Jump to content

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


FodderofCannon

Recommended Posts

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

Argumentum ad Hominem (abusive and circumstantial): the fallacy of attacking the character or circumstances of an individual who is advancing a statement or an argument instead of trying to disprove the truth of the statement or the soundness of the argument. Often the argument is characterized simply as a personal attack.

 

The personal attack is also often termed an "ad personem argument": the statement or argument at issue is dropped from consideration or is ignored, and the locutor's character or circumstances are used to influence opinion.

 

The fallacy draws its appeal from the technique of "getting personal." The assumption is that what the locutor is saying is entirely or partially dictated by his character or special circumstances and so should be disregarded.

Edited by FodderofCannon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

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

 

says the gunslinger who made a QQ nerf powertechs thread based on trying to 2v1 a pair of burst DPS at the end of a warzone without paying full attention...

 

you're bad skolops

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skill level directly correlates to understanding of the game and how to pvp competitively. Excuse me if I don't take the level 20 sawbones who complains about how his heals are subpar without his man hots yet seriously. And then he rerolls sent thinking it's just the class, only to let me kill him in 3 gcds. Have at least valor 60 or you haven't played enough to know. Even at valor 83 I'm still learning more about my class and optimal pvp.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

says the gunslinger who made a QQ nerf powertechs thread based on trying to 2v1 a pair of burst DPS at the end of a warzone without paying full attention...

 

you're bad skolops

 

I enjoy reading your posts :)

 

But since I need to stay on topic here: You are bad! :D

 

@OP, while I agree with the point that insults alone are only the arguments of those who have none, the L2P on the forums is often used when people demonstrate that they have not spend any time with trying to find construcive ways to deal with their problem (usually being killed by someone).

 

Nonconstructive posts like "nerf xyz, they are so op" are just tiresome and the majority of the forums warms up old "arguments" without making the effort to read what was already posted in that matter, often not even informing themselves about the class/spec they want nerfed.

In those cases being bad stands not necessarily for the skill level alone but also for failing to inform oneself about the strengths and weaknesses of the opponent.

You can probably substitute "You are too lazy" for you are bad.

 

Also what evidence? Beside scripts that have parsed the server logs from BW you can seldom get evidence on the topics (example is the thread KBISP mentioned). Anecdotal evidence like "Pyros dealing 10k rs crits" etc? :D

 

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.

 

You have no evidence about the people you are insulting, no claim to your stakes and a few latin words are not exactly rocket science level either :)

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.

 

In other words... "Because your Bad"?

 

I just dont quite have much faith in most of humanity to think you posted that as a joke, rather than a serious rebuttal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@OP, while I agree with the point that insults alone are only the arguments of those who have none, the L2P on the forums is often used when people demonstrate that they have not spend any time with trying to find construcive ways to deal with their problem (usually being killed by someone).

 

It's not a matter if you agree with me or not. It is a matter of logic. Its a fallacy, always has been, always will be.

 

Nonconstructive posts like "nerf xyz, they are so op" are just tiresome and the majority of the forums warms up old "arguments" without making the effort to read what was already posted in that matter, often not even informing themselves about the class/spec they want nerfed.

 

This is still a judgment of their person. The point your missing is that it doesn't matter if you think they are lazy, argue with them about their point, even a simple "what is your evidence?" would be better. The logical way to deal with this would to be to call them on their lack of evidence, I have seen may decently argued posts about balance just dismissed with the 'your bad" non-argument.

 

Also what evidence? Beside scripts that have parsed the server logs from BW you can seldom get evidence on the topics (example is the thread KBISP mentioned). Anecdotal evidence like "Pyros dealing 10k rs crits" etc? :D

If they present no evidence then you are entitled to call them on it, and dismiss their argument based on their lack of evidence. This is prefectly legitimate, however, their own experience can be evidence, it just might not be persuasive.That's something you can have an actual debate about. "l2p" "you are bad" is not it.

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.

 

You have no evidence about the people you are insulting, no claim to your stakes and a few latin words are not exactly rocket science level either :)

 

They are rules of logic, you don't like rules, I get it.

 

Also you just attacked my person, where I did not attack yours.

 

See the difference?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, guys... Honestly, anyone who thinks that was a serious reply really needs to get out more.

 

Yes, it was a joke. Moreso, actually, it was an attempt to respond with the same level of value I saw in the original post. It's not that he's wrong about what he says. Rather, it's that I think its really somewhat absurd that he thinks this post is really all that constructive, in my opinion. Anyone who thinks "You're bad" is an argument and is posting on an MMO forums is pretty much beyond the hope of being instructed in logical fallacies. This is so obvious that I almost think the OP is trolling in any case.

