Know-Nothing-Know-It-Alls

[Nakosis]

I've run into a couple of people. not many who'll not believe me when I tell them my views.
I suppose I feel if they are going to disbelieve what I say anyway, no point in engaging them.

Occasionally I'll make what seems an outlandish statement, but I always have something to back it up with. Meaning more then just my opinion.

 

[leibowde84]

A lot of conversations usually dont require that you share your beliefs but more debating with reasonable arguments you support but may not believe in (since thats irrevelant to the debate at hand)?

Yes, I agree with this.

 

[leibowde84]

There will never be an equation, a photo, a fingerprint or repeatable experiment.
No proof will be offered.

only the argument.

If the argument fails to pass your sensibility....then you will call it dishonest.

I don't think that is honest.
You claim devil's advocate.....
do you also claim the weigh scale and balance?

STRAW MAN ALERT! When did I say that if an argument fails to pass my sensibility, I will call it dishonest. That is absurd. Something is only dishonest if the person expressing it knows it to be false. And, I have never once claimed that I am in any place to the "weigh scale and balance". Where are you getting this stuff from?!

Expressing an argument = providing a reasoned deduction of why a certain premise is plausible, whether or not you agree with that premise.

Expressing a personal belief = speaking to what you, personally, think to be true.

 

[leibowde84]

I've run into a couple of people. not many who'll not believe me when I tell them my views.
I suppose I feel if they are going to disbelieve what I say anyway, no point in engaging them.

Occasionally I'll make what seems an outlandish statement, but I always have something to back it up with. Meaning more then just my opinion.

Exactly. I agree.

 

[leibowde84]

"It's not always about you," is what people say to remind others that they are taking something personally or making it about themselves when that wasn't the intent.

Ad hominem is when the debate opponent is directing their arguments to be about you; hence the humour in reminding yourself that their ad hominem is "not about you."

Oh ... I see. Thanks for clarifying. I completely agree.

 

[Thief]

I agree. Argument is a tool used in the "seeking of something better". And, belief should be stated as belief, nothing more. But, how is that relevant? I am speaking to arguments, not dishonest professions of beliefs.

You must have made your mind.....somewhere along the way....what is dishonest.

 

[Jumi]

You can ask questions without holding a position of belief of them. How is that dishonest?

 

[leibowde84]

You must have made your mind.....somewhere along the way....what is dishonest.

"Dishonest" is a term that means "not honest". Honesty is when you believe the things you claim as true to be true. When you make a claim that you know is not true, that is dishonest. With an argument, however, you are not making any declarative statements about what you think. You are substantiating a specific premise with reasoned deduction. Unless you are using an argument that you know to be false, you aren't being dishonest.

How are you defining dishonesty?

 

[leibowde84]

Strawmaen arguments occur because the position is not nderstood in the first place. half the time, the poster does not even realize that that they are strwamnning an argument.

A straw man is a common form of argumentand is an informal fallacy based on false representation of an opponent's argument.[1]To be successful, a straw man argument requires that the audience be ignorant or uninformed of the original argument. (From Wikipedia).

How is this relevant to your point?

 

[Desert Snake]

A straw man is a common form of argumentand is an informal fallacy based on false representation of an opponent's argument.[1]To be successful, a straw man argument requires that the audience be ignorant or uninformed of the original argument. (From Wikipedia).

How is this relevant to your point?

Because in reality, these affectations of belief, or position, usually do posit a 'strawman', ie ''Jesus is G-d, is from the trinity doctrine'', type thing. It's a non-understanding of the general arguments.

 

[leibowde84]

Because in reality, these affectations of belief, or position, usually do posit a 'strawman', ie ''Jesus is G-d, is from the trinity doctrine'', type thing. It's a non-understanding of the general arguments.

OK, I agree I guess, but this is not caused by people arguing for positions they don't necessarily hold. They are simply and obviously caused by a lack of understanding and seem to happen more when people are professing their personal beliefs.

 

[leibowde84]

Because in reality, these affectations of belief, or position, usually do posit a 'strawman', ie ''Jesus is G-d, is from the trinity doctrine'', type thing. It's a non-understanding of the general arguments.

It seems as if you are claiming that belief in some way correlates to understanding an argument, but that couldn't be.

 

[Desert Snake]

OK, I agree I guess, but this is not caused by people arguing for positions they don't necessarily hold. They are simply and obviously caused by a lack of understanding and seem to happen more when people are professing their personal beliefs.

