GENIUS FORUMS

It bears repeating:

What's that fallacy called where everyone that disagrees with you, is wrong? :)

Kow,

What's that fallacy called where everyone that disagrees with you, is wrong? :)

There is no fallacy that describes such a case, because it is logically possible for someone to be correct all the time. Hence, anyone who disagrees with him would be necessarily wrong.

Trevor Salyzyn wrote:Kow,

What's that fallacy called where everyone that disagrees with you, is wrong? :)

There is no fallacy that describes such a case, because it is logically possible for someone to be correct all the time. Hence, anyone who disagrees with him would be necessarily wrong.

It was a joke. Finally though, you are correct about something. It's a burden that you'll never know. :)

Trevor Salyzyn wrote:Steven, I have made no threats. As to your other claim, which emotion do you believe I was appealing to? Her reason?

Maybe Steven meant you looked like you were trying to force her to reason?

Trevor Salyzyn wrote:Steven, I have made no threats. As to your other claim, which emotion do you believe I was appealing to? Her reason?

You were appealing largely to the emotion (rather than reason) of your readers, in order to prove your case against kowtaaia.

Do you believe "might makes right"?

kowtaaia wrote:What's that fallacy called where everyone that disagrees with you, is wrong? :)

Narcissism.

Eliza,

Maybe Steven meant you looked like you were trying to force her to reason?

"Appeal to force" is a threat, like "I know where you live and if you don't change your mind I'll beat you up."

Steven,

You were appealing largely to the emotion (rather than reason) ("ad populum") of your readers, in order to prove your case against kowtaaia.

Pardon? Ad populum? I was speaking directly to her the whole time. And again: which emotion was I appealing to? I can't see it. To me, I was speaking clearly and rationally, and it looks like you misread me.

Even now you are displaying reminents of an ad hominem argument ("Her reason..." -- insinuating an insult to her intelligence)

That's not an ad hominem argument. That would only have been an insult (if I did intend to insinuate that, which I did not), which is not always the same thing. Anyway, saying that someone is not proficient at reasoning is not the same as calling them stupid. Reasoning requires practise: I do not believe she has been doing philosophy long enough to be very good at it.

Do you believe "might makes right"?

She has poor (if nonexistent) arguments, and she has been making incorrect statements. That makes her wrong.

I have solid arguments, and I am making correct statements. That makes me right. That is all.

Steven,

There's no point in wasting time on the narrow minded; on the one definition wonders. Is there a section where the children aren't allowed to post? :)

Trevor Salyzyn wrote: I have solid arguments, and I am making correct statements. That makes me right. That is all.

Your DELUSION is the belief that Argumentum Ad Hominem has to do with an "irrelevant known fact of another person's life".
Argumentum Ad Hominem has to do with ANY attack of the person. Aside from the two you named, there is also 'tu quoque' and 'poisoning the well', which you are quite the expert at.

Your DELUSION is the belief that Argumentum Ad Hominem has to do with an "irrelevant known fact of another person's life".
Argumentum Ad Hominem has to do with ANY attack of the person. Aside from the two you named, there is also 'tu quoque' and 'poisoning the well', which you are quite the expert at.

You have called me many more things than I have called you, and each insult of yours has been grossly inaccurate.

Regardless, you are wrong. An insult is not the same thing as ad hominem. So when you say things like, "is there a section where children aren't allowed to post?" you are actually not performing a fallacy. You are just being as asshole, plain and simple.

Now, the question is are you going to stop being an asshole long enough to figure out the gyst of this forum? It's not too late to stop with the hostility. It would be a remarkable gesture on your part if you were to actually ask a question about something relevant to this forum, such as what genius means or why this forum is different than others.

If you can't quiet that knee-jerk reaction of yours, and don't stop with the bullshit and insults, I will stop responding to your posts. I'm giving you a final opportunity to impress me with something that shows you have any interest in truth.

Get over yourself! You are wrong and are too full of yourself to admit it.

kow,

Get over yourself! You are wrong and are too full of yourself to admit it.

That in-depth analysis brought to you by someone who doesn't know or care about the difference between true and false.

Bye.

