|
Post by geode on Aug 26, 2018 16:02:44 GMT
Most call-out threads are basically ad hominem attacks. As it is generally known by those who understand logical fallacies, when people resort to using an ad hominem approach they have essentially lost the argument and have nothing left to do but offer insults.
Not being able to "hold one's own" in a discussion can be due to a lack of knowledge, a lack of intelligence, or both a lack of knowledge and intelligence.
Yes, there are people who are intelligent who have taken using insults to an art form showing great wit when making them. Of course Don Rickles comes to mind, but also Oscar Wilde, Oscar Levant, Dorothy Parker, Winston Churchill and others. These all were very intelligent people. But have we really seen people possessing their intelligence and fine-tuned wit starting call-out threads here? I don't remember seeing evidence of this, and if anything those starting them here are generally exposing their limited cognitive abilities.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Aug 27, 2018 1:12:05 GMT
Most call-out threads are basically ad hominem attacks. As it is generally known by those who understand logical fallacies, when people resort to using an ad hominem approach they have essentially lost the argument and have nothing left to do but offer insults. Not being able to "hold one's own" in a discussion can be due to a lack of knowledge, a lack of intelligence, or both a lack of knowledge and intelligence. Yes, there are people who are intelligent who have taken using insults to an art form showing great wit when making them. Of course Don Rickles comes to mind, but also Oscar Wilde, Oscar Levant, Dorothy Parker, Winston Churchill and others. These all were very intelligent people. But have we really seen people possessing their intelligence and fine-tuned wit starting call-out threads here? I don't remember seeing evidence of this, and if anything those starting them here are generally exposing their limited cognitive abilities. 100% agree with you, Geode. One more thing - people also give away their long held biases and prejudices when they create call-out threads. It portrays the person as very small minded.
Sometimes people create call-out threads apparently against 6 or 7 members (even that is wrong) but you can easily catch the odd-man out out of those 6 or 7 for whom the thread is actually created. At end of the day it represents inferiority complex of the person creating the thread. Especially when the person for whom the thread is created does not even reply. The person who created the thread wants to tell the world something in such cases. But people who are aware of the history know what lies behind the curtain.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Aug 27, 2018 1:52:20 GMT
Most call-out threads are basically ad hominem attacks. As it is generally known by those who understand logical fallacies, when people resort to using an ad hominem approach they have essentially lost the argument and have nothing left to do but offer insults. As true as the second part of your statement is, it has nothing to do with the the first part of it, which of course is nothing more than an unsubstantiated opinion that generalizes all call-out threads. Because as is often the case, some call out threads stand alone in the absence of any existing argument. That’s true. But it also has no direct relationship as to whether a call out thread is in fact an ad hominem or not. You’re welcome to attempt to display your supposedly superior cognitive abilities by proving this to be accurate (if you can without lying that is). That would certainly make a more convincing case for whether or not “we” see what you claim we see.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Aug 27, 2018 2:04:03 GMT
100% agree with you, Geode. One more thing - people also give away their long held biases and prejudices when they create call-out threads. It portrays the person as very small minded. Not necessarily. Even if it did what you said (which it doesn’t, and I’ll get to that in a moment), having prejudices and biases (which everyone has) doesn't automatically make someone small minded. That is an ad hominem right there, and it would require some validation/qualification of that statement in order for it to be anything but an ad hominem. With respect to call out threads, they are not necessarily indicative in and of themselves of a prejudice or a bias. It would depend on the content of the thread, who was being called out, and in what way they were being called out that might demonstrate some bias or prejudice. A key word in your statement is “sometimes”, isn’t it? There’s a LOT of assumptions in there; far too many to draw such clear conclusions aren’t there? For example, why would it represent an inferiority complex to call out someone else (whether they respond or not)? Also, what if the person does respond by say creating a different thread where they rant about being called out? I mean, if anything that’s would indicate an inferiority complex in the person being called out. Seeking validation and sympathy from others that they don’t deserve to be called out is an act of desperation is it not? What are they trying to tell the world? You see how the logic you are using here completely falls apart.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Aug 27, 2018 4:49:51 GMT
