-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Facts and Reasons
- Thread starter Heyo
- Start date
-
- Tags
- #ad hominem #dilbert
Secret Chief
nirvana is samsara
Of course it does you moron.Does that remind you of someone specific?
Im late for the party so ^^^ THIS ^^^
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
There are in fact 2 kinds. Positive and negative.
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
Yes it does...but I can't name themDoes that remind you of someone specific?
Staff will pick me up by my ears if I do I need my ears....
Audie
Veteran Member
Oh, now, you are just repeating what others say
about you.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
There is a concept of positive ad hominem. If I state something which is a reason for your thinking/behavior, which is a fact, it is in fact a positive ad hominem. Or in reverse.
If someone has so many arguments and right points, the truth suffices.
Because the truth is stronger.
Because the truth is stronger.
Last edited:
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
If someone has so many arguments and right points, they don't need ad hominems.
Because the truth is stronger.
Well, if I tell the truth about you, that is a positive ad hominem, because I describe the facts about you. And so in reverse.
I.e. e.g. for how you understand 2+2=4, 2+2=11, 2+2=5 and 2+2=∞, that is about you. As much as it is about me, how I understand those.
If someone has so many arguments and right points, they don't need ad hominems.
Because the truth is stronger.
Actually, I find feelings to be stronger than truth.
Truth only works if you can get past them darn feelings.
Which, imo, kind of makes the OP appropriate.
The easiest way to "win" an argument is by making the other guy mad.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
The joke is that on good days it won't work on me, because I am mad.
Ah...
That's why I always win our arguments.
J/K
Often true, never relevant.
Does that remind you of someone specific?
I don't think people argue over facts and reasons. They argue over differing values and philosophical differences. That's why ad hominems come in, since it might hit closer to home and lead to an emotional response.
If someone said "Abraham Lincoln was the 10th President of the United States," that's a simple error in fact which can be easily corrected with "No, A. Lincoln was the 16th President of the United States." Short and sweet, and if most factual discussions were handled that way, there would be fewer problems. No reason to resort to ad hominems or get upset or emotional about it. It's just a simple mistake which is easily corrected.
Trouble is, rather than give the correct answer right away, some people choose to be cute and cagey about it, turning it into some sort of game for some reason other than the honest dissemination of correct information.
I suppose it may work to some extent. I think when someone takes a political stance on something, it's 90% emotional and 10% "facts and reason." Yet nobody wants to admit to that, as they want everyone to think their stance is purely objective and based solely on study, scholarship, scientific facts, etc. But if one makes them mad, they might lose their composure and accidentally blurt out the real reason they take the stance they do.
Secret Chief
nirvana is samsara
I'd have to understand your posts to argue with youThe joke is that on good days it won't work on me, because I am mad.
Secret Chief
nirvana is samsara
(Want an argument?
)I'll happily admit to this. Politics is as much about subjective values, attitudes, philosophies etc as it is about study, scholarship, science etc. But I'd have thought people generally realise that this is the case? No?
Funny that politics has become more volatile than religious topics.
(Want an argument?
I'll happily admit to this. Politics is as much about subjective values, attitudes, philosophies etc as it is about study, scholarship, science etc. But I'd have thought people generally realise that this is the case? No?
I think people realize it on a more fundamental level, but sometimes people seem to forget during the argument.