*waits for rtil to respond to every comment and then claims he has a life
please forgive your useless sister.
Joined on 2/27/05
- Level:
- 42
- Exp Points:
- 19,492 / 19,580
- Exp Rank:
- 1,085
- Vote Power:
- 8.35 votes
- Art Scouts
- 3
- Rank:
- Police Captain
- Global Rank:
- 4,084
- Blams:
- 626
- Saves:
- 1,598
- B/P Bonus:
- 16%
- Whistle:
- Silver
- Trophies:
- 42
- Medals:
- 265
- Supporter:
- 5y 2m 7d
Clever way of putting it. I can see you used psychology along with other research for your arguement, therefore giving it more meaning. I respect that. Of course the many comments you have received are mostly from users who are:
. Objecting to your arguement and try to expose the contradictions in it, in the hopes of foiling you.
. Those who have sworn their undying love to NG and would no doubt fight to the very death against.
. Those who basically, don't take your post seriously and leave an immature, offensive comment on your post (eg. Noob, faggot).
I probably belong near the first group. No doubt you'll get similar comments from the same groups or from different groups. I suppose we'll see.
Randomly clicked on your name, don't know much about you, but the words you've written are appreciated. Edumacate more people, please. ;)
Calling out hypocrisy can invalidate a moral or ethical argument, though, when the hypocrite is using him/herself as an example. John Stuart does this a lot for news media and politicians.
"Watch Fox news, because we're fair and balanced." This implies other stations aren't.
So, no pizza tonight?
Daffy Duck better have a joke when I get back.
I talk to myself all the time. I get along with myself rather well though. I by myself little treats if I'm exceptionally good to myself.
Hows the next metropolis circuit coming along?
i am gonna be the loser here and say something neutral
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ok
Cool story bro
knock knock
open up the door for lunch
with the non stop pop pop of falcon punch
Meh. Yay for general dramafag attention whoring.
Why is every comment to this either a douche-bag response, or somebody trying to sound smart?
Because you touch yourself at night.
Despite feeling like all your actions are concentrated douchery I have to agree with your post.... God I hope you c/ped this because agreeing with you is a depressing feeling =\
I detest hypocrisy. and Peter Wastholm can suck my dick. I'd fuck his mom in the butt though
A pup named Scooby Doo makes so much sense now! Fred Jr always thought the culpret was RED HERRING!
amen to that
goddamn rtil your page is a magnet for faggots who try to act hardcore
I'm not devoted I just like letting people know what's on my Alt mind. Is that so hypocritical?
thantounderscore
The problem with claiming that something is a Tu Quoque fallacy is that doing so is generally a misunderstanding of the claims made. That is, no one ever says, "X is wrong, You're doing X, therefore you are wrong."
Instead, the argument generally goes thusly:
1. You present an argument where the conclusion is that X is wrong
2. You do X anyway
3. (2) You obviously don't believe that X is wrong
4. (3) You obviously don't believe that the argument you presented is strong/valid (depending on the type of argument)
5. (1,4) You must believe that the argument that you presented is somehow flawed, whether it is invalid/weak, or the premises are false or otherwise unreasonable
If you are speaking to someone and claim something that you obviously believe is false, then anyone listening to you really has no reason to believe it either.
An argument is only fallacious as Ad Hominem if the attack is irrelevant to the argument. When someone claims to have some sort of talent or to have dome something special, and another responds with an argument that he/she does not or has not, that is not Ad Hominem, because it is directly relevant to the comment made. So, for example, if a person claims to be original or to have made original content, and another argues that that person is unoriginal and has never made original content, that argument is no fallaciously Ad Hominem, because it relates directly to the claim made.
Also, I think it's great that you personify yourself in the 2nd person. You create a fantasy image of who you think you're speaking to (someone who doesn't understand logic or proper argumentation), then proceed to attack it.