100% agree with you, Geode. One more thing - people also give away their long held biases and prejudices when they create call-out threads. It portrays the person as very small minded. Not necessarily. Even if it did what you said (which it doesn’t, and I’ll get to that in a moment), having prejudices and biases (which everyone has) doesn't automatically make someone small minded. That is an ad hominem right there, and it would require some validation/qualification of that statement in order for it to be anything but an ad hominem. With respect to call out threads, they are not necessarily indicative in and of themselves of a prejudice or a bias. It would depend on the content of the thread, who was being called out, and in what way they were being called out that might demonstrate some bias or prejudice. A key word in your statement is “sometimes”, isn’t it? There’s a LOT of assumptions in there; far too many to draw such clear conclusions aren’t there? For example, why would it represent an inferiority complex to call out someone else (whether they respond or not)? Also, what if the person does respond by say creating a different thread where they rant about being called out? I mean, if anything that’s would indicate an inferiority complex in the person being called out. Seeking validation and sympathy from others that they don’t deserve to be called out is an act of desperation is it not? What are they trying to tell the world? You see how the logic you are using here completely falls apart. All that effort is of no use, Bryce. Keep justifying your repeat call-out threads. Even in years nobody has bought your stories about Geode. Regarding Geode's honesty - Never seen one reason to doubt him. Can't say the same about you. Still remember your "Fuck the Jews" post which you subsequently deleted but not before PD quoted it. Regarding Geode's intelligence - The person on this board with possibly the best understanding of evolution (beside Red Ruth). In spite of being a theist he has never resorted to his own version of the same. Not even in the days when you had your own version of evolution that had no room for common descent. Geode is a humble person and maintains his cool and calm. Not sure about you. Still remember the drunken posts alleging that Tas-10 was apparently one of the few intelligent people here and your subsequent profile deletion after feeling sorry about your rants. Bottom line - Nobody that I remember has bought your story. Keep trying but you won't succeed. I like the hyper-activity mode you have gone to since your call-out thread disappeared. Liked the snowflake thread and the other one you have started. Interesting human psychology.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Aug 27, 2018 4:57:59 GMT
Most call-out threads are basically ad hominem attacks. As it is generally known by those who understand logical fallacies, when people resort to using an ad hominem approach they have essentially lost the argument and have nothing left to do but offer insults. Not being able to "hold one's own" in a discussion can be due to a lack of knowledge, a lack of intelligence, or both a lack of knowledge and intelligence. Yes, there are people who are intelligent who have taken using insults to an art form showing great wit when making them. Of course Don Rickles comes to mind, but also Oscar Wilde, Oscar Levant, Dorothy Parker, Winston Churchill and others. These all were very intelligent people. But have we really seen people possessing their intelligence and fine-tuned wit starting call-out threads here? I don't remember seeing evidence of this, and if anything those starting them here are generally exposing their limited cognitive abilities. Many times it is not enough to show a person that he is wrong. It can be helpful to show him why he is wrong, what tendencies of his lead to the error.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Aug 27, 2018 9:31:36 GMT
Most call-out threads are basically ad hominem attacks. As it is generally known by those who understand logical fallacies, when people resort to using an ad hominem approach they have essentially lost the argument and have nothing left to do but offer insults. Not being able to "hold one's own" in a discussion can be due to a lack of knowledge, a lack of intelligence, or both a lack of knowledge and intelligence. Yes, there are people who are intelligent who have taken using insults to an art form showing great wit when making them. Of course Don Rickles comes to mind, but also Oscar Wilde, Oscar Levant, Dorothy Parker, Winston Churchill and others. These all were very intelligent people. But have we really seen people possessing their intelligence and fine-tuned wit starting call-out threads here? I don't remember seeing evidence of this, and if anything those starting them here are generally exposing their limited cognitive abilities. 100% agree with you, Geode. One more thing - people also give away their long held biases and prejudices when they create call-out threads. It portrays the person as very small minded. Sometimes people create call-out threads apparently against 6 or 7 members (even that is wrong) but you can easily catch the odd-man out out of those 6 or 7 for whom the thread is actually created. At end of the day it represents inferiority complex of the person creating the thread. Especially when the person for whom the thread is created does not even reply. The person who created the thread wants to tell the world something in such cases. But people who are aware of the history know what lies behind the curtain.