Edited by Skolops
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skill level directly correlates to understanding of the game and how to pvp competitively. Excuse me if I don't take the level 20 sawbones who complains about how his heals are subpar without his man hots yet seriously. And then he rerolls sent thinking it's just the class, only to let me kill him in 3 gcds. Have at least valor 60 or you haven't played enough to know. Even at valor 83 I'm still learning more about my class and optimal pvp.

 

The reality is this it doesn't matter if you think this. It's still a fallacy.

 

Bur as a side: Do you think that the developers all have valor 60 characters? If they do not: do you think you have more knowledge of how the game is designed than the people the people that actually designed it? Not an exhaustive example, but one that does illustrate why the fallacy exists in the first place.

 

Would a civilian not be able to tell if the American army is superior to the Iraq Army even though the civilian has no military knowledge?

 

The fallacy exists for a reason, you just have to treat everyone with fairness instead of prejudging them. Even if in the end your prejudice is right, the fallacy still exists for a reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

They are rules of logic, you don't like rules, I get it.

 

Also you just attacked my person, where I did not attack yours.

 

See the difference?

 

Erm. Great contradiction in three lines. I also said latin words are not rocket science, if you think that is an insult its your way to see.

But sry you fail at argumentation (statement, fact as shown in the quote above so not an insult). Like the three lines alone demonstrate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, guys... Honestly, anyone who thinks that was a serious reply really needs to get out more.

 

Yes, it was a joke. Moreso, actually, it was an attempt to respond with the same level of value I saw in the original post. It's not that he's wrong about what he says. Rather, it's that I think its really somewhat absurd that he thinks this post is really all that constructive, in my opinion. Anyone who thinks "You're bad" is an argument and is posting on an MMO forums is pretty much beyond the hope of being instructed in logical fallacies. This is so obvious that I almost think the OP is trolling in any case.

 

The reality is that many people use this fallacy ALL THE TIME (not just in this context, but everywhere, why do think negative adds work so well in politics?) and think they have nailed it. They simply haven't been educated about logic. People like to justify this fallacy because it is so commonly used by most people think its valid. It's the old "repeat it often enough and people will believe anything."

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

 

For someone who has supposedly gone to college and studied logical thinking, you'd think you know the difference because your and you're. Because you're bad.

 

I guess YOUR just too smart for everyone.

 

Furthermore, most people do not post arguments or evidence. Any 'evidence' they might post is usually ancidotal and therefore the fact that they are bad at the game is quite relevant.

Edited by Gidoru
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reality is that many people use this fallacy ALL THE TIME (not just in this context, but everywhere, why do think negative adds work so well in politics?) and think they have nailed it. They simply haven't been educated about logic. People like to justify this fallacy because it is so commonly used by most people think its valid. It's the old "repeat it often enough and people will believe anything."

 

Are you sure you're not trolling?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erm. Great contradiction in three lines. I also said latin words are not rocket science, if you think that is an insult its your way to see.

 

Veiled insult, but yeah it was directed at me in order to discredit my argument. Come now, be honest . My OP was not directed at you.

 

See the difference??

 

But sry you fail at argumentation (statement, fact as shown in the quote above so not an insult). Like the three lines alone demonstrate.

 

Even if I fail at one argument (who hasn't failed in one argument?) which I did not here, would not mean I fail at argumentation in general. This is equivalent to saying if someone makes a mistake they always make mistakes. This would be another fallacy called: slippery slope fallacy.

 

See no Latin.

Edited by FodderofCannon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For someone who has supposedly gone to college and studied logical thinking, you'd think you know the difference because your and you're. Because you're bad.

 

I guess YOUR just too smart for everyone.

 

Furthermore, most people do not post arguments or evidence. Any 'evidence' they might post is usually ancidotal and therefore the fact that they are bad at the game is quite relevant.

 

Oh come on, attack the person again?? Really?? Are you daft??

 

This is the internet, spelling is optional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh come on, attack the person again?? Really?? Are you daft??

 

This is the internet, spelling is optional.

 

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.

Edited by Gidoru
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet it's spelling and grammar. Not logic. Also notice the quotes.

 

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.

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

 

Man this made me laugh, how about you put that philosophy major to better use than arguing on the SWTOR PVP forums.... oh wait.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...