Quag and the Angel: a dialogue

[Individual]

Asking for an example is far from pointing out failure, for one thing. For another, I just answered your question on the previous page of this thread, and here you are, posting the question again, as if unanswered.

And your 2nd premise fails as the 1st premise covers all that exists without need of a must exist.

 

[Angel]

And your 2nd premise fails as the 1st premise covers all that exists without need of a must exist.

Premise 1 is about what is possible. Premise 2 is about what is necessary. The two premises are about different things.

 

[Quag]

Your opinions have been neutered once and for all in the upshot of this thread. Carry on with your dismissals.

Your strawman has been exposed, you are dismissed

 

[Angel]

Your strawman has been exposed, you are dismissed

I'll make this as simple as possible, simple enough for anyone but an Internet Skeptic to acknowledge: your argument, the argument that goes "belief is opinion because one of the definitions found in a creditable dictionary defines it that way and because that's what I mean when I use the term 'belief" in my claim" -- that argument makes for the futility of any discussion of any argument. Period.

If you fail to acknowledge so simple an indictment, if you continue to cry "strawman" for no reason at all, and if you simply dismiss the charge, then I recommend the following thread for your future posting:
Internet Skepticism: Casting Call

 

[Quag]

I'll make this as simple as possible, simple enough for anyone but an Internet Skeptic to acknowledge: your argument, the argument that goes "belief is opinion because one of the definitions found in a creditable dictionary defines it that way and because that's what I mean when I use the term 'belief" in my claim" -- that argument makes for the futility of any discussion of any argument. Period.

If you fail to acknowledge so simple an indictment, if you continue to cry "strawman" for no reason at all, and if you simply dismiss the charge, then I recommend the following thread for your future posting:
Internet Skepticism: Casting Call

You made a strawman its really quite simple you ended any possibility of discussion and tried to blame me for it.
You are dismissed.

 

[Angel]

You made a strawman its really quite simple you ended any possibility of discussion and tried to blame me for it.
You are dismissed.

What strawman? Spell it out. I've identified the transgression as your argument. Own it. Meanwhile check out that thread I steered you to.

 

[Quag]

What strawman? Spell it out. I've identified the transgression as your argument. Own it. Meanwhile check out that thread I steered you to.

I have repeatedly heck even you spelled it out repeatedly
Stop being dishonest and admit it the reason discussion is impossible is because you insist on making a strawman

 

[Angel]

I have repeatedly heck even you spelled it out repeatedly
Stop being dishonest and admit it the reason discussion is impossible is because you insist on making a strawman

Get off it, man. There's no strawman. There's just Quag trying desperately to save face instead of acknowledging his error in good faith.
I'll make even simpler for you:

Quag's argument: X is Y because I choose a dictionary definition of X that suits my claim. -- this argument makes all discussion futile.

 

[Quag]

Get off it, man. There's no strawman. There's just Quag trying desperately to save face instead of acknowledging his error in good faith.
I'll make even simpler for you:

Quag's argument: X is Y because I choose a dictionary definition of X that suits my claim. -- this argument makes all discussion futile.

Getting upset because I refuse to accept your strawman?
It may come as a surprise to your but I dont care how upset you become when your dishonest tactics fail
You made a strawman and got caught. Sucks to be you

 

[Angel]

Getting upset because I refuse to accept your strawman?
It may come as a surprise to your but I dont care how upset you become when your dishonest tactics fail
You made a strawman and got caught. Sucks to be you

A strawman you cannot identify. Tell it to the marines. Your argument, verified in more than a score of posts, stinks. If you were engaging in good faith discussion you would acknowledge that. Instead you resort to the trolling tactics of Internet Skepticism.

 

[Quag]

A strawman you cannot identify. Tell it to the marines. Your argument, verified in more than a score of posts, stinks. If you were engaging in good faith discussion you would acknowledge that. Instead you resort to the trolling tactics of Internet Skepticism.

More untruths form you I have stated exactly how you have made your strawman, heck you even laid it out for all to see.
Run away Angel its all you are good for

 

[Angel]

More untruths form you I have stated exactly how you have made your strawman, heck you even laid it out for all to see.
Run away Angel its all you are good for

Where's the strawman in this? X is Y because I choose a dictionary definition of X that suits my claim.
That 100% Quag.
I have scores of posts to prove it.

Your argument stinks to the high heavens. And you know it. Now everyone knows it.

 

[Quag]

Where's the strawman in this? X is Y because I choose a dictionary definition of X that suits my claim.
That 100% Quag.
I have scores of posts to prove it.

Your argument stinks to the high heavens. And you know it. Now everyone knows it.

Your post stinks as I have pointed it out multiple times and even you yourself laid it out for everyone
Your posts stink to high heaven and everyone knows it
You got caught and no amount of BS on your part will absolve you of your transgressions.

 

[Angel]

Your post stinks as I have pointed it out multiple times and even you yourself laid it out for everyone
Your posts stink to high heaven and everyone knows it
You got caught and no amount of BS on your part will absolve you of your transgressions.

Yeah, I got caught exposing Quag's argument for the travesty it is.

 

[Quag]

Yeah, I got caught exposing Quag's argument for the travesty it is.

You only caught yourself. You thought you could catch me with this thread but you failed to get your strawman across.
But please feel free to keep this thread alive so everyone can see how foolish you look.

 

[Angel]

You only caught yourself. You thought you could catch me with this thread but you failed to get your strawman across.
But please feel free to keep this thread alive so everyone can see how foolish you look.

No, your denials to the contrary notwithstanding, I succeeded in exposing your travesty of an argument:

"X is Y because I choose a dictionary definition of X that suits my claim."

The argument that makes argument futile. Brought to DP by Quag.

 

[Quag]

No, your denials to the contrary notwithstanding, I succeeded in exposing your travesty of an argument:

"X is Y because I choose a dictionary definition of X that suits my claim."

The argument that makes argument futile. Brought to DP by Quag.

Again with the strawman
Why do you continue to make a fool of yourself?

 

[Angel]

Again with the strawman
Why do you continue to make a fool of yourself?

You are denying your own statements and hiding behind an unsupported and insupportable strawman ruse in order to avoid acknowledging that your argument, that "X is Y because I choose a dictionary definition of X that says what I mean in my claim," makes any discussion of arguments futile.

I have quoted your posts where you assert this justification and can quote them again. The jig is up, Quag.

 

[Quag]

You are denying your own statements and hiding behind an unsupported and insupportable strawman ruse in order to avoid acknowledging that your argument, that "X is Y because I choose a dictionary definition of X that says what I mean in my claim," makes any discussion of arguments futile.

I have quoted your posts where you assert this justification and can quote them again. The jig is up, Quag.

No I am denying your strawman and yes the jig is up you made it very clear what you are trying to do.

 

[Angel]

No I am denying your strawman and yes the jig is up you made it very clear what you are trying to do.

Quag:

X is Y because I choose a dictionary definition of X that says what I mean in my claim.

END OF DISCUSSION ​

 

[Quag]

Quag:

X is Y because I choose a dictionary definition of X that says what I mean in my claim.

END OF DISCUSSION ​

you are inserting that definition into my statement creating your strawman

YOU GOT CAUGHT
END OF DISCUSSION

 

[Angel]

you are inserting that definition into my statement creating your strawman

YOU GOT CAUGHT
END OF DISCUSSION

I'm not inserting anything anywhere.
"X is Y because I choose a dictionary definition of X that says what I mean in my claim" is an abstract rendering of your argument.

Your actual argument is "Belief is only opinion because this is one of the meanings in a creditable dictionary and I select that particular meaning because that is what I mean by 'belief' in my claim."

No insertion, no strawman, just your justification for your claim -- and it makes all discussion of all arguments nugatory.

 

[Quag]

I'm not inserting anything anywhere.
"X is Y because I choose a dictionary definition of X that says what I mean in my claim" is an abstract rendering of your argument.

Your actual argument is "Belief is only opinion because this is one of the meanings in a creditable dictionary and I select that particular meaning because that is what I mean by 'belief' in my claim."

No insertion, no strawman, just your justification for your claim -- and it makes all discussion of all arguments nugatory.

Yes you are inserting your definition of belief into my statement when you say that all premises are beliefs then claim using that definition in my statement I am ending all possibility of discussion
Or in other words you are making a strawman.
You tried originally to directly force your definition of belief into my statement and when that failed you tried to sneak it in only you are not nearly as clever as you think you are and got caught.
You lost Angel this thread is just a documentary evidence of your dishoenst posting style, please keep it alive so everyone can see an know exactly what you are. Hint it isnt the Angel you pretend to be and you know it

 

[Angel]

Yes you are inserting your definition of belief into my statement when you say that all premises are beliefs then claim using that definition in my statement I am ending all possibility of discussion
Or in other words you are making a strawman.
You tried originally to directly force your definition of belief into my statement and when that failed you tried to sneak it in only you are not nearly as clever as you think you are and got caught.
You lost Angel this thread is just a documentary evidence of your dishoenst posting style, please keep it alive so everyone can see an know exactly what you are. Hint it isnt the Angel you pretend to be and you know it

You're confused, Quag. The fault lies here, in your justification of your claim:
"Belief is only opinion because this is one of the meanings in a creditable dictionary and I select that particular meaning because that is what I mean by 'belief' in my claim."

That justification makes discussion nugatory.

The following simply exemplifies the absurdity of your justification:
"All premises are beliefs as belief is simply the mental acceptance of a statement according to a dictionary definition I, Angel, select because that is what I mean by 'belief' in my claim."

You are confused, Quag. I have not inserted my definition of belief into your statement -- I have used your justification to support my own statement.

Your justification -- from which you would not budge though others besides myself told you you were being unreasonable -- your smug and pretentious justification has been reduced to absurdity by Angel, and false pride drives you to post these ridiculous fabricated complaints about Angel's checkmate of you.

 

[Quag]

You're confused, Quag. The fault lies here, in your justification of your claim:
"Belief is only opinion because this is one of the meanings in a creditable dictionary and I select that particular meaning because that is what I mean by 'belief' in my claim."

That justification makes discussion nugatory.

The following simply exemplifies the absurdity of your justification:
"All premises are beliefs as belief is simply the mental acceptance of a statement according to a dictionary definition I, Angel, select because that is what I mean by 'belief' in my claim."

You are confused, Quag. I have not inserted my definition of belief into your statement -- I have used your justification to support my own statement.

Your justification -- from which you would not budge though others besides myself told you you were being unreasonable -- your smug and pretentious justification has been reduced to absurdity by Angel, and false pride drives you to post these ridiculous fabricated complaints about Angel's checkmate of you.

Continue to make a fool of yourself Angel the only absurd one here is you and you prove it with every post
Your made a strwawman and got caught sucks to be you