Originally posted by RobtardCome on dude. We all know that Astner is built like Superman, is the epitome of masculine beauty, has a penis ten miles long and thick as a few city blocks, and is the most charming and intelligent person imaginable. I mean, dude, he has told us this on numerous occasions, remember? estahuh
Considering what he just claimed about barely knowing this person and this person sharing this type of sensitive info with him, it highly possible you're correct; that the protagonist in the story is indeed Astner and his GF left him for a better looking fighter who isn't invading her privacy with spyware.
Originally posted by focus4chumps
im happy that you are finally exploring the perils of fallacious comments in a discussion and hope you one day find the humility to apply it to your own statements. for instance, this:...is a false dilemma.
Well, it's not. Nice try. You really are not good with logical fallacies even a little bit as you have proven with your improper invocation of "false dilemma'. You didn't even come close to properly representing what a false dilemma was because I only provided one option and one solution to that option.
Originally posted by focus4chumps
anyway, by declaring that you needed the other side of the story, that left only 2 possible implications:1-her cheating may have been justified/cheating can sometimes be justified.
2-the story was a lie or contained some fabrication/she did not cheat at all.
See, this is actually a false dilemma.
You also said this of the above argument:
Originally posted by focus4chumps
i can see that you both want to help out your friend, and thats admirable, but that was not a false dilemma. ...unless you want to point out a possible implication that i left out?
So here's why it really is a false dilemma.
There are other options other than 2 choices.
Such as the one that I pointed out that is explicitly outined if you read my posts in this thread instead of dishonestly representing my points with out of context "snips" and "clips".
Originally posted by dadudemon
I'm sure the lady would have something to say about things he had done which drove her away. He might shit and not flush, verbally abuse her, have unreasonable demands, and so forth. For me, I can't ever take sides in these types of things until I hear both sides and then get a third party to back up some things.
The strawman was misrepresenting my argument to mean anything other than the above. He assumed it meant something that was not represented in my argument (nothing against Astner: this is his homie so he has a vested interest in trying to defend him...most of us are bias towards or friends). Not once did I say she was justified in leaving him. Notice that Astner quoted only that particular section of my post, as well? If he does so, then he can support the path of a strawman that says I justified her ability to cheat.
However, the strawman is not fully realized until you get into the rhetoric of his statement. His implications with his rhetorical questions are thus: "Cheating is not justified."
Behold, the actual reason it is a strawman. 🙂
However, you already knew that but just like to troll me because you're still sore over past arguments. You'll get over me: I promise.
Originally posted by focus4chumps
strawman is the fallacy of misrepresenting one's position in order to create an effigy. its done in order to sell others on your own position.
Well, then you agree that it was a strawman, then. You usually end up proving me right in most of our discussions and it is getting old. Troll better, please.
Originally posted by focus4chumps
you just want to apply it to each and every misunderstanding or misinterpreting of someone's statement or position.
No, I want to apply it to every situation in which someone misrepresents a position of mine and then argues against that position. You can clearly note that I do not call things "strawman" that are not actually strawman arguments. It is just that everyone uses strawman arguments so often that it seems like I use it a lot. I really don't. For some reason, most strawman arguments I encounter occur in business meetings or in the GDF (where I frequent on KMC): "A plague a' both your houses."
Originally posted by focus4chumps
(which you seem never able to express without surrounding it in an essay of wild irrelevancy that few bother to translate).
Incorrect. But you love your misrepresentations of what actually takes place.
Originally posted by focus4chumps
you use it so broadly and inappropriately that a conversation can go like this:ddm: man i stubbed my toe this morning
me: well, you should look where you're walking.
ddm: STRAWMAN!!! i wasnt walking. a book landed on my foot.
Incorrect.
Here is a more proper representation:
dadudemon: These women should be allowed to abort their babies because they run a strong risk of both of them dying. That defeats the purpose to a 'right to life' to begin with.
you: oh, so now you're saying that we should abort every baby because there is always potential death risk to both the mother and the child in every pregnancy?
dadudemon: No. That's a strawman. I clearly indicated that only those with strong risks should abort.
you: rofl rofl! oh man. you don't even know how to use strawman. hahahaha.
Note: I was thorough in representing your refusal to use capital letters. 😄
Originally posted by Omega Vision
Way to say what I said with less subtlety.
Wait, you didn't say that.
Originally posted by Omega Vision
Maybe this "friend" is closer to Astner than he lets on.
Oh.
Honestly, I did not interpret that out of your post the first time I read it. But "friend" in quotes makes sense, now, in retrospect.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Originally posted by dadudemon
I'm sure the lady would have something to say about things he had done which drove her away. He might shit and not flush, verbally abuse her, have unreasonable demands, and so forth. For me, I can't ever take sides in these types of things until I hear both sides and then get a third party to back up some things.
wow
the claim was made that she cheated. here you present possibilities in which cheating might have been justified. therefore you suggest that cheating is sometimes justifiable.
are you just trolling or are you really this angry and ill equipped to discuss the simplest of topics?
Originally posted by focus4chumps
wowthe claim was made that she cheated. here you present possibilities in which cheating might have been justified. therefore you suggest that cheating is sometimes justifiable.
are you just trolling or are you really this angry and ill equipped to discuss the simplest of topics?
Do you think cheating is absolutely bad?
I think there could be cases where it is justified.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Do you think cheating is absolutely bad?I think there could be cases where it is justified.
i was not trying to argue ethics. since you ask, i think its a useless and petty venture when the better option is always to simply get out of the relationship (be it temp or perm).
i cant think of a proper scenario for cheating.
the closest i can come to is revenge cheating-mate screws around on you, you do the same in turn to teach them a lesson-in a case where both parties still find their relationship salvagable. or to expand the term and apply it to "open" relationships, which some people seem to prefer. perhaps even a separated, yet still legally married couple going through a divorce.
as far as being in a crappy relationship, i dont see what there is to gain by making it even crappier.
Originally posted by focus4chumps
i cant think of a proper scenario for cheating.the closest i can come to is revenge cheating-mate screws around on you, you do the same in turn to teach them a lesson-in a case where both parties still find their relationship salvagable. or to expand the term and apply it to "open" relationships, which some people seem to prefer. perhaps even a separated, yet still legally married couple going through a divorce.
as far as being in a crappy relationship, i dont see what there is to gain by making it even crappier.
I'm only disagreeing with the absoluteness I was getting from you. It could have been a result of arguing with dadudemon.
Have a good day. 😄