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

A simple answer to the "burden of proof" question

  • Topic Archived
  1. Boards
  2. Religion
  3. A simple answer to the "burden of proof" question
2 years ago#221
AynRandySavage posted...
I feel that I've been more than straight in the past. I don't feel that you have been though, admittedly. But given the fact that you distrust me and that I distrust you. I think my proposal is a reasonable compromise.

Holding a discussion hostage to get an answer doesn't strike me as a "reasonable" compromise. It doesn't strike me as a compromise at all. It seems more like you're trying to gain control by withholding information that you think I strongly desire. And then you're offering me the carrot that is that withheld info so that you can get me to jump through hoops for you and kowtow to your wishes.

No thanks. I simply don't care enough about what your answer would be. So again, I invite you to answer my question. But I'm not going to answer yours. If that makes you unwilling to answer my question, that's fine. In fact, I'd be fine if you never responded to me again.
---
Locke: "Why do you find it so hard to believe?" || Jack "Why do you find it so easy?!" ||
Locke: "It's never been easy!"
2 years ago#222
From: cyclonekruse | #221
Holding a discussion hostage to get an answer doesn't strike me as a "reasonable" compromise. It doesn't strike me as a compromise at all. It seems more like you're trying to gain control by withholding information that you think I strongly desire. And then you're offering me the carrot that is that withheld info so that you can get me to jump through hoops for you and kowtow to your wishes.


I'm seeing a similar tactic used somewhere in history... I can't put my finger on it...
---
Trolling and making valid arguments are not mutually exclusive things.
2 years ago#223
But you think I should jump through hoops before you even consider answering my question. Why is that?
2 years ago#224
AynRandySavage posted...
But you think I should jump through hoops before you even consider answering my question. Why is that?

I'm not considering answering your question, nor will I if you answer my question. Take your false equivalency elsewhere.
---
Locke: "Why do you find it so hard to believe?" || Jack "Why do you find it so easy?!" ||
Locke: "It's never been easy!"
2 years ago#225
cyclonekruse posted...
AynRandySavage posted...
But you think I should jump through hoops before you even consider answering my question. Why is that?

I'm not considering answering your question, nor will I if you answer my question. Take your false equivalency elsewhere.


Then you're just being hypocritical. You have no basis to criticize me for not answering your question if you won't answer mine.
2 years ago#226
There's more evidence of your poor reading comprehension. I explicitly said I was inviting you to answer but if you didn't that would be fine. Again, if you never respond to me ever again, I'd be more than okay with that.
---
Locke: "Why do you find it so hard to believe?" || Jack "Why do you find it so easy?!" ||
Locke: "It's never been easy!"
2 years ago#227
cyclonekruse posted...
There's more evidence of your poor reading comprehension. I explicitly said I was inviting you to answer but if you didn't that would be fine. Again, if you never respond to me ever again, I'd be more than okay with that.


Why are you inviting me to answer? You don't seem to want the answer.
2 years ago#228
AynRandySavage posted...
Why are you inviting me to answer? You don't seem to want the answer.

You're being intentionally dense, aren't you? At least I hope it's intentional. This isn't that hard. I'm giving you the option to respond to my question. If you answer it, fine. If not, also fine.
---
Locke: "Why do you find it so hard to believe?" || Jack "Why do you find it so easy?!" ||
Locke: "It's never been easy!"
2 years ago#229
AynRandySavage posted...
cyclonekruse posted...
There's more evidence of your poor reading comprehension. I explicitly said I was inviting you to answer but if you didn't that would be fine. Again, if you never respond to me ever again, I'd be more than okay with that.


Why are you inviting me to answer? You don't seem to want the answer.


(Just so you know, you've kind of made a huge ass out of yourself in this topic)
---
joey444
We elect Obama and all the capitalists will be executed. This is a legitimate concern of mine. - OMGWTFPIE, 2011
2 years ago#230
cyclonekruse posted...
AynRandySavage posted...
Why are you inviting me to answer? You don't seem to want the answer.

You're being intentionally dense, aren't you? At least I hope it's intentional. This isn't that hard. I'm giving you the option to respond to my question. If you answer it, fine. If not, also fine.


It really seems more like you don't want to answer mine, so you're backpedaling from yours. Your question is irrelevant, so I don't see any reason why I should answer it. Are we done?
  1. Boards
  2. Religion
  3. A simple answer to the "burden of proof" question

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived