> On Jul 16, 2014, at 3:05 PM, Ian Glendinning <[email protected]> > wrote: > > arlo, > one - that was a process describing critcism very explcitly, indeed > recommending it as sound teaching for the novice. > two - sure I broke my own (aspirational) rule. so what should you read into > that rhetorical choice. more ad-hominen things about ian or ..... > > ian.
Ron sez: Ian, exactly what part of Arlo's criticism was not relevant to the Discussion? At what point does he not address The topic and instead criticizes You personally? For example an ad hominem ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short forargumentum ad hominem, is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. " Where did Arlo reject your claim because you are an idiot? See THAT is an ad hominem fallacy. Or, your claim on criticism is invalid because You are a dick Ian. See how that works? , >> On 16 Jul 2014 14:54, "ARLO JAMES BENSINGER JR" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> [Ian] >> In fact I was tempted to respond to this from Arlo .... >> >> "...As I tell students I work with, the simplest progression is "A said B. >> A was wrong about B. This is why A was wrong about B. I propose C instead >> of B. Here's why C is better." Each step in this progression is subject to >> examination for accuracy, and you can't conflate criticism with one step as >> criticism for another (or all)." >> >> That this is the problem. >> It's all criticism, the cart before the horse. >> Nothing before the disagreement. >> >> [Arlo] >> Except, what I wrote is not "criticism" by any stretch of that word. It's >> a simple presentation of a process. Could I have been more elaborate? >> Perhaps. But I guess I am used to working with people who wouldn't need >> this process elaborated upon. Apparently, I was wrong. (Yes, you can count >> THAT as "criticism".) >> >> I am tempted to point out that your reply to this, however, was all >> criticism. And you didn't follow your Dennett-steps yourself. >> >> [Ian] >> Criticism is to be used very, very, very, very sparingly, and only after >> 1, 2 and 3 are established in the conversation. >> >> [Arlo] >> Do as I say, not as I do, eh? (Count that as a bonus "criticism".) >> >> >> >> >> Moq_Discuss mailing list >> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >> Archives: >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >> http://moq.org/md/archives.html > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
