Page 29 of 33 FirstFirst ... 192728293031 ... LastLast
Results 281 to 290 of 322

Thread: Cheney: Obama Should Be Debriefing, Not Investigating

  1. #281
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Cheney: Obama Should Be Debriefing, Not Investigating

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    I may be a lot of things....but one thing I am not is hypocritical and/or intellectually dishonest.

    I blew my pepsi out my nose when I read this

  2. #282
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Cheney: Obama Should Be Debriefing, Not Investigating

    Quote Originally Posted by PogueMoran View Post
    That's not what I said. Goober is posing a logical fallacy based on his own opinion there's nothing valid about a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.
    Here's Pogue illustrating that he doesn't understand that when dealing with a hypothetical situation, the given, by defintion, cannot be post hoc ergo propter hoc.

  3. #283
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Cheney: Obama Should Be Debriefing, Not Investigating

    Quote Originally Posted by EgoffTib View Post
    Seems like a waste of time. Discussing hypotheticals hardly accomplishes anything.
    Happens all the time, and if you REALLY thought so, you would not have wated the time to post what you posted.

  4. #284
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northeast
    Last Seen
    11-03-11 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,834

    Re: Cheney: Obama Should Be Debriefing, Not Investigating

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    You've been shown how you are wrong.
    If you dont want to admit it to us, that's fine, but you shoudl at least admit it to yourself.
    Are you stuart smalley now? You were shown to be wrong you then shifted your rationale calling it a given when that failed you claimed it was an assumed facts. FACTs are not assumptions that can waiver facts are true statements with no give or take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    What you fail to recognize (or refuse to admit) is that in a hypothetical, NONE of the ASSUMED facts in the given have to be proven.
    Facts are not assumed facts have no give or take. Facts are provable, your original "hypothetical" meet neither of these. If your "assumed facts" can't be proven then they are not facts. You're just putting yourself into a maze of words that you have no idea what they mean.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    You've been shown how you are wrong. Again.
    If you dont want to admit it to us, that's fine, but you shoudl at least admit it to yourself.
    "You're wrong because I say you're wrong even though I keep twisting the meaning of what I said and now am on my third iterance of what I meant by claiming its an "assumed fact"

  5. #285
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northeast
    Last Seen
    11-03-11 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,834

    Re: Cheney: Obama Should Be Debriefing, Not Investigating

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Here's Pogue illustrating that he doesn't understand that when dealing with a hypothetical situation, the given, by defintion, cannot be post hoc ergo propter hoc.
    It's not the question that's a post hoc ergo propter hoc goobie again you fail to understand that. Its the interjection you made saying that if it is shown to have been prevented by bush's torture tactics. That's the logical fallacy. This happened because of this is the rough translation of the latin ad hoc ergo propter hoc. Correlation does not make causation. I know this is a tough subject for you to comprehend and you keep twisting what you meant by calling something a given, when its not, then claiming its an assumed fact, when facts aren't assumptions

  6. #286
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northeast
    Last Seen
    11-03-11 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,834

    Re: Cheney: Obama Should Be Debriefing, Not Investigating

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Yes ... terms that, at this point, you clearly dont understand.

    Now, man up, admit you've been trying to dodge the question, and then answer that question.
    I'm not the one having problems with terms like say a given which isn't open to interpretation but a set fact. Or assumed facts a phrase that makes no sense as facts are not assumptions. So now what are you going to claim it is next? If you really want to make that phrase that would mean your statement is not true but an assumption on your part. So that makes it you interjecting your own opinion into your hypothetical
    Last edited by PogueMoran; 09-09-09 at 12:12 PM.

  7. #287
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Cheney: Obama Should Be Debriefing, Not Investigating

    Quote Originally Posted by PogueMoran View Post
    It's not the question that's a post hoc ergo propter hoc goobie again you fail to understand that.
    This is you yet again illustrating you dont understand what;s going on.
    I -know- you arent claiming the question is a fallacy, but the givens.

    You -continue- to fail to understand that the givens -cannot- be falacies.

    Its the interjection you made saying that if it is shown to have been prevented by bush's torture tactics. That's the logical fallacy.
    That's also -not- the given.

    The given:
    1: The Obama Administration reverses/ceases the Bush Administration counter-terrorism efforts under contention
    2: there is terrorist attack that would have been stopped through the continuation of those efforts,

    See? You've been wrong all this time. Just like I said.

    Correlation does not make causation. I know this is a tough subject for you to comprehend and you keep twisting what you meant by calling something a given, when its not, then claiming its an assumed fact, when facts aren't assumptions
    Says the guy that apparently didnt actually read the post he's been going on and on and on about.
    Wow. Thats gotta hurt.

  8. #288
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northeast
    Last Seen
    11-03-11 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,834

    Re: Cheney: Obama Should Be Debriefing, Not Investigating

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    This is you yet again illustrating you dont understand what;s going on.
    I -know- you arent claiming the question is a fallacy, but the givens.

    You -continue- to fail to understand that the givens -cannot- be falacies.


    That's also -not- the given.

    The given:
    1: The Obama Administration reverses/ceases the Bush Administration counter-terrorism efforts under contention
    2: there is terrorist attack that would have been stopped through the continuation of those efforts,
    Givens aren't open to interpretation. The 2nd line is where you commit your logical fallacy and are interjecting your own opinion. The givens cannot be fallacies and that's why the second statement is not a given and why your hypothetical is based on your own personal interjection. That's what you keep failing to understand.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    See? You've been wrong all this time. Just like I said.
    No as pointed out Givens are set in stone they're not open to interpretation so you seem to have a misunderstanding of how wrong your question is. That's why people have been calling it a loaded question because its based on your own personal opinion and a fallacy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Says the guy that apparently didnt actually read the post he's been going on and on and on about.
    Wow. Thats gotta hurt.
    I read the post I commented on it you then did a little dance and shifted from a given, to an assumed fact and you still failed to meet any of those definitions. You created a logical fallacy own up to it

  9. #289
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Cheney: Obama Should Be Debriefing, Not Investigating

    Quote Originally Posted by PogueMoran View Post
    Givens aren't open to interpretation. The 2nd line is where you commit your logical fallacy and are interjecting your own opinion.
    The part you refuse to understand is that I am doing no such thing.
    I am stating that, for the purposes of this discussion, this is a fact.
    A fact, not an opinion.

    Thus, you're wrong.

    I read the post I commented on it you then did a little dance and shifted from a given, to an assumed fact


    Givens ARE assumed facts.


  10. #290
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northeast
    Last Seen
    11-03-11 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,834

    Re: Cheney: Obama Should Be Debriefing, Not Investigating

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    The part you refuse to understand is that I am doing no such thing.
    I am stating that, for the purposes of this discussion, this is a fact.
    A fact, not an opinion.
    It is not a fact. A fact is not open to interpretation unlike your so-called givens.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Thus, you're wrong.
    Translation:
    "You're wrong because I say you're wrong not based on reality"

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post


    Givens ARE assumed facts.

    Which is not what statement 2 is. Again you seem to be missing the point. Assumption number 2 is not a given or an "assumed fact". It is an assumption based on speculation not on concrete evidence. So therein lies your problem. You keep not understanding how certain words do not apply to your statements. Assumption 2 is not a given or an "assumed fact" it is an assumption and your own personal interjection. Thus the fallacy.

Page 29 of 33 FirstFirst ... 192728293031 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •