Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 6793853" data-attributes="member: 16814">My interpretation that you both presented conjectures is fallacious?  Not sure how you get to that, but okay.I never said that a) you didn't say that or that b) it's not true.  I didn't even address that.  I addressed the fact that you were attacking him for providing what you believed to be a false conjecture immediately after you did the same thing.  End of point.  I'm nowhere arguing that you're wrong about Arial doing whatever, just that you should probably not claim rhetorical high ground for essentially doing  the same thing immediately before he did it.Sure he presented his conjecture as RAW.  Doesn't make it not a conjecture.  Certainly doesn't make my recognizing it as conjecture a strawman.  I'm not arguing to defeat your point, I'm pointing out that you engaging in largely similar argumentation immediately prior to him, with your offering of an extra-RAW possibility.  Also, since he did directly address your statements, it's hard to say he went non-sequitur.  You might want to lay off the informal fallacies -- they haven't done anyone any good in this thread.I admit it, you've beaten me.  I can't even parse this.Yeah, that's probably for the best, you didn't do a very good job naming them, either.Also, renouncing your prior conjecture doesn't work retroactively, nor does it bind me into anything --  you can't erase it from the conversation.  For the record, I haven't once said that you were wrong on any of your points.  I pointed out that your choice of rhetoric was maybe inadvisable given that you had just committed a similar rhetorical sin.  I don't think Arial's right, either.  I certainly don't buy his argument about components.  I get that you're certain that I'm against you, but I'm not -- we're largely in agreement.  I'm really just here defending myself against calls of being factually incorrect, fallacious, and being engaged in logical fallacies for arguments I'm not even making.  Now that I think about it, it's a bit banal of me (bad pun most certainly intended).</blockquote>

Verification