First thanks to Azgrey who handed me back two hours of my life by responding.

Secondly Richard you should be able to understand that when I use the term 
"sophist trick" it is in the specific context of a philosophical argument and I 
always couple it with the example I am refering to.  Using it a a general sense 
as a generic putdown turns it into another version of poopy pants as Azgrey 
pointed out. It is a specific technical term in the context of an argument. One 
that I object to whenever one of them is used.  Unfortunatley with some posters 
it is the inevitible end of any discussion and is my signal that civility has 
ceased.


--- In [email protected], "WillyTex" <willy...@...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> > > > You don't understand the meaning of the terms 
> > > > you are using.
> > > > 
> > > Curtis demonstrates in his response that he is 
> > > practiced in the use of pharasaical sophistry.
> > >
> azgrey:
> > Another EPIC FAIL by authfiend...
> > 
> Well, I think Judy pretty much proved that Curtis
> was the respondent that didn't understand the terms
> he was using. But, you've topped Curtis with your
> own 'pharasaical sophistry'.
> 
> > > pharisaical: marked by hypocritical censorious 
> > > self-righteousness
> > >
> > > sophistry: subtly deceptive reasoning or 
> > > argumentation
>


Reply via email to