Fandom Forums - View Single Post - Us government's trick to violate civil liberties
View Single Post
Old 01-18-2012, 07:55 PM   #187
[something clever]
Axiom's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 74
Thanks: 487
Thanked 824 Times in 305 Posts
Axiom is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties

Originally Posted by almightywood View Post
Not really, you all were trying to tell me my opinion was invalid through stating your own.
You all brought your opinions up in contention to mine, not the reverse.
In other words, it was you who were enforcing your opinions on me.
Nothing of a kind has happened in this thread. What has transpired here is people have presented reasonable arguments against your unsubstantiated hogwash, then provided proper evidence to reinforce their claims, that indeed what you are faffing on about is unsubstantiated hogwash.

No, my point all along, was that you all state your opinions like they are facts. Whereas I state mine as though it's an opinion. You can't disprove an opinion with an opinion, only with a fact. That is why you can not prove an opinion wrong without proving it impossible. When you talk about right and wrong (in the logical sense), you are talking about something that basically exists completely outside the realm of anything I was ever even discussing.
You have said all this before, and continue to add nothing of value to your argument. Did you really come back here just to copy and paste crap you have already said in just about every other one of your posts?

It's interesting however that you keep using this untouchable opinion/unobtainable truth spiel of yours, when yourself said:
The only way an opinion can possibly be wrong is if it goes against absolute truth, otherwise the simple fact that is an opinion makes it impossible to be wrong.
This is you using an absolute truth to try and solidify your opinion.

The only problem here is the fact that you all refuse to approach a non-debate discussion with a non-debate oriented approach.
You do realize your "non-debate" is taking placing in a sub-section of the debate board right?

Debates are for meatheads who don't like to mull on things. It's a way for people to feel important about themselves and smart.
Is this an opinion or an absolute truth?

I am much more willing to entertain the validity of a well thought out and properly reasoned claim, from someone who put in the time and effort to research and construct an argument of substance. Over the nonsensical ramblings of some guy who simply "mulled" things over for five minutes in his head.

After all the whole point of a debate isn't the truth at all, it's just winning.
Again, extending from my previous point. Debates for individuals to whom are actually willing to spend the time research the finer points of their position. So they can precede to present a reasonable argument for it.

Being ethically right and wrong is something I care about, I find the other right and wrong to be the most insignificant concept on the face of the planet. Since it is only an illusion anyway.
It's actually the exacty opposite of insignificant. If I claim that clouds are made of lettuce. Do you honestly consider it worth while to explore that as an actual possibility? I think not.

Once you determine that someone is "right" with a debate, then you file it away under "resolved" even though no conclusion was ever actually reached, as there is still more to know about the subject, whatever it is.
If there is more to know on a subject matter, then there is still room for debate. That's not the case for you, becuase you just keep coming back regurgitating the same old lame -to quote Act- "Metaphysical crap".

A debate is just the common man's way to "figure something out" so they no longer have to think about it. It's the lowest form of intellectual discussion,
Wow..... The level of nonsense in that is.... Just wow.

A discussion that is not a debate is the only good way to pass along information since you don't have to fight people to get your message across. At that point it is up to them whether or not they choose to accept what you have to say.
You should, unequivocally, have to "fight to get your message across". That's what proves you, at the very least, have applied proper thought to it to begin with. Why should anyone accept your view on a subject when you have proven to have no knowledge of it, and no intention on researching it further.

If some guy trys to rewrite the laws of physics by claiming that the erath is held together by spegetti noodles. He better be prepared to argue that position with more then, "it is becuase I beleive it is"

My whole little philosophy wasn't created so that I could never be wrong. It has nothing to do with me always being right.
That's exactly what your philoshophy does. "I am stating my opinions. Opinions cannot be proven wrong, without an absolute truth. Absoluted trutsh do not exist. Ergo, I can never be proven wrong."

You like that kid on the play ground, who makes up rules for the game on the fly, to which only benefit him. Then when one of his rules bites him in the ass, he changes it to suit him better.

You all can call me a hypocrite for posting again
You're a hypocrite.

Last edited by Axiom; 01-18-2012 at 07:57 PM.
Axiom is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Axiom For This Useful Post:
ask me anything (01-18-2012), kael03 (01-18-2012), Mal (01-18-2012), Miburo (01-20-2012), Numinous (01-18-2012), xxMESTxx (01-18-2012)