Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 03-11-2009, 03:11 PM
atropos atropos is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14
Default Re: The Curious Case of Chas Freeman

Originally Posted by pampl View Post
It only makes sense to argue against the most cogent or interesting arguments
This might be the first fragment of a thought of yours with which I agree. I will take it to heart and make this my last post on this subject. Feel free to have the last word.

I will apply my "faulty" way of thinking to the situation at hand and perhaps show you what I mean (unlikely that you will take the point, but others might).

This whole time I have been trying to assume that we were having a conversation about whether or not motive matters. This was, in any case, what *I* was discussing from the get-go. I've offered a neutral position on Freeman and noted along the way that the arguments against him should probably be examined on their merits.

But this doesn't seem to be what you're discussing. You seem to be ignoring the points I'm making on the matter and dragging in nonsensical and off-topic matter and attempting to connect it with my argument here. I never called anyone a liar, nor did I charge anyone with conspiracy. Yet there you go bringing those ridiculous bad-faith comments into the discussion.

Here comes my "faulty" thinking: I think you're not at all motived by the philosophical question of whether or not motive matters when it comes to arguments. The more I interact with you the more I become convinced that what is motivating you is an intense emotional response to the situation with Freeman and you just want to see your side win. You saw your side win and gave me this:

Whining about bad faith apparently didn't help Freeman so apparently he also disagrees with your virtue-theory of logic.
Emotional ejaculation if I've ever seen it - and that was with my taking a neutral perspective on Freeman.

So - my assessment is that attempting to argue with you on the merits of this issue will be fruitless. I do not believe it is the issue that is actually motiving you and as a result nothing I will say (or have said) will get through to you. Therefore I will cut my losses and stop wasting my time trying to convince someone who isn't actually interested in the topic at hand. You will just keep introducing new and ever-increasingly creative straw men.
Reply With Quote

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:07 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.