Jump to content

"because your bad"- it's not an argument


FodderofCannon

Recommended Posts

Since when did forum discussions actually matter if someone had a legitimate argument or not? Last I checked, nobody cared if someone "fails" at a forum argument, because most of the forum content isn't comprised of intelligent thought in the first place.

 

True, but can you blame me for trying?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Your just being difficult for the sake of being difficult. Would you say it is more or less likely to know about logic if you do not go to college?

Is the title of this thread "because your bad"- it's not an argument or Who is most likely to know the rules of logic?

 

As you have clearly pointed out, your intent was to inform people of their error. College is not relevant to this error. College is not relevant to having knowlege or teaching someone the rules of logic.

Is more or less likely to know about logic if you do not go to college?

As you have clearly pointed out, your intent was to inform people of their error. College is not relevant to this error.

Off topic. How is this related to the fallacy? Even if you are right, and I am a moron, it is still not relevant to the topic.

Also it's an example of the fallacy. Now that's irony.

As ive continiued to point out, and you apparently fail to understand time and time again it is relevant to the sentence i have referenced multiple times. The sentence is relevant because it is the main issue of contention at the moment.

How so? Since I have only pointed out ONE fallacy in the OP this remark is utterly disingenuous.

I clearly pointed out how this is the case. Perhaps you should try this cool thing called reading? Let me reitierate for you.

You claim i have discounted your argument that 'because you're bad' is not an argument by suggesting that you made a spelling and grammatical error and therefore your argument is false.

 

However i have not done this. I have no made no mention whatsoever of whether your argument is true or false. Instead what i have done is make the claim that your post has an arrogant and insulting tone stemming from the fact you made a completely unncessary and pompous remark about college.

Since you clearly are incapable of seperating the two, i will lay it out for you quite simply for the 3rd time. College is not relevant to the assertion that 'because you're' bad is not an argument.

 

Therefore you clearly fail in understanding logic and argument given the fact you made the mistake of thinking that my issue was related to or directly challenged your main assertion when clearly it was not.

It's not hypocritical because I was talking exposure to the rules of logic. How is this so hard to grasp?

As you have clearly pointed out, your intent was to inform people of their error. College is not relevant to this error. College is not relevant to having knowlege or teaching someone the rules of logic.

 

So now you are backtracking and telling me that your intent was not to inform people about the rules of logic but rather to inform them as to how to be exposed and who is exposed to them most?

Also remember when you misspelled hypocrisy? LOL ;)

Ill just quote you here

Off topic. How is this related to the fallacy? Even if you are right, and I am a moron, it is still not relevant to the topic.

Also it's an example of the fallacy. Now that's irony.

Also here is a link to a definition of hypocrite since you dont seem to know what it means.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hypocrite

You keep saying this. I don't get it. Oh wait sarcastic ad hom....tricky guy. :rolleyes:

Your post is pompous and arrogant. There is really nothing more to say

Edited by Gidoru
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead what i have done is make the claim that your post has an arrogant and insulting tone stemming from the fact you made a completely unncessary and pompous remark about college.

 

Is going to college more or less likely to result in one knowing about logical fallacies? This is a yes/no question.

 

My claim that people that go to college are more likely to know about logical fallacies has not been refuted, thus my opening remarks cannot be construed as being "arrogant" if they are simply matters of fact, despite your interpretation of them as being so. The claim that I am a hypocrite is false since I was not talking about spelling/grammer in my opening statement, but rather the likelihood of people without education knowing about the rules of logic.

 

Since you clearly are incapable of seperating the two, i will lay it out for you quite simply for the 3rd time. College is not relevant to the assertion that 'because you're' bad is not an argument.

 

No, you are attempting to ad hom me by discrediting me, and thus my original argument about fallacies. So you are doing this, your just trying to be sneaky about it because I have called you on it. Your post was made to call me a hypocrite, and this association is clearly an attempt to discredit me personally, and any argument I make.

 

"He's a hypocrite so don't listen to what he says"- is the implied thrust here.

 

Indecently this is a good argument to highlight the use of the fallacy. Thanks.

 

So now you are backtracking and telling me that your intent was not to inform people about the rules of logic but rather to inform them as to how to be exposed and who is exposed to them most?