Yes, I think you are correct in what you say here. In my experience a call-out thread usually reveals more about the one starting it than the expected target. Probably they backfire most of the time. Many years ago on the old IMDb boards I was having a discussion with a guy named Castlewood about whether or not animals have souls. He considered my thoughts heretical but stopped posting in the thread in question. But he was not through. He started a callout thread on another board, one I never posted on, essentially calling me names over my position. I guess he was surprised that almost every reply disagreed with both his theological thinking as well as his approach of not only using a call-out thread, but one on a different board.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Aug 27, 2018 11:30:05 GMT
Not necessarily. Even if it did what you said (which it doesn’t, and I’ll get to that in a moment), having prejudices and biases (which everyone has) doesn't automatically make someone small minded. That is an ad hominem right there, and it would require some validation/qualification of that statement in order for it to be anything but an ad hominem. With respect to call out threads, they are not necessarily indicative in and of themselves of a prejudice or a bias. It would depend on the content of the thread, who was being called out, and in what way they were being called out that might demonstrate some bias or prejudice. A key word in your statement is “sometimes”, isn’t it? There’s a LOT of assumptions in there; far too many to draw such clear conclusions aren’t there? For example, why would it represent an inferiority complex to call out someone else (whether they respond or not)? Also, what if the person does respond by say creating a different thread where they rant about being called out? I mean, if anything that’s would indicate an inferiority complex in the person being called out. Seeking validation and sympathy from others that they don’t deserve to be called out is an act of desperation is it not? What are they trying to tell the world? You see how the logic you are using here completely falls apart. All that effort is of no use, Bryce. Keep justifying your repeat call-out threads. Even in years nobody has bought your stories about Geode. Oh, you think this is about me. Unfortunately you are mistaken; I have no “stories” about Geode. I’m asking you to justify your assumption filled post here (and unlike you I’m not arrogant enough to presume what everyone thinks or knows here). But if you’d rather avoid the question (or concede that it’s a bunch of unsubstantiated nonsense), that’s fine too. Yeah, I don’t know what mysterious “story” you keep alluding to (guess we’ll never know). But it seems clear at this point that you perceive that geode is being attacked by me, that you’ve got some kind of hard-on for him, and that you have some kind of misplaced anger towards me. You’ve gone completely off the rails with this post and your supposed “memories” of me, so I’m going to let you settle with that and see where geode was going with his rant instead. I think human psychology is most definitely at play here in your aggressive tone (and over the top interpretation of my actions). For what it’s worth, I have no personal issues with you. I was just genuinely looking forward to you justifying your response. Had I known you had some sort of animosity towards me in particular, I wouldn’t have tried to press you here. In any case, good luck and please try to settle your issues.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Aug 27, 2018 11:36:29 GMT
100% agree with you, Geode. One more thing - people also give away their long held biases and prejudices when they create call-out threads. It portrays the person as very small minded. Sometimes people create call-out threads apparently against 6 or 7 members (even that is wrong) but you can easily catch the odd-man out out of those 6 or 7 for whom the thread is actually created. At end of the day it represents inferiority complex of the person creating the thread. Especially when the person for whom the thread is created does not even reply. The person who created the thread wants to tell the world something in such cases. But people who are aware of the history know what lies behind the curtain.
Yes, I think you are correct in what you say here. In my experience a call-out thread usually reveals more about the one starting it than the expected target. Probably they backfire most of the time. Many years ago on the old IMDb boards I was having a discussion with a guy named Castlewood about whether or not animals have souls. He considered my thoughts heretical but stopped posting in the thread in question. But he was not through. He started a callout thread on another board, one I never posted on, essentially calling me names over my position. I guess he was surprised that almost every reply disagreed with both his theological thinking as well as his approach of not only using a call-out thread, but one on a different board. Do people often call you out on threads? Is that the reason you felt some sort of emotional drive to make a thread about call out threads? I’m curious as to why someone (who is otherwise intelligent) would become so emotionally invested in whether or not they are called-out? Isn’t that a bit insecure? Oh, and you didn’t answer my earlier question. AJ seems to be implying that your post is inspired by me presumably because I used your name (among many others) in reference to a general question. But I’d rather not assume this to be true. You could clarify this of course, as it would give further indication of whether you likewise consider something that benign a “call-out” thread.
