TheGuy's repeating theme Threads, that're all on the same tangent, merged here.

[TheGuy]

Re: Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteous, for they will be filled..

What is good about being in Japan, is their advanced technology, you don't have to go to the beach, it comes to you..

{Ummmm....no, I wouldn't. I would come to his assistance.}

Are you sure about that?

 

[gerryh]

Re: Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteous, for they will be filled..

Some of these posts remind me of someone in Beamsville:lol:

Do they still have the horse track there? When I lived there, the townhouses we lived in backed onto the Horse track. And on Canada day they had a fair on the grounds with fireworks and everything. It was sooooooooo cool.

 

[TheGuy]

Re: Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteous, for they will be filled..

I just want to interject into this thread to make a side point.

An argumentum ad hominem is not a logical fallacy when the argument it is attacking relies on the personal characteristics of the person making it. If for example the argument made depends on the persons reliability or honesty or intelligence, you can logically rebut that argument by questioning those qualities - attacking the person's reliability, honesty or intelligence.

What petros said would have been a fallacious ad hominem had he called TheGuy silly in order to refute an argument he made. But he didn't. He just said TheGuy was silly. And that makes it only an insult. There's no need to slap a Latin word on it and pretend you're operating on some higher level of debate here (that's my job ). Most people know and use your incorrect definition of ad hominem anyway.

To respond to a statement, with an insult, is to imply that the statement is FALSE.. particularly when the insult is reffering to ones intellectual capacity...

You are splitting hairs..

At any rate...



Fallacy: Personal Attack

Also Known as: Ad Hominem Abusive. Description of Personal Attack


A personal attack is committed when a person substitutes abusive remarks for evidence when attacking another person's claim or claims. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because the attack is directed at the person making the claim and not the claim itself. The truth value of a claim is independent of the person making the claim. After all, no matter how repugnant an individual might be, he or she can still make true claims.
Not all ad Hominems are fallacious. In some cases, an individual's characteristics can have a bearing on the question of the veracity of her claims. For example, if someone is shown to be a pathological liar, then what he says can be considered to be unreliable. However, such attacks are weak, since even pathological liars might speak the truth on occasion. In general, it is best to focus one's attention on the content of the claim and not on who made the claim. It is the content that determines the truth of the claim and not the characteristics of the person making the claim.


So DO your damn JOB.. .

 

[Goober]

Re: Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteous, for they will be filled..

Gee Goob, I think you're getting to the little twerp. He's making even less sense than he usually does.

Gerry H

A very simple life principle - Little sense - No sense - then The Guy - Natural progression I would say? He is only a few stem cells away from being single ( stem cell).

To respond to a statement, with an insult, is to imply that the statement is FALSE.. particularly when the insult is reffering to ones intellectual capacity...

You are splitting hairs..

And pray tell, what is your intellectual capacity - you refer to it so often, please less us with the IQ and you capacity level.
Personally I think your level is about what many would refer to as a toilet ring.

 

[TheGuy]

Re: Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteous, for they will be filled..

Gerry H

A very simple life principle - Little sense - No sense - then The Guy - Natural progression I would say? He is only a few stem cells away from being single ( stem cell).


And pray tell, what is your intellectual capacity - you refer to it so often, please less us with the IQ and you capacity level.
Personally I think your level is about what many would refer to as a toilet ring.

So DO your damn JOB.. .

 

[Goober]

Re: Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteous, for they will be filled..

So DO your damn JOB.. .

Are the questions to difficult for you. I could try use one or two syllable words. Come on answer up.

 

[Corduroy]

Re: Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteous, for they will be filled..

To respond to a statement, with an insult, is to imply that the statement is FALSE.. particularly when the insult is reffering to ones intellectual capacity...

It might. But petros didn't respond to a statement. He just said you were silly without any context.

So DO your damn JOB.. .

What?

 

[Chiliagon]

If you don't LIE, then you don't need to remember what you said..

if it were only that simple...

 

[damngrumpy]

Re: Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteous, for they will be filled..