 

Is it possible to make more than one argument in a paragraph? It seems to me that this might be the case here. Just a thought.

 

Your post is pompous and arrogant. There is really nothing more to say

 

So this has nothing to do with the truth or falseness of my original post? Of either of my points? I can't know your motivation, but really??

 

Come now, lets be honest here. I think your just pissed at me, and your not willing to admit your claim is unfounded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is going to college more or less likely to result in one knowing about logical fallacies? This is a yes/no question.

Its quite funny that you attempt to get me to answer a question whose answer is not only trivially obvious but has been stated in this thread multiple times. Its also quite funny that you conveniently ignore every question posed at you. I suppose you believe that you can win an argument by selectively replying to things you feel you are capable of answering while ignoring those things you cannot.

My claim that people that go to college are more likely to know about logical fallacies has not been refuted, thus my opening remarks cannot be construed as being "arrogant" if they are simply matters of fact, despite your interpretation of them as being so.

Except that was not your claim.

 

Here is your statement.

I understand a lot of you kids have never gone to college or studied any form of logical thinking, so maybe you think this is actually a reasonble argument. I mean the motivation for someone posting is imporatant right?

 

This is not saying that people who go to college are more likely to know about logical fallacies. Rather this is simply stating that many of the people on the forums did not go to college and therefore do not know about the rules of logic.

 

The second can be infered from the first, however these are two completely different assertions. But i suppose they look the same to you?

 

Furthermore, there is nothing preventing a fact from being considered an arrogant remark.

The claim that I am a hypocrite is false since I was not talking about spelling/grammer in my opening statement, but rather the likelihood of people without education knowing about the rules of logic.

Read above. You are clearly not aware of what you written, or otherwise fail to grasp the intricacies of the english language.

No, you are attempting to ad hom me by discrediting me, and thus my original argument about fallacies. So you are doing this, your just trying to be sneaky about it because I have called you on it. Your post was made to call me a hypocrite, and this association is clearly an attempt to discredit me personally, and any argument I make.

Clearly you do not understand the rules of logic as well you seem to think.

As i have already pointed out.

The assertion that most people on this forum have not gone to college and therefore do not understand the rules of logic is not the same as the assertion that "because you're bad" is not an argument and therefore a logic fallacy.

 

If you are incapable of distinquishing between these two clearly distinct statements, there is little more i can say to you.

 

I have been arguing that the first statement is arrogant and insulting. I have not addressed the second statement to any degree whatsoever. I have also not apply applied any statements regarding the first assertion in any general capacity to truth or falsity of anything else you say or attempt to argue. The two statements are unrelated, and therefore anything regarding the first does not apply to the second. Considering that the first statement is not part of your argument and i was therefore not addressing your argument by addressing the first statement, suggesting that the first is arrogant does not constitue ad hominem .

"He's a hypocrite so don't listen to what he says"- is the implied thrust here.

Actually no, what is implied here is that you're foolish for insulting the people on this forum for not being educated while yourself consistently making an error that an educated person should not make.

Indecently this is a good argument to highlight the use of the fallacy. Thanks.

See above, you clearly lack a basic understanding of the logical fallacy you proclaim to be informing the forum about in this post.

Nowhere did i say or imply that because of you grammatical error your argument about fallacies is false. You seem to have a great deal of trouble understanding this rather simply concept.

Is it possible to make more than one argument in a paragraph? It seems to me that this might be the case here. Just a thought.

Is it possible that you are now desperately trying to justify your statements now? Just a thought. If you were indeed trying to make this argument, then explain to me why when stating your original intentions you did not think to mention this but it is only upon repeated questioning that you provide this rather convenient answer. Did you just forget about it for 3 pages of argument?

So this has nothing to do with the truth or falseness of my original post? Of either of my points? I can't know your motivation, but really??

Exactly.

Come now, lets be honest here. I think your just pissed at me, and your not willing to admit your claim is unfounded.

Ad Hominem.

I am angry therefore i am wrong?

 

Thank you for once again proving you are not only a hypocrite but lack a basic understanding of the logical rules you claim to be teaching.

 

This is just getting embarassing now.