Trevor Salyzyn wrote: kow,

Get over yourself! You are wrong and are too full of yourself to admit it.

That in-depth analysis brought to you by someone who doesn't know or care about the difference between true and false.

...and the above stupid comment was brought to you by the master of stupid...Trevor Salyzyn.

Trevor Salyzyn wrote: Bye.

Bye, bye. Don't go away mad. Do keep your word, though.

If some of you guys want to dish out the crap, then you'd better develop a liking for the taste of it.

kowtaaia wrote:Get over yourself! You are wrong and are too full of yourself to admit it.

It's worth mentioning that pointing out someone's delusion is NOT a personal attack. Asserting that someone is deluded and that they are therefore wrong IS. That didn't happen though.

Trevor,

You have, in fact, displayed evidence of delusion. And that, friend, is NOT a personal attack. It may not be what you want your girl/boyfriend to whisper in your ear at night, but it's a fact.

beebuddy wrote:Trevor,

You have, in fact, displayed evidence of delusion. And that, friend, is NOT a personal attack. It may not be what you want your girl/boyfriend to whisper in your ear at night, but it's a fact.

Beebuddy,

If someone does have a delusion, that person will not see it clearly enough to pick up on what you mean by just stating "You have, in fact, displayed evidence of delusion." To make your point clearly, you must point out exactly what you found delusional (a quote would be nice) and present a clear, logical reason why you find that position delusional.

You mean like this?

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:

Leyla Shen wrote:If there's one thing worse than a cunt, it's a cunt who pretends not to be one...

.

Actually, she could just be deluded.

kowtaaia wrote:

Trevor Salyzyn wrote: kow,

Get over yourself! You are wrong and are too full of yourself to admit it.

That in-depth analysis brought to you by someone who doesn't know or care about the difference between true and false.

...and the above stupid comment was brought to you by the master of stupid...Trevor Salyzyn.

Trevor Salyzyn wrote: Bye.

Bye, bye. Don't go away mad. Do keep your word, though.

If some of you guys want to dish out the crap, then you'd better develop a liking for the taste of it.

Don't worry about us, Kowtipper, we love the stuff.

Some got quite upset over a simple question about the game. They must live in the country, because they used alot of straw and bullshit in their responses and even more when the game was played. It's a curious train wreck that you guys have here.

kowtaaia wrote:Some got quite upset over a simple question about the game. They must live in the country, because they used alot of straw and bullshit in their responses and even more when the game was played. It's a curious train wreck that you guys have here.

Did you have a point? Or do you just want to insult us? I can respect either. I just want to know what's going on.

TO SPELL IT OUT...YOU SAID:

millipodium wrote: Don't worry about us, Kowtipper, we love the stuff.

THE POINT IS THAT YOU DON'T LOVE THE STUFF AS MUCH AS YOU THINK YOU DO.

kowtaaia wrote:TO SPELL IT OUT...YOU SAID:

millipodium wrote: Don't worry about us, Kowtipper, we love the stuff.

THE POINT IS THAT YOU DON'T LOVE THE STUFF AS MUCH AS YOU THINK YOU DO.

You're laughably ineffective.

millipodium wrote:

kowtaaia wrote:TO SPELL IT OUT...YOU SAID:

millipodium wrote: Don't worry about us, Kowtipper, we love the stuff.

THE POINT IS THAT YOU DON'T LOVE THE STUFF AS MUCH AS YOU THINK YOU DO.

You're laughably ineffective.

Your response tells a different story. Clearly, you are a hypocrite.

kowtaaia wrote:

millipodium wrote:

kowtaaia wrote:TO SPELL IT OUT...YOU SAID:

millipodium wrote: Don't worry about us, Kowtipper, we love the stuff.

THE POINT IS THAT YOU DON'T LOVE THE STUFF AS MUCH AS YOU THINK YOU DO.

You're laughably ineffective.

Your response tells a different story. Clearly, you are a hypocrite.

Ok. So we do or do not like shit.That's was always true.

Please tell us your agenda.

Do you have some sort of degree in non-sequitur posting?

kowtaaia wrote:Do you have some sort of degree in non-sequitur posting?

I can explain something to you if you like. Actually the problem lies with you. What's confusing you?