The majority of these mistaken positions, in my experience, on RF, actually do stem from those who do not hold those beliefs, themselves. Ironically, it often takes the form of someone, telling me what a ''correct'' interpretation is, of some religious text or concept, even though they don't hold the belief themselves. This is clearly also an indication that their ''position'' is incorrect, if even they don't hold it. lol

 

[leibowde84]

The majority of these mistaken positions, in my experience, on RF, actually do stem from those who do not hold those beliefs, themselves. Ironically, it often takes the form of someone, telling me what a ''correct'' interpretation is, of some religious text or concept, even though they don't hold the belief themselves. This is clearly also an indication that their ''position'' is incorrect, if even they don't hold it. lol

I would have to disagree. I feel like I see that much more in people who are confident in their beliefs, as they often aren't open to being wrong.

 

[Desert Snake]

It seems as if you are claiming that belief in some way correlates to understanding an argument, but that couldn't be.

That is a subjective thing. I will say 'belief', even if I think something is true, or actual. This is a religious usage of the word, it is not the same as saying, ''I have no idea about this, but I'm guessing'', etc.

 

[Desert Snake]

I would have to disagree. I feel like I see that much more in people who are confident in their beliefs, as they often aren't open to being wrong.

That would only be the case in forums where there is a ''majority'' held belief, or likewise. Many people here argue positions that they don't personally hold.
I understand what you are meaning by belief doesn't indicate correctness, however, belief does indicate a position that the arguer, ACTUALLY believes, which therefore is indicating a commitment to the belief/position.

 

[leibowde84]

That is a subjective thing. I will say 'belief', even if I think something is true, or actual. This is a religious usage of the word, it is not the same as saying, ''I have no idea about this, but I'm guessing'', etc.

Now this is a Straw Man argument! Belief, by definition (religiously oriented or not), lacks certainty, but it in no way is based on guessing ... that would just be a "guess". Beliefs can be based on many forms of evidence. That being said, there is no correlation between believing something and understanding it. Many who do not believe have a much better understanding than those that do, and visa versa. Ignorance is the cause of these issues, not a lack of belief.

 

[leibowde84]

That would only be the case in forums where there is a ''majority'' held belief, or likewise. Many people here argue positions that they don't personally hold.
I understand what you are meaning by belief doesn't indicate correctness, however, belief does indicate a position that the arguer, ACTUALLY believes, which therefore is indicating a commitment to the belief/position.

Right, but there is no correlation between that commitment and thorough understanding. Many that I know who hold strong beliefs do not want to dissect them out of fear that they might end up in doubt. As if doubt is some negative thing.

 

[thau]

I've had an ongoing battle with another member of RF that claims to know more about my beliefs than I do merely from my comments on a single religious debate forum. To me, this is the most ridiculous claim I've ever heard. I pride myself on being able to look at things from different points of view, and often I am educated on this site by other members who enlighten me to various assumptions I might overlook. Often, I enjoy playing the "Devil's Advocate", simply because it forces me to look at things from different angles. Imho, avoiding this is detrimental to one's own intellectual development. Because of this, it seems ridiculous to even consider the possibility that you could know my personal beliefs merely from the comments I've made on this site.

What are your thoughts?

When posters (me included) make statements like “you agnostics all…” or “liberals are…” etc., I just read between the lines.

I do not believe anyone is making a blanket statement that they truly believe holds true about any group. Nor do I think anyone is telling you what you believe definitively when it is speaking of you. I think it is simply a shortcut way of making a challenge or claim for one to accept, refute or explain why or why not. At least, that is how I take an accusation directed my way. Beyond that, how can anyone know for certain what another poster truly holds dear.

 

[leibowde84]

When posters (me included) make statements like “you agnostics all…” or “liberals are…” etc., I just read between the lines.

I do not believe anyone is making a blanket statement that they truly believe holds true about any group. Nor do I think anyone is telling you what you believe definitively when it is speaking of you. I think it is simply a shortcut way of making a challenge or claim for one to accept, refute or explain why or why not. At least, that is how I take an accusation directed my way. Beyond that, how can anyone know for certain what another poster truly holds dear.

I agree, but in this specific circumstance, the poster was making derogatory comments toward me and my beliefs specifically, not general populations. But, he actually does that quite a bit too.