Edited by Gidoru
Link to comment
Share on other sites

this whole thread is illogical.

 

when giving opinion's, facts are not needed to support a claim.

 

In my expert (i think highly of myself dont I) opinion. You are bad. From having grouped with you and seen your poor choices in breaking cc and not killing normal mobs first, i have assesed your value as less than good. Therefore, in my opinion, you are bad.

 

If you make a valid point followed by facts to follow up, i might have to agree with the argument situation. However, this would require you to have a VALID point first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its quite funny that you attempt to get me to answer a question whose answer is not only trivially obvious but has been stated in this thread multiple times. Its also quite funny that you conveniently ignore every question posed at you.

 

Name one.

 

I suppose you believe that you can win an argument by selectively replying to things you feel you are capable of answering while ignoring those things you cannot.

 

Name one.

 

Except that was not your claim.

 

Here is your statement.

I understand a lot of you kids have never gone to college or studied any form of logical thinking, so maybe you think this is actually a reasonble argument. I mean the motivation for someone posting is imporatant right?

 

This is not saying that people who go to college are more likely to know about logical fallacies. Rather this is simply stating that many of the people on the forums did not go to college and therefore do not know about the rules of logic.

 

??? NO it says "gone to college or studied any form of logical thinking ". It also say "a lot of you kids". Notice not all people, nor even a majority, only "a lot", this is totally ambiguous. Your just grasping here.

 

You sir, appear to me to be not interested in having a real debate.

 

The second can be infered from the first, however these are two completely different assertions. But i suppose they look the same to you?

 

You know you can make two arguments right? Let me break down for you:

 

1) Lots of people that don't have education don't know about fallacies.

2) Here is a fallacy.

 

It is no more complex than that.

 

Furthermore, there is nothing preventing a fact from being considered an arrogant remark.

 

Fine why don't you just say anything I say is arrogant and be done with it? What do you want?

 

Read above. You are clearly not aware of what you written, or otherwise fail to grasp the intricacies of the english language.

 

sigh. Really you are making stuff up now. This is just silly.

 

Clearly you do not understand the rules of logic as well you seem to think.

 

What rule of logic have I violated?

As i have already pointed out.

The assertion that most people on this forum have not gone to college and therefore do not understand the rules of logic is not the same as the assertion that "because you're bad" is not an argument and therefore a logic fallacy.

 

Not most people: "a lot" of people. Also these are two arguments, one leads to the other. For example, if they had knowledge of this error why would they be using it? Unless of course they are intentionally trolling. This argument make perfect sense, your just going in circles for no reason.

 

If you are incapable of distinquishing between these two clearly distinct statements, there is little more i can say to you.

 

Yeah two distinct statements, that support each other. What's the issue man? You haven't gotten us anywhere. You called me a hypocrite for a spelling error, in a op about a logic fallacy. If it wasn't an ad hom used to discredit me, what hell are you writing about it here for? Just felt like calling me names? For ***** a giggles??

 

lol.

 

I have been arguing that the first statement is arrogant and insulting.

 

To whom? To a "lot of people". Who is that?? Certainly people that don't use that fallacy wouldn't be part of that group now would they?

 

I have not address the second statement to any degree whatsoever.

 

You're not attacking the statement you're attacking me. It's called character assassination, a form of ad hom.

 

I have also not apply applied any statements regarding the first assertion in any general capacity to true or falsity of anything esle you say or attempt to argue. Being that the two statements are unrelated, and therefore anything regarding the first does not apply to the second. Consider that the first statement is not part of your argument and i was therefore not addressing your argument by addressing the first statement, suggesting that the first is arrogant does not constitue ad hominem .

 

Um ok...

/shakes head

 

Actually no, what is implied here is that you're foolish for insulting the people on this forum for not being educated while yourself consistently making an error that an educated person should not make.

 

Whom did I insult specifically?? Besides you the crusader for hurt forum fallacy users.:p

 

See above, you clearly lack a basic understanding of the logical fallacy you proclaim to be informing the forum about in this post.

 

lol. I understand you want to win this debate, but really??

 

Nowhere did i say or imply that because of you grammatical error your argument about fallacies is false. You seem to have a great deal of trouble understanding this rather simply concept.

