Originally posted by Tangible God
Wait a minute, are you saying you're aware that you contradicted yourself, but were just waiting for a good time to barter with it?
No point in debating with him, Tangible. He's a guy who makes blatant contradictions and refuses to accept them, likes to pass off his so-called "logical deduction" as something that actually measures up against evidence.
You should see some of the crap he's said.
Damn, this whole strongest-thread is becoming a big arguement.
Sidious PT/OT just is the strongest, it's official!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This thread is in the EU section, but it doesn't mean we can state that some stupid-ass EU-SithLord is the greatest.
I said before that most of them are quite good and exciting creations, but they'll never match Palp's skill and genious.
It is officially confirmed that Sidious is the greatest of them all, he had the power of fulfilling the Revenge of the Sith.
The hell with KOTOR, DE and all EU for that matter or else we would be discussing why George didn't took in mind the EU(DE, KOTOR, NJO, Legacy and all future EU etc...) while making the PT and thus further developing Sith-history.
And you know what, he doesn't have too; he used some EU ideas because he liked them, NOT because of a continuity-error that (would have) occured.
StarWars is completely his patent so he has the right to do whatever he wants with it, he gave EU-authors rights, not the other way around.
He doesn't care that they made a new (clone)Emperor in DE, he doesn't care that they let Chewie die in NJO, but as long as it doesn't contradict with the bigger picture and as long as he sees the fun in it.
He gives EU-creators enough artistic freedom to do their thing, but he has rules>>>"I have final authority on all things SW(LucasfilmLicensing) and I can mess with EU if I want to, because SW is mine!".
George says Sidious PT/OT is the strongest and he says Vader never became more powerfull than his Master, because of his cyborg-being!
POINT; end of discussion(well, at least for me)!!!!!!
That's exactly what I said. I fail to see how I'm not using logical deduction when I get a complete view of the situation. As you said we as humans interpret everything differently so I'm still not sure where you're getting the idea that Logical deduction has 1 side, and where I said it was foolproof, but an interesting rebuttal is overdue
Originally posted by J.M FcThumbs-Up
Damn, this whole strongest-thread is becoming a big arguement.
Sidious PT/OT just is the strongest, it's official!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This thread is in the EU section, but it doesn't mean we can state that some stupid-ass EU-SithLord is the greatest.
I said before that most of them are quite good and exciting creations, but they'll never match Palp's skill and genious.
It is officially confirmed that Sidious is the greatest of them all, he had the power of fulfilling the Revenge of the Sith.
The hell with KOTOR, DE and all EU for that matter or else we would be discussing why George didn't took in mind the EU(DE, KOTOR, NJO, Legacy and all future EU etc...) while making the PT and thus further developing Sith-history.
And you know what, he doesn't have too; he used some EU ideas because he liked them, NOT because of a continuity-error that (would have) occured.
StarWars is completely his patent so he has the right to do whatever he wants with it, he gave EU-authors rights, not the other way around.
He doesn't care that they made a new (clone)Emperor in DE, he doesn't care that they let Chewie die in NJO, but as long as it doesn't contradict with the bigger picture and as long as he sees the fun in it.
He gives EU-creators enough artistic freedom to do their thing, but he has rules>>>"I have final authority on all things SW(LucasfilmLicensing) and I can mess with EU if I want to, because SW is mine!".
George says Sidious PT/OT is the strongest and he says Vader never became more powerfull than his Master, because of his cyborg-being!POINT; end of discussion(well, at least for me)!!!!!!
Show me a quote where GL says himself that Sidious by PT is the strongest ever...
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Wow, that usually means "I claimed that this guy said X when he never said it so instead of proving it whether he said it or admitting my mistake, I'm going to attempt to make this other guy look bad because I can't admit my faults". Nice one Escape, truly mature.
Rofl! Tangible as my witness, didn't you just confess that you knew all along that you contradicted yourself?
Originally posted by Escape81
You're the one who's using (in all of your arguments) the so-called "logical deduction", which I've just proven - measures up to crap when you have nothing to base it off on. Which is why I have - and will continue - to reiterate that iron clad proof is [B]above and beyond your "logical deduction".Now, you show me where you admitted that you contradicted yourself in the original statement. [/B]
There. Black and white.
"Logical deduction" has been the only thing you've ever used in any argument that you've been in on here, stemming from the "absence of proof is not proof of absence!!!111!" excuse that you like to throw out. You seem to think that "because something wasn't shown" that, some how, some where, that fact is nullified. You think that, though Sadow was never seen shooting amulet blasts without his amulet, that he must have, because he's "teh uber Ancient Sith"?
Originally posted by Archangelysses
two pages of posts arguing about logical deduction and contradictioninteresting.
