On Tue, 4 Feb 2014, Brian Barker wrote:
At 09:58 04/02/2014 +1000, Peter West wrote:
It mystifies me that some ossers become tossers on this particular topic,
...
Whatever value your argument might have had, you destroy it by being abusive
and using an ad hominem argument, of course. It is thus surprising that you
should choose to do this.
jeez, these days no one knows what an 'ad hominem' argument is!
an 'ad hominem' attempts to prove a point against (or for) X by basing
the point on some logically irrelevant aspect of the person claiming
X.
e.g. "you only say we should bottom-post because you are a tosser."
(whatever a 'tosser' is, is that a kind of shot putter?)
that wasn't the case here as Peter based his point on a different
argument (albeit one I find thoroughly unconvincing but not because
I'm a shot putter).
name-calling does not invalidate an argument else, "p implies q,
therefore not (p and not-q), you tosser!" would be invalid.
just saying....
F.
--
Felmon Davis
Blutarsky's Axiom:
Nothing is impossible for the man who will not listen to reason.
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
