Your Friendly Guide on Belittling Your Neighbor's Beliefs (pamphlet for distribution is pending) — Page 2

It was a House reference, anyway :)
Although it should've been obvious to be some kind of reference anyway, eh?

No idea at all what I might've said that was "offensive" to you.
I so hope it wasn't challenging your "skepticism"... you know...

Oh, no!  I strive to remain on good terms with everyone, so don't take that too harshly.  It's honestly what I pointed out in the first place way back when.  The long and the short of it is, if you disagree with someone, you write a dissertation with multiple quotes from the person you disagree with, adamantly and contentiously force-feeding your point of view, and not allowing anyone's opinion to differ from yours without you chewing their glutes.  I'm not trying to be rude.  I'm just pointing out that your methods are not necessarily as thorough as they are grating.  But I've learned to take your style gracefully; not everyone else has.

If you wish to throw down the gauntlet again in the political thread (referring to the mention of skepticism), we can do that :)  Probably not tonight, though.  My time here is becoming rarer and rarer, and I feel disinclined to restate the same position again until I have enough time to express myself clearly.  Next week, darth_ender will will likely be an endangered species on this forum.  A shame, too, as his kind was the handsome sort.

Nah, well, it was your turn so if you wanna post something, sure... I've said everything so far :)

And no, I don't know how many times I have to repeat this again, I DON'T attack "anyone who disagrees with me" - there are just SOME opinions, that are (apparently) fallacious, and THEN I might attack or try to debunk them. And try to "force-feed" what I consider as... reason.

And then obviously I quote multiple parts from their posts so I can make a nice point... based on their post.

It's not just "any opinion", because it's "my style". I'm just honest if I find something stupid, and any "respect your opinion" would be an empty pleasantry in that case.

As I said, I only attack bullshit opinions. You may think whatever nonsense you want.

twooffour said:

Nah, well, it was your turn so if you wanna post something, sure... I've said everything so far :)

And no, I don't know how many times I have to repeat this again, I DON'T attack "anyone who disagrees with me" - there are just SOME opinions, that are (apparently) fallacious, and THEN I might attack or try to debunk them. And try to "force-feed" what I consider as... reason.

And then obviously I quote multiple parts from their posts so I can make a nice point... based on their post.

It's not just "any opinion", because it's "my style". I'm just honest if I find something stupid, and any "respect your opinion" would be an empty pleasantry in that case.

Well, I'm afraid this is another brilliant topic started by an eloquent OP now derailed by what was intended as a minor venture off-track, in this case in your defense.

First, I never even said you attack anyone, so chill.  Second, you presume what every human presumes, that being that all your opinions are correct and everyone else's are faulty.  After all, why cling to an opinion if you don't think it's right.  The real problem is that if anyone slightly questions your point of view, then you pull your usual rhetoric with "quotation marks," ALL CAPS, and always finding supposed fallacies where none truly exists.  The belief that you are always right is the most fallacious of human reasoning.  You fall prey to it more than anyone else I've yet had the pleasure to meet on this forum.

Wait, darth_ender!  Twooffour is not off topic!  Every post is the belittling of someone else's beliefs.  Perhaps he could be incorporated into the second edition of your little pamphlet.

^By jove!  What an incredible idea!

darth_ender said:

Wait, darth_ender!  Twooffour is not off topic!  Every post is the belittling of someone else's beliefs.  Perhaps he could be incorporated into the second edition of your little pamphlet.

Now I'm on board. ;-)

13) If you happen to go by the online name of twooffour, you get a special category.  You see, you belong among the self-professed Demigods of the Wall of Logic.  Your worldview demands that only you are right.  These are the rules associated with your worship: You may, and in fact do, belittle everyone else for not capitulating to your greatness.  This is okay, because the Demigods of the Wall of Logic bow to no one, and instead demand piety from their inferiors.  However, if you do not belong to this bizarre sect, no one seems to have any faith in you.  No one mourns or calls out the Stasi when you are insulted.  You are, shall we say, "in season."

(Need to run this by my editors.  Meanwhile, any suggestions?)

Needs moar CAPS and "quotes."

twooffour said:

As I said, I only attack bullshit opinions. You may think whatever nonsense you want.

Curious how bullshit opinions seem to be every opinion you disagree with...

darth_ender said:

twooffour said:

Nah, well, it was your turn so if you wanna post something, sure... I've said everything so far :)

And no, I don't know how many times I have to repeat this again, I DON'T attack "anyone who disagrees with me" - there are just SOME opinions, that are (apparently) fallacious, and THEN I might attack or try to debunk them. And try to "force-feed" what I consider as... reason.

And then obviously I quote multiple parts from their posts so I can make a nice point... based on their post.

It's not just "any opinion", because it's "my style". I'm just honest if I find something stupid, and any "respect your opinion" would be an empty pleasantry in that case.

Well, I'm afraid this is another brilliant topic started by an eloquent OP now derailed by what was intended as a minor venture off-track, in this case in your defense.

First, I never even said you attack anyone, so chill.  Second, you presume what every human presumes, that being that all your opinions are correct and everyone else's are faulty.  After all, why cling to an opinion if you don't think it's right.  The real problem is that if anyone slightly questions your point of view, then you pull your usual rhetoric with "quotation marks," ALL CAPS, and always finding supposed fallacies where none truly exists.  The belief that you are always right is the most fallacious of human reasoning.  You fall prey to it more than anyone else I've yet had the pleasure to meet on this forum.

What an insipid piece of BULLSHIT.