Escape, Tangible, Your patience astounds me.
My patience is reaching its limits. I'm arguing with someone who'd rather confuse the situation then admit he's wrong.
"Marka Ragnos is teh uber!"
Why's that?
"Because I say so."
What makes you say that?
"Teh logical deduction!!!111"
Erm... but aren't you changing your opinion and stance every five minutes? Surely then you must realize that you're apparently not logical - if your opinion has to change every few minutes.
"Nooo!!!11! I r shure becuz even though I hav nothing to base my crappy argument on - Im just going to say "logical deduction" as an excuse!!! Oh, wait. When that fails "absence of proof is not proof of absence"...!!!!!!!!"
Weird how I'm not the only one who calls you out on your absence of proof logic. But since you can't admit your fault (Typical), and would rather change the subject to put the blame back on me, if you think I contradicted myself, then ok. Maybe I did, I didn't catch and I still don't but obviously if you're getting so worked up over it I must have. Now you can admit your faults, and we can kiss and make up.
Originally posted by Escape81
There. Black and white."Logical deduction" has been the only thing you've ever used in any argument that you've been in on here, stemming from the "absence of proof is not proof of absence!!!111!" excuse that you like to throw out. You seem to think that "because something wasn't shown" that, some how, some where, that fact is nullified. You think that, though Sadow was never seen shooting amulet blasts without his amulet, that he must have, because he's "teh uber Ancient Sith"?
And again, that is the point of these forums, to use logical deduction.. That's the ENTIRE point of these debate forums. And I personally prefer my "logical deduction to your "they weren't shown to do much without the amulets, omgz that means they cant!" logic.
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Weird how I'm not the only one who calls you out on your absence of proof logic. But since you can't admit your fault (Typical), and would rather change the subject to put the blame back on me, if you think I contradicted myself, then ok. Maybe I did, I didn't catch and I still don't but obviously if you're getting so worked up over it I must have. Now you can admit your faults, and we can kiss and make up.
Odd, how I'm not the only one to tell you that you were wrong, you contradicted yourself, and you were acting like an ass. 😉
Wow. If you want to play "well I'm not the only one", looks like you've just proven my point, eh? 😉
a. You did contradict yourself. In one single statement, you said that Palpatine got everything from the Ancient Sith, and created his own techniques - and then you said that he didn't know more.
b. You do act like "logical deduction" is actually equal to proof in the argument. But, as I've pointed out, your logical deduction fails - because humans naturally don't possess the same interpretation of logic - otherwise we'd never debate. Furthermore, you've always claimed to have logical deduction. But then, you change your opinion.
If your opinion were "logically deduced" from the start, you'd never need to change it.
omg can we get past A already?
b. This forum is a debate forum, so logical deduction is the most "proof" we can have aside from "ironclad proof". Unless of course you want to diminish the purpose of this forum and bombard several authors with questions like Lightsnake did, to give yourself some sort of peace.
c. Again we're on this. You YOURSELF stated as humans we have different interpretations. There could be 1 logical interpretation for an event, or there could me an INIFINITE amount of logical interpretations. Just because I had one and then figured out another, does not mean I can't change my opinion.
'But, as I've pointed out, your logical deduction fails - because humans naturally don't possess the same interpretation of logic - otherwise we'd never debate.'
Don't you think it's possible that maybe it's not so much that logical deduction fails but that some humans are more logical than others, which leads to different interpretation of logic and thus we have debates?
omg can we get past A already?
I have. Because myself and others know that you contradicted yourself, and then spent several pages trying to argue out of it.
b. This forum is a debate forum, so logical deduction is the most "proof" we can have aside from "ironclad proof". Unless of course you want to diminish the purpose of this forum and bombard several authors with questions like Lightsnake did, to give yourself some sort of peace.
That is, ultimately my point. So, let's say that you have an opinion on Ragnos and Kun. Let's say that you believe that Ragnos > Kun (which you do), but KJA (the creator of both) says that Kun is superior. Then his "iron clad" proof supercedes your opinion and your logical deduction.
c. Again we're on this. You YOURSELF stated as humans we have different interpretations. There could be 1 logical interpretation for an event, or there could me an INIFINITE amount of logical interpretations. Just because I had one and then figured out another, does not mean I can't change my opinion.
Humans interpret logic differently, yes. But that doesn't make all of the routes the correct one. We know that humans who sometimes do things in the name of logic - fail and do it incorrectly.
My point being that your logical deduction has been proven, at times, to be illogical. You adapt your opinion because you feel that the previous opinion (also claimed to be base on "logical deduction"😉 is incorrect.
This proves the inferiority of "logical deduction" in debates when conflicting on panel evidence.