Which political ideology do you most identify with?
If my beliefs are so utterly baseless and absurd and reactionary, why is it so difficult for you to…
If my beliefs are so utterly baseless and absurd and reactionary, why is it so difficult for you to disprove them?
It's not. It's actually incredibly easy to disprove many of your claims. Your refusal to accept contradictory evidence is not anyone else's problem. Heck, remember months ago when you and I had a long discussion about evolution vs creationism (along with the reality of anthropogenic climate change), and your claims were so wildly incorrect and absurd that even this site's bot accounts from the Republican Party and other right-wing groups had stepped in to point out sources explaining why your claims were unfounded and wrong? I thought it was hilarious but I guess you really came out of it still believing that "it must be everyone else and their sources that are wrong, not me", huh?
If my beliefs are so utterly baseless and absurd and reactionary, why is it so difficult for you to disprove them?
Like what?
More importantly, you understand that you can argue a position "logically", in which the argument is completely logically sound, but still be blatantly incorrect...right? Just because an argument is logically structured, does NOT make it correct. Facts determine correctness, not logic. You can take untrue claims and still posit an argument using proper logic, yet the incorrect facts still make your logical claim wrong. You keep assuming that anything you say is correct so long as you make a logical argument to get there (even when you don't use proper logic), but that's not how factual claims work.
For example:
-"The sun is white. The sun is a star. Therefore, stars can be white." uses proper logic and also is factually correct, hence the claim is correct.
-"The sun is purple. The sun is a star. Therefore, stars can be purple." uses the same proper logic but is NOT factually correct, hence the claim is incorrect.
Logic doesn't make a claim true, supporting facts do. Your obsession with logic as the inherent arbiter of truth is blinding you from that...
@Patriot-#1776Constitution3mos3MO
I wasn't talking to you
@VulcanMan6 3mos3MO
You don't need to be, this is an open online forum. Not to mention the fact that this is in my own thread. But hey, if you don't have a response then you can just say so...
@Patriot-#1776Constitution3mos3MO
I never said an argument couldn't be logically sound and false at the same time, so here YOU are using the Strawman Fallacy by putting words in my mouth I never said and debunking a position I never took. You keep also using the Question Begging Fallacy by claiming that my arguments were "wildly incorrect and absurd" when in reality this has not been proven or even established, assuming I'm wrong in order to argue that I'm wrong.
PS: You actually believe there's some right wing conspiracy on this webpage to water down leftism through "bots"? If anything, the reverse is true – look at the daily discussions, almost everyone's a leftist.
@VulcanMan6 3mos3MO
I never said an argument couldn't be logically sound and false at the same time, so here YOU are using the Strawman Fallacy by putting words in my mouth I never said...
I never said you said that, I said you SEEM to act like that is the case, based on the assumptions you make and the obsession with "logic" that you always portray. In fact, my actual statement was a question: "you understand that you can argue a position "logically", in which the argument is completely logically sound, but still be blatantly incorrect...right?". You could have simply answered… Read more