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Aug 27, 2018 12:18:41 GMT
I suppose it depends on the nature of the CALL-OUT thread... Sometimes, a person just wants to continue a conversation/argument that started in a thread that's already cluttered or really long.. and it is perceived, or vilified, as being a CALL OUT. In an argument, all posts are kind of a call out... Seeing the need to whine about a post that is argumentative just because it's at the beginning of a thread seems rather silly. OR Take Rabbit... please... Once he got his retard focus set upon you.. he'd respond to every post you make with his mindless drivel... Some people (of weak mind) didn't have a problem with this... but, God forbid, that you start a thread pointing out that he is responding to every post his foils make... because, in their stupid heads, that's just you seeking his attention. And some (usually those same week minded individuals) are smugly hypocritical with their "I don't make call out threads... They're beneath me" attitude: Their last 50 posts could be nothing but out-of-the-blue/non-topic-related insult replies to you... but.. if you start a thread pointing out that their last 50 posts are nothing but insult replies to you: You're a worm for doing a call out. As if those 50 posts are nonexistent compared to the 1, at the start of a thread.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 27, 2018 12:57:33 GMT
As it is generally known by those who understand logical fallacies, when people resort to using an ad hominem approach they have essentially lost the argument and have nothing left to do but offer insults. Fallacies do not imply that someone has lost an argument or that whatever the person is claiming is false or wrong. The idea of fallacies is simply that they do not amount to valid arguments (validity being defined as the impossibility of premises being true and conclusions false; with a fallacy, it's possible for premises to be true while the conclusion is false, hence we do not have a valid argument by definition). So, if for example part of our argument for the Earth not being flat is that the vast majority of people say that the Earth isn't flat, we're committing the argumentum ad populum fallacy even though our claim that the Earth isn't flat is true. So committing a fallacy doesn't imply that the person's claim isn't true. It's just that it's not true for the reasons that they're arguing. It's true for other reasons.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 27, 2018 13:14:11 GMT
Also, traditionally "ad hominem" doesn't refer to insulting someone. Ad hominem rather referred to appealing to your fellow discussant's biases, prejudices, etc. For example, say that you're arguing that it's dangerous to sail too far across the ocean. If you know that you're talking to a flat-earther, that might be part of your support for your claim. The problem is that appealing to the beliefs the person already buys obviously doesn't guarantee validity. Hence that's a fallacy, and that's traditionally what the ad hominem fallacy was. It was only in the last century or so that ad hominem shifted to the "insulting/undermining the character of" connotation.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Aug 27, 2018 13:22:59 GMT
OR Take Rabbit... please... Once he got his retard focus set upon you.. he'd respond to every post you make with his mindless drivel... Some people (of weak mind) didn't have a problem with this... but, God forbid, that you start a thread pointing out that he is responding to every post his foils make... because, in their stupid heads, that's just you seeking his attention. Jesus, I almost forgot about that clown. Whatever happened to him?
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Aug 27, 2018 16:12:27 GMT
All that effort is of no use, Bryce. Keep justifying your repeat call-out threads. Even in years nobody has bought your stories about Geode. To be honest: I'm confused. I see only two threads started by captainbryce on this page; they don't look like call-out threads to me. Bottom line - Nobody that I remember has bought your story. Keep trying but you won't succeed. There's a story? I like the hyper-activity mode you have gone to since your call-out thread disappeared. Liked the snowflake thread and the other one you have started. Interesting human psychology. Starting two threads is hyper-activity mode? Then thefleetsin and progressiveelement should be producing enough energy to solve the problems of humanity... I don't remember every argument on message boards. And I try to judge posters on a post-by-post basis. After all, even a broken clock is right twice a day.
|
|
|
Post by koskiewicz on Aug 27, 2018 16:22:44 GMT
"In each human heart are a tiger, a pig, an ass and a nightingale. Diversity of character is due to their unequal activity." -Dr Jamrach Holobom
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Aug 27, 2018 16:39:20 GMT
All that effort is of no use, Bryce. Keep justifying your repeat call-out threads. Even in years nobody has bought your stories about Geode. To be honest: I'm confused. I see only two threads started by captainbryce on this page; they don't look like call-out threads to me. Bottom line - Nobody that I remember has bought your story. Keep trying but you won't succeed. There's a story? I like the hyper-activity mode you have gone to since your call-out thread disappeared. Liked the snowflake thread and the other one you have started. Interesting human psychology. Starting two threads is hyper-activity mode? Then thefleetsin and progressiveelement should be producing enough energy to solve the problems of humanity... I don't remember every argument on message boards. And I try to judge posters on a post-by-post basis. After all, even a broken clock is right twice a day. In fairness there was a thread I started here which was a general call out thread (calling out many people; I did not single out geode). I imagine that thread was deleted because geode’s feelings were hurt. This thread is obviously a direct reply to that one. AJ is clearly friends with geode, who is obviously seeking some validation or support for what he perceives as an attack on him. Geode has never liked me because I called him out once on the old IMDB boards about him lying. He’s held a grudge ever since which is why he doesn’t respond to me directly (even though he clearly reads my posts). I’m not really sure what AJ’s “memory” is based on, except to say that it often appears to be exaggerated and/or fabricated. There is clearly no “story” beyond what you see and I honestly don’t know what he means by hyperactivity. I’m as curious as you to see his response.
