Fandom Forums - View Single Post - Us government's trick to violate civil liberties
View Single Post
Old 12-21-2011, 08:50 PM   #153
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 275
Thanks: 37
Thanked 97 Times in 90 Posts
almightywood is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Originally Posted by Miburo View Post
Of course you don't, you're an idiot. It doesn't matter if you believe in something or not. I would disagree with it regardless of whether a statement is something you believe (oh wait, something you base your life philosophy around) or not. It doesn't matter. I don't disagree with it because it's your life philosophy. I doubt it's validity or disagree with it because it's something that lacks proof or something I find disagreeable. To me, it being your life philosophy is inconsequential and coincidental. Totally irrelevant.
It doesn't matter AT ALL if it is relevant to you. If you are attacking my life's philosophy, WHICH I CLEARLY STATED, then you are making a personal attack on me. A personal attack on me isn't a sound argument. If we're talking about my personal philosophy, there's no such thing as a sound argument against it because anything that is one is a personal attack, unless it is something that completely disproves even the very possibility of it being valid. If it was any belief other than my personal philosophy then it wouldn't be. Simple as.

Okay, change wherever I said "your belief" to "your life philosophy" if it'll stop your nitpicking. There. Now you can stop avoiding the discussion. Give me a link to one of the many websites dedicated to explaining and providing examples of logical fallacies that shows exactly this: 'Counter-arguments against a statement that happens to be a basis of your life philosophy are ad hominens.' That's it. Then you win. Game over. That is all it would take to prove my comrades and I were being ignorant and you were right all along.
Change 'counter-arguments' back to 'attacks' and 'ad hominens' back to 'are an attack on my character', and you're talking, I'll go looking, since that's the only statement I need to prove.

You would also be proving that there is nothing illogical about many things that are now considered ignorant and horrible, like racism and sexism, since any arguments against such things would qualify as counter-arguments against statements that happen to be a basis of many people's life philosophies. Making them logically fallacious. You're literally a couple of link posts away from exposing a world changing breakthrough in logic that would do bigots the world over a truly great service. You truly are a sage of enlightenment, and I'm honored to be a part of this monumental historic event.
In my opinion, logic can be used to justify anything so, yeah, this is pretty much already the case as far as I'm concerned.

These are called the laws of respect that everyone has the RIGHT to by virtue of being born, not the laws of logic. I was told that all of academia disputes me, well go find me an ethics book that says you can freely attack another person's beliefs. If you're going to tell me that ethics don't apply in a discussion or debate, I will tell you to go straight to hell.
Religious persecution is criticizing someone's beliefs as much as criticizing them for their beliefs.

Last edited by almightywood; 12-21-2011 at 09:07 PM.
almightywood is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to almightywood For This Useful Post:
matta (01-23-2012)