like to hone my argumentation skills.


Do you think you're really accomplishing much though? Why not go after bigger fish with your college professors?

This topic is an exception admittedly, since the topic of discussion is him and his "personality flaws."


Well, then just make it clear that THIS topic is about him as a person, and not any of your previous conversation topics. I think there's some bad communication going on.


Sure, but I didn't mean it as mocking. My disappointment was sincere. OW is a lot like cyclonekruse in that he'll argue a bad position to his dying breath. Seeing the two of them take this topic to 500 would have been interesting.


Well, he's trying really hard not to engage you right now. You've got to give him credit for that.
#328cyclonekrusePosted 1/31/2013 7:06:04 AM
From: Gegengegengegen | #322
By admitting that you were biased against him, you put yourself lower than him.

This assumes two things. One, that he isn't equally if not more biased against me. Just as a guess, how much respect do you think he has for me or had for me before I told him I didn't respect him? (Though, again, I'm still not sure where I supposedly did that. I certainly haven't done it "constantly" as he suggests.) Two, you assume my lack of respect for him is undeserved.

And once you re-examine what you've done, and found that you didn't do anything wrong, then what?

I would ask why the person thought that. I still wouldn't actually assume I'd done nothing wrong. I just might not be seeing it.

It pretty pithily summed up the irony of your posts in this thread.

I don't think it was directed at my posts. Or this thread, really. More of a general statement about me.

From: Gegengegengegen | #323
That doesn't mean he argued the rest of his points any more poorly.

Maybe not, but it doesn't give me much meat to respond back to once he starts doing that.

It doesn't even look like you're trying. Are you trying to hold back and resist arguing with Ayn Randy Savage here? Are you trying to stop things from becoming personal?

Have you seen me engaging him and his blatant falsehoods lately? Also, like I said, I don't bring up the personal stuff and haven't for a long, long time. That's always ARS. And, if you notice one of the edits I made in this very thread, I actually apologized to him for misreading his statement. I took the time to go back and look at his statement and read it to make sure I wasn't mischaracterizing him due to my bias.

As for Ayn Randy Savage's wrong: it was whatever he unjustly did to make you start rattling off your personality flaws and how much you personally disliked him. As for your wrong: see above.

To what "above wrong" are you referring? Me suggesting that he's a liar and troll? As for trolling, he's admitted to trying to bait me in the past:

ARS: It.wasn't pointless at all. I'm not proud to admit it, but I was hoping that by saying "indeed" he would lose his temper and and respond
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/263-religion/61713455
Post 494

There's no reason to think he's changed his stripes in that regard (and plenty of reason to think he hasn't--given that he described trolling as a positive thing in this thread). Being a liar pretty naturally follows from being a troll. An egregious example though is that he's tried to treat me as an equal. Given that he thinks of me as a sophist and undereducated and has admitted as much and regularly talks down to me, that's a pretty clearly false statement. That impression of me has been around for a long time, I'm sure. Now, it's possible that he's not "lying" there. He might not believe what he said was false. He might wrongly believe that he's treated me as an equal. I just don't think that's likely.
---
Locke: "Why do you find it so hard to believe?" || Jack "Why do you find it so easy?!" ||
Locke: "It's never been easy!"
#329AynRandySavagePosted 1/31/2013 7:50:34 AM(edited)
cyclonekruse posted...
This assumes two things. One, that he isn't equally if not more biased against me.


argument from ignorance. I've said nothing to make anyone think that I haven't given your arguments the full benefit of the doubt.

I would ask why the person thought that. I still wouldn't actually assume I'd done nothing wrong. I just might not be seeing it.


You haven't done that to all the people calling you a sophist on the stackexchange.


I don't think it was directed at my posts. Or this thread, really. More of a general statement about me.


It was directed at your behavior in this thread, certainly.

ARS: It.wasn't pointless at all. I'm not proud to admit it, but I was hoping that by saying "indeed" he would lose his temper and and respond
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/263-religion/61713455
Post 494


It was unfortunate, but I'd do it again if necessary.

That impression of me has been around for a long time, I'm sure.


Unfortunately again, I can attest to this. I can't attest to the fact that he's made much progress in remedying that.
#330IamvegitoPosted 1/31/2013 7:50:09 AM
Paul Tillich has a good definition that is broadly applicable.
http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/tillich.html
---
"A day will come when you think yourself safe and happy, and suddenly your joy will turn to ashes in your mouth, and you'll know the debt is paid."