Do I even have to respond to this?
No, not every human presumes that all their opinions are correct - that's reserved for the idiots. Anyone with half a brain will realize that some of their opinions are uninformed or poorly thought-out (which you can, of course, only do after admitting that an opinion CAN be uninformed and poorly thought-out), and is probably able to tell it at at least SOME examples.

However, believing that you're right when you can back up your claims time and time again, and anyone objecting can't, is, I think, a pretty justified reasoning.
That doesn't mean you're right ABOUT EVERYTHING - just the STUFF YOU CAN BACK UP. Is that so hard to get?

And hey, if you wanna claim that when I point out a fallacy, "none true exists", how about you point that out next time? What you're doing here, is just empty accusation - and also built on fallacies and false conclusions (strawman is a fallacy, look it up).

Is that finally clear? Have I got it across? THANK you.

CP3S said:

twooffour said:

As I said, I only attack bullshit opinions. You may think whatever nonsense you want.

Curious how bullshit opinions seem to be every opinion you disagree with...

Maybe because I don't see any sense in agreeing with a bullshit opinion?

Again, it's a bullshit opinion if I can back up that it is. That's the only qualified, not who disagrees with it.
I think I've said this same thing dozens of times already, and if you're too thick to get that (because accusing someone of megalomania is so much more fun than using your brain), then hey, fine.



@Twister, all your examples are unrelated and suck. I'm not even going to

I mean, I have never seen you "respectfully disagree" with anything. Anytime you disagree, you call some forms of bullshit or another.

When I expressed my views on Islam, I initially had nothing backing them up and yet you commented on what a great post I had made and how well I had managed to back up my views for once... this left me scratching my head and bemused. When I made that post I was actually slightly bothered by the fact that I had made a bunch of claims, but hadn't provided anything to back them. That post was only a good post to you, because you happened to agree with it. If you disagreed with it, you could have just as easily called bullshit on that post as any of my others.

That was a very telling example of how right and wrong to you is stuck within the strict confines of your own views. You aren't disagreeing with it because it is bullshit, it is bullshit simply because you disagree with it. A reasonable person would disagree with any number of things that they would find to be understandable enough (for example: I can clearly see all the merits of driving a manual, I understand all my friends arguments for why stick is better, but I still prefer automatics. If I thought like you, I'd probably think my friends were at least "BEING" at "THAT TIME" slightly stupid for thinking manual transmissions are better than automatics).

CP3S said:

I mean, I have never seen you "respectfully disagree" with anything. Anytime you disagree, you call some forms of bullshit or another.

That's confirmation bias. Actually done that quite a few times.
My religious discussion with darth_ender on the Politics would be one example.
(Although that was in terms of tone.)

When I expressed my views on Islam, I initially had nothing backing them up and yet you commented on what a great post I had made and how well I had managed to back up my views for once... this left me scratching my head and bemused.

If you disagreed with it, you could have just as easily called bullshit on that post as any of my others.

Your mistake here is that political opinions about Islam are wide-spread points of views held by a lot of different people. It's not just an individual opinion of yours and yours only, that I yet have to see backed up - when I've already seen lots of other Islam criticis pointing to the instructions in the Quran, the crimes committed by many Muslims today, with piles of examples etc. etc.
In such a case, a first impression that someone else has given the issue some thought (and from the looks of it, much more than I have), is quite sufficient I think.

That was a very telling example of how right and wrong to you is stuck within the strict confines of your own views.

You aren't disagreeing with it because it is bullshit, it is bullshit simply because you disagree with it.

Ok, are we done with this? Can we wrap this up?

Your silly accusations have no merit whatsoever, and I don't think I can keep debunking this stupid poppycock for much longer.

Notice how you hardly ever see me just pop in someone's thread and start throwing accusations at another user based on past disagreements (with that being the whole content of my posting). Have I done that? MAYBE once, or twice? Certainly not ALL THE FUCKING TIME.

Seems like I'm not the one who's trying to keep the pissing contest alive and rollin'.
This time it's the OP who decided to start it, though, so I guess it's alright.

You back them up in as far as saying that the things you are disagreeing with are bullshit because they are bullshit, you just say it in as many words as possible.

CP3S said:

You back them up in as far as saying that the things you are disagreeing with are bullshit because they are bullshit, you just say it in as many words as possible.

 

Meta Humuour at its finest.

"Look at me. I'm accusing you of not backing up your claims, just stating them, or backing them up with themselves.
However, I'm not going to back up this accusation myself, just state it.

The meta joke being that I'm making myself guilty of something I'm attributing to you, while not proving you to be guilty of it as I'm not backing it up.
So basically, I'm accusing solely you by telling, while condemning solely myself by showing.

It's like in that movie, "Be Cool", where Steven Tyler, playing himself, claims he's not one of those musicians who go on to star in movies, while doing exactly this by playing this role. The character exonerates himself, but condemns the actor! And they're the same person! Now wasn't that hilarious?

Or that other one, where the killer hits the wrong target, and then asks: "Well whose fault is that?"
Vince Vaughn: "... It's your fault? Duh?"

Hehe, yea I know, I do have my moments, LOL!"




...


Oh wait, that wasn't intentional.

Oh, look who turned ANOTHER thread to "shit."

twister111 said:

 

Internet Fights Are A Waste Of Time!(to twooffour)

 

So applicable!  My favorite comment on the video is the guy who asked "what if I'm trolling."  Might as well have been twooffour.

TV's Frink said:

Oh, look who turned ANOTHER thread to "shit."

The OP.