The Guy believes he has truth, and truth when it comes to the spiritual realm is not
probable in the mystic sence of the word. Did some of the events in the Bible take
place? Yes I believe they did, but they way they are depicted entirely not sure at all.
The Bible is like Huck Finn, over time it has been the subject of revisionist history
until it matches what some people wanted to present as the truth.
Is there merritt in spiritual things, I suppose there is, but when you plan your life
around anything, and it is one thing only, based on a spiritual feeling, you miss the
point others are trying to make. This guy has done that, no one has the key to the
truth except him and a bunch of people who believe the same thing.
Personally i don't give a damn what people do or do not believe. Two thousand years
have passed and someone should rewrite that book again, so it at least conforms to
some vision of the modern world. Problem is some must live in the past way back in
the past. I find it hard to take this serious actually, Give me a break.

 

[MHz]

Re: I think it make a lot of sense that people would BASH Christians.

Cord put the claws to 'im - hence the feather problem....

I don't think it is possible to give a fallen angel that 'rode hard and put up wet look'. For the viagra crowd it would be rode hard and put up dead.

 

[lone wolf]

Re: I think it make a lot of sense that people would BASH Christians.

Beats hell outs dyin' WITHOUT that sweet smile of satisfaction....

 

[petros]

Re: Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteous, for they will be filled..

I just want to interject into this thread to make a side point.

An argumentum ad hominem is not a logical fallacy when the argument it is attacking relies on the personal characteristics of the person making it. If for example the argument made depends on the persons reliability or honesty or intelligence, you can logically rebut that argument by questioning those qualities - attacking the person's reliability, honesty or intelligence.

What petros said would have been a fallacious ad hominem had he called TheGuy silly in order to refute an argument he made. But he didn't. He just said TheGuy was silly. And that makes it only an insult. There's no need to slap a Latin word on it and pretend you're operating on some higher level of debate here (that's my job ). Most people know and use your incorrect definition of ad hominem anyway.

I said "some guy" was silly.

 

[petros]

Re: I think it make a lot of sense that people would BASH Christians.

I don't think it is possible to give a fallen angel that 'rode hard and put up wet look'. For the viagra crowd it would be rode hard and put up dead.

The phrase is "rode hard and put away wet". As in exercising a thoroughbred a horse.

 

[DaSleeper]

If you don't LIE, then you don't need to remember what you said....

if it were only that simple...

Actualy It's the only thing he's posted that makes sense so far.....:roll:

 

[taxslave]

if it were only that simple...

That would put lawyers out of business

 

[TheGuy]

Not when those buildings are occupied by other people. Their right to live supersedes any "right " for muslim terrorists to kill anyone including other muslims..

You missed the point..

It is your OPINION that " Their right to live supersedes any "right " for muslim terrorists to kill anyone including other muslims"

 

[TheGuy]

Re: I think it make a lot of sense that people would BASH Christians.

People , at least in Canada have a right to their religious beliefs no matter how wacky or lack there of. What they don't have is the right to impose those beliefs on others.

TO {impose beliefs on others} is the very definition of religion..

And further this OPINON that {they don't have the right to impose those beliefs on others} is being imposed on THEM..

So on what grounds do SOME have the RIGHT to impose their beliefs on others?

 

[TheGuy]

What is FAITH?

I see no difference between FAITH and PRESUMPTUOUSNESS...

FAITH in a religious context is to simply ASSUME TO KNOW what is TRUE, when it is not reasonable or logical to assume it as TRUE at all...

 

[CDNBear]

Re: I think it make a lot of sense that people would BASH Christians.

TO {impose beliefs on others} is the very definition of religion..

Religion | Define Religion at Dictionary.com

Can you point out where it says that in the "very definition" of religion?

So on what grounds do SOME have the RIGHT to impose their beliefs on others?

When the law and legislation dictate so.

 

[JLM]

Re: What is FAITH?

I see no difference between FAITH and PRESUMPTUOUSNESS...

FAITH in a religious context is to simply ASSUME TO KNOW what is TRUE, when it is not reasonable or logical to assume it as TRUE at all...

I do- faith generally pertains to good, positive things - presumptuousness generally pertains to making assumptions that favour yourself over the other person.