• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The shooter in Santa Fe, TX killed ten people as a result of shooting for 30 minutes

Don't give me crap about the "they were his friends" line. That is someone else's line (https://www.debatepolitics.com/gun-...30-minutes-post1068546447.html#post1068546447). I merely responded to they line by accepting as germane and true premise that the guy refrained from shooting his friends who presumably have been taught to be timid and despondent, and "running with it."

If you follow the parenthetical link, you'll see the other member offered that compound line in response to my OP, which, isn't even an argument; it's merely an enumeration of facts. Insofar as that's all the OP is, it's odd that the other member opened the post containing that premise by writing, "Its tragic how readily...eagerly...people will sacrifice their personal integrity to try to make an argument." Indeed, look at my posts in the thread. You'll find that I have not at all presented an argument -- premises (presumably the facts in the OP) and a conclusion -- that uses those facts.

Several members have assumed I made an argument and responded in accordance with their assumption. Doing so is described colloquially as "reading into something that which isn't there," though it's got a so-called formal name, "unfounded inference." Making and/or ascribing to unfounded inferences is a behavior/thought pattern emotional/irrational thinkers exhibit fairly readily.

If you look carefully at the structure of post 18 wherein I "ran with" the line the other member presented, you'll see that I presented two things:
  • One "unembellished" sentence that, if the "he was not shooting his friends" is to be made valid, is germane to and thus merits addressing --> "Did the boy refrain from shooting any teachers?"
  • One "dressed to the nines" discussion (the rest of the post) that is but an oblique application of reductio offered a "shiny object" that prescient/perspicacious readers would, recognizing that it's just me using reductio to mock the other member's line, completely disregard.
Reading post 21, one sees that the other member completely ignored the germane sentence and went "hook, line and sinker" for the absurdity, the "shiny object," deigning additionally to adorn it with ad hominem derision. How droll...

tl:dr after you told me that the kids at his table werent his friends.

If you're going to make **** up, no point in discussing.
 
tl:dr after you told me that the kids at his table werent his friends.

If you're going to make **** up, no point in discussing.

I don't know what made you think I told you that.
 
Back
Top Bottom