 

sigh... No you just posted that for no reason at all. You weren't trying to discredit me at all were you?? :rolleyes:

 

Is it possible that you are now desperately trying to justify your statements now?

I'm desperate?? lol

 

How so?

 

Just a thought. If you were indeed trying to make this argument, then explain to me why when stating your original intentions you did not think to mention this but it is only upon repeated questioning that you provide this rather convenient answer. Did you just forget about it for 3 pages of argument?

 

What??

 

Ad Hominem.

I am angry therefore i am wrong?

 

You are angry and therefore you are not looking at this objectively. This is not an argument, but a suggestion that your motivation for this argument might be tainting your ability to see it clearly. This was stated as my opinion, not an argument.

 

Thank you for once again proving you are not only a hypocrite but lack a basic understanding of the logical rules you claim to be teaching.

 

Since you haven't proven that I am hypocrite in this context, I don't get it. What logical rule have I failed?

 

This is just getting embarassing now.

 

You don't like to lose do you? Not one to admit failure? Never back down sort of person? Even in the face of overwhelming evidence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its called hypocracy. Calling people out for being uneducated while failing at basic spelling and grammar in the same post is just laughable and ruins any credibility you have.

 

Once again, calling me daft and presuming yourself more intelligent when you fail at basic spelling.

 

Cough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand a lot of you kids have never gone to college or studied any form of logical thinking, so maybe you think this is actually a reasonble argument. I mean the motivation for someone posting is imporatant right? They are bad so they complain about something. You think because they have motivation to post something that invalidates their opinon.

 

NO. Just no. Their motivation is irrelevant to the argument they use. It is the evidence that they present that matters. So even if you could prove they are the worst player on the planet; IT STILL WOULD NOT MATTER. It is the evidence they present in their argument that matters, you have to deal with that: not "if they are bad or not".

 

In logic this is what we call argument ad hominem, or "attack of the person". I know politicians do it all the time, I know in grade 6 school yard they do it, it is used all the time, but in LOGIC it is a fallacy.

 

Any time you use it: You FAIL.

 

http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/person.html

 

Except that real life doesn't work like that. When you're sick do you go to the doctor, or go talk to a random person about why you're feeling sick? You'd go see a doctor. Why? Because the advice/information you get from a doctor is far more likely to be of use and accurate than what some random *** person says.

 

So when someone complains about something in this game, it matters if they are bad or not when the complaint is regarding class balance.

Edited by Smashbrother
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand a lot of you kids have never gone to college or studied any form of logical thinking, so maybe you think this is actually a reasonble argument. I mean the motivation for someone posting is imporatant right? They are bad so they complain about something. You think because they have motivation to post something that invalidates their opinon.

 

NO. Just no. Their motivation is irrelevant to the argument they use. It is the evidence that they present that matters. So even if you could prove they are the worst player on the planet; IT STILL WOULD NOT MATTER. It is the evidence they present in their argument that matters, you have to deal with that: not "if they are bad or not".

 

In logic this is what we call argument ad hominem, or "attack of the person". I know politicians do it all the time, I know in grade 6 school yard they do it, it is used all the time, but in LOGIC it is a fallacy.

 

Any time you use it: You FAIL.

 

http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/person.html

 

i completed university. and now im engeneer(not kinda useless guy like most nowadays)

and "you are bad" is a good argument, when you know something, but dont want to bother yourself explaining it to a guy who not deserves to know truth.

Its like with resolve system: it works, but some guys have no brains to understand how.

why need i bother explaining?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand a lot of you kids have never gone to college or studied any form of logical thinking, so maybe you think this is actually a reasonble argument. I mean the motivation for someone posting is imporatant right? They are bad so they complain about something. You think because they have motivation to post something that invalidates their opinon.

You should probably also refrain from insulting people like you did in the first line. As what you said means more or less the same as what you said we shouldn't say? Just you are taking your statement into real life.

Who have I insulted? My comments were not directed at any specific person. So this claim fails. Also there are simply many people that do not have the education to know about the rules of logic. This is a fact, as this board, any many, many, more like it prove.

 

This exchange made me laugh so hard. It's not insult if it's not directed at specific person, that's fine.

So, to keep with facts, if person plays Deception Assasin, and says he can't kill this or that, you can't tell him that he can't play, that would be an insult. But, you should tell him that most people can't play Deception Assasin properly(that's a fact, Devs said so), making it not directed at him as specific person, so valid and entirely not an insult.

 

 

Let's try to put our newfound skill to use:

People that point out lesser education of other people generally have very low self-esteem, due to being bad or other reason they are not proud of.(That's a fact.)

Smart people don't try too hard to win internet agruments.(That's a fact.)

 

Hey, it's easy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Let's try to put our newfound skill to use:

People that point out lesser education of other people generally have very low self-esteem, due to being bad or other reason they are not proud of.(That's a fact.)

Smart people don't try too hard to win internet agruments.(That's a fact.)

 

Hey, it's easy!

 

I agree with this, and since it is a generalisation it is not an insult but a fact?

Didn't the op post that somewhere along his lines as well when pointed out he was insulting?Found it!

Or probably when we use it its a veiled insult. When he does its a generalisation.

 

Who have I called uneducated?

 

People in general?? lol. Fair much?

Edited by Twor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure you're just bad at arguing, so that's the end of whatever point you were trying to make.

 

This is very obviously satirical in nature, and anyone who took it seriously should wake up, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i completed university. and now im engeneer(not kinda useless guy like most nowadays)

and "you are bad" is a good argument, when you know something, but dont want to bother yourself explaining it to a guy who not deserves to know truth.

Its like with resolve system: it works, but some guys have no brains to understand how.

why need i bother explaining?

 

I guess it wasn't an English-speaking university.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it wasn't an English-speaking university.

 

C'mon not everyone has english as their native language. I wouldn't call you out if you'd make some mistakes while communicating in german with me either :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gidoru "NOT" failing grammar....

 

Spelling and grammar are things someone who is educated and has gone to college should quite adept at. Particularly given that the difference between your and you're is something you should have learned before high school.

 

Please continue thinking yourself brilliant because you have taken possible 1 or 2 Philosphy courses. Judging by the fact you cannot spell, it must not have been a very good college.

 

You have at least 2 huge errors in the above quote (should BE quite adept at) and (Philosphy is not a word)

 

Second post from Gidoru with errors.

Pretty substantial difference between making a typo and error of a single letter while thinking of something else and not knowing the difference your and you're.

 

Also a pretty substanial difference between you and i given that you are calling people uneducated and then showing yourself to be. Whereas i have not done the same.

(and AN error of a single letter) and of course, the good old forgot to capitalize the I....

 

The OP is 100% correct. there is a fallacy in logical arguments that is used constantly on these forums. L2P = Argumentum ad hominem =/= a logical rebuttal.

 

The fact that people have a go at his sentence structure/grammar is a signifier that these forums are filled with people who don't argue logically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C'mon not everyone has english as their native language. I wouldn't call you out if you'd make some mistakes while communicating in german with me either :)

 

I wouldn't use German to communicate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The OP is 100% correct. there is a fallacy in logical arguments that is used constantly on these forums. L2P = Argumentum ad hominem =/= a logical rebuttal.

 

Ao you're saying that no matter what problems people have, source of those problems never lies between chair and keyboard? That's very interesting opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand a lot of you kids have never gone to college or studied any form of logical thinking, so maybe you think this is actually a reasonble argument. I mean the motivation for someone posting is imporatant right? They are bad so they complain about something. You think because they have motivation to post something that invalidates their opinon.

 

NO. Just no. Their motivation is irrelevant to the argument they use. It is the evidence that they present that matters. So even if you could prove they are the worst player on the planet; IT STILL WOULD NOT MATTER. It is the evidence they present in their argument that matters, you have to deal with that: not "if they are bad or not".

 

In logic this is what we call argument ad hominem, or "attack of the person". I know politicians do it all the time, I know in grade 6 school yard they do it, it is used all the time, but in LOGIC it is a fallacy.

 

Any time you use it: You FAIL.

 

http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/person.html

 

A very long winded way to say that anyone that disagrees with you is wrong. Please shorten it up a bit in the future. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...