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Aug 27, 2018 16:55:03 GMT
In fairness there was a thread I started here which was a general call out thread (calling out many people; I did not single out geode). I imagine that thread was deleted because geode’s feelings were hurt. This thread is obviously a direct reply to that one. Ah, ok. I'm not a fan of call-out threads; and I believe there's something in the terms of conduct against call-out thread. Even those that address more than one poster. Deleting such a thread because of that seems more plausible than imagining hurt feelings. AJ is clearly friends with geode, who is obviously seeking some validation or support for what he perceives as an attack on him. Geode has never liked me because I called him out once on the old IMDB boards about him lying. He’s held a grudge ever since which is why he doesn’t respond to me directly (even though he clearly reads my posts). I’m not really sure what AJ’s “memory” is based on, except to say that it often appears to be exaggerated and/or fabricated. There is clearly no “story” beyond what you see and I honestly don’t know what he means by hyperactivity. I’m as curious as you to see his response. "clearly"? "obviously"? "appears to"? I don't buy into conspiracy theories. Right now this thread reminds me of a school playground fight. Maybe posting on this thread wasn't such a good idea...
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Aug 27, 2018 17:04:05 GMT
I'm not gonna say I'm completly against "call out threads" as admittingly they can be rather entertaining, though they are basically the Internet equivalent of this:
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Aug 27, 2018 17:09:58 GMT
All that effort is of no use, Bryce. Keep justifying your repeat call-out threads. Even in years nobody has bought your stories about Geode. To be honest: I'm confused. I see only two threads started by captainbryce on this page; they don't look like call-out threads to me. Bottom line - Nobody that I remember has bought your story. Keep trying but you won't succeed. There's a story? I like the hyper-activity mode you have gone to since your call-out thread disappeared. Liked the snowflake thread and the other one you have started. Interesting human psychology. Starting two threads is hyper-activity mode? Then thefleetsin and progressiveelement should be producing enough energy to solve the problems of humanity... I don't remember every argument on message boards. And I try to judge posters on a post-by-post basis. After all, even a broken clock is right twice a day. Yes, there was a Call-out thread. Deleted by admins perhaps.
There is a story dating back many years. Captain Bryce has over the years alleged that Geode is a liar and apparently one of the biggest fools on this board. Such call-out threads are not new. May be you are not aware of the back story.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Aug 27, 2018 17:14:59 GMT
All that effort is of no use, Bryce. Keep justifying your repeat call-out threads. Even in years nobody has bought your stories about Geode. Oh, you think this is about me. Unfortunately you are mistaken; I have no “stories” about Geode. I’m asking you to justify your assumption filled post here (and unlike you I’m not arrogant enough to presume what everyone thinks or knows here). But if you’d rather avoid the question (or concede that it’s a bunch of unsubstantiated nonsense), that’s fine too. Yeah, I don’t know what mysterious “story” you keep alluding to (guess we’ll never know). But it seems clear at this point that you perceive that geode is being attacked by me, that you’ve got some kind of hard-on for him, and that you have some kind of misplaced anger towards me. You’ve gone completely off the rails with this post and your supposed “memories” of me, so I’m going to let you settle with that and see where geode was going with his rant instead. I think human psychology is most definitely at play here in your aggressive tone (and over the top interpretation of my actions). For what it’s worth, I have no personal issues with you. I was just genuinely looking forward to you justifying your response. Had I known you had some sort of animosity towards me in particular, I wouldn’t have tried to press you here. In any case, good luck and please try to settle your issues. Oh, you are liar then. You have often started call-out threads on Geode. Alleging him to be liar and that he apparently stole a line from your signature once. In the call-out threads you also allege him to be one of the least intelligent posters here. Considering your past record that is not unbelievable. In of your call-out threads (drunken one) you had also alleged over 90% of the board members to be fools and members like Tas-10 and 2 or 3 others to be apparently only intelligent members.
|
|