But in the rest of the forums, your seemingly obsessive need for rigor from others but not for yourself,
Logical fallacy, "Argument by Assertion", and by extension "Ad Hominem".
Merely claiming that I apply a standard to others that I don't apply to myself doesn't make it true just because you assert it is true.
You would not be capable of producing a single example to back up your claim, because your claim is false.
Which then just makes your accusation an Ad Hominem distraction from the fact that you have no valid counter argument to offer.
and your extreme pedantry is just uncalled for, and WAY over the top.
Logical fallacy, "Argument by Assertion".
Merely claiming that my arguments are unnecessary or unwarranted doesn't make it true just because you assert it is true.
You would not be capable of giving a single logical reason to justify your claim.
Because in order for you to even try to argue that anything I've said is unjustified, you'd need to be able to establish:
1. Why you feel entitled to make arguments that aren't founded in valid logic.
2. Why you feel entitled for others to accept these as valid arguments and respond to them as though they were.
3. Why you feel entitled to merely assert things are true, without proving they are true.
4. Why you feel entitled to expect others to accept that your assertions are true without proof, and then to treat your assertions as though they are true without question.
5. Why you think this represents a valid or productive way of debating an issue and a useful way at arriving at truth.
You won't be able to successfully justify your approach towards debate.
It's actually ironic, and hypocritical, what you're trying to do. Because you're trying to claim I'm somehow out of line for rightly pointing out the flaws in your arguments that you try to use to disprove what I said - never realizing the inherently bad and dishonest behavior you are engaging in by:
a) Accusing me of things I never did without valid reason.
b) Claiming I said things I never did. Then refusing to back up your claim when challenged.
c) Trying to say I'm wrong without being willing to give any valid reasons why.
d) Expecting me to accept what you say is true without question.
Your behavior is out of line with proper honest discourse and debate. If anything, it is you who are guilty of what you try to falsely accuse me of.
I think it goes without saying that you can't have an honest or real debate if you reject the idea that your arguments need to be logical and you need to back up your claims with valid arguments. That is the very foundation of what makes a debate a debate, by definition.
A debate involves at it's core the process of establishing a premise, followed by a logical argument, and then a conclusion.
You cannot state conclusions without a premise and argument.
And you cannot make an argument that is not logically valid.
If you lack either of those two things then it's just you asserting you're right and they're wrong, never giving a valid reason for what you believe. Which is why people who engage in that kind of behavior usually always devolve into just calling people names because you're mad that someone won't treat your belief as truth just because you claim it is. Or you're mad that you aren't capable of defending your claim with valid counter points, but you don't want to humbly admit that, so you'd rather attack the other person to cover up that fact.
