HorrorMovieFans.com

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote: You're missing the point. It doesn't matter at all where idiots want to go. Idiots on the "remove all slave owners" get no more credence than "remove any statues of black people" fringe would from the KKK.

if it's just fringe that seeks for removal and not already well regarded members of a community with a large base too, then we'll probably be fine.

You'll definitely be fine. Glad we got that out of the way.

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:I mean you know that "Slippery Slope" is a specific logical fallacy.

in this specific instance, maybe so. i really hope you're right. i hope the censorship and vandalism stops with civil war figures.

Well yes. That too.

But also it is a general fallacy that shouldn't be used as an argument.

you don't like it as a place to take an argument, and that's fine. but can you say that things have never snowballed from one incident to go further and further? do things just always happen in a vacuum, out of nowhere?

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:I mean you know that "Slippery Slope" is a specific logical fallacy.

in this specific instance, maybe so. i really hope you're right. i hope the censorship and vandalism stops with civil war figures.

Well yes. That too.

But also it is a general fallacy that shouldn't be used as an argument.

you don't like it as a place to take an argument, and that's fine. but can you say that things have never snowballed from one incident to go further and further? do things just always happen in a vacuum, out of nowhere?

No. But each action and consequence has a chance to then respawn new actions. The fallacy isn't that a chain of events can happen. It's that there is inevitability in the final outcome based on the first step.

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote: You're missing the point. It doesn't matter at all where idiots want to go. Idiots on the "remove all slave owners" get no more credence than "remove any statues of black people" fringe would from the KKK.

if it's just fringe that seeks for removal and not already well regarded members of a community with a large base too, then we'll probably be fine.

You'll definitely be fine. Glad we got that out of the way.

jason and you will definitely agree that al sharpton is an idiot.

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:I mean you know that "Slippery Slope" is a specific logical fallacy.

in this specific instance, maybe so. i really hope you're right. i hope the censorship and vandalism stops with civil war figures.

Well yes. That too.

But also it is a general fallacy that shouldn't be used as an argument.

you don't like it as a place to take an argument, and that's fine. but can you say that things have never snowballed from one incident to go further and further? do things just always happen in a vacuum, out of nowhere?

No. But each action and consequence has a chance to then respawn new actions. The fallacy isn't that a chain of events can happen. It's that there is inevitability in the final outcome based on the first step.

you're mistaking my use of the argument. it's not that it will inevitably happen. and that is why i keep saying that i hope it doesn't. that i hope it only goes "this far".

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote: You're missing the point. It doesn't matter at all where idiots want to go. Idiots on the "remove all slave owners" get no more credence than "remove any statues of black people" fringe would from the KKK.

if it's just fringe that seeks for removal and not already well regarded members of a community with a large base too, then we'll probably be fine.

You'll definitely be fine. Glad we got that out of the way.

jason and you will definitely agree that al sharpton is an idiot.

Sounded like it based on his last statement. Garbage.

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:I mean you know that "Slippery Slope" is a specific logical fallacy.

in this specific instance, maybe so. i really hope you're right. i hope the censorship and vandalism stops with civil war figures.

Well yes. That too.

But also it is a general fallacy that shouldn't be used as an argument.

you don't like it as a place to take an argument, and that's fine. but can you say that things have never snowballed from one incident to go further and further? do things just always happen in a vacuum, out of nowhere?

No. But each action and consequence has a chance to then respawn new actions. The fallacy isn't that a chain of events can happen. It's that there is inevitability in the final outcome based on the first step.

you're mistaking my use of the argument. it's not that it will inevitably happen. and that is why i keep saying that i hope it doesn't. that i hope it only goes "this far".

Deal with each link in its turn. If it goes all the way to removing anyone who was born before 1945 you'll have every chance to try and stop it along the way.

I like having zombs on my side of an argument someone who reacts with reason not emotions

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:I mean you know that "Slippery Slope" is a specific logical fallacy.

in this specific instance, maybe so. i really hope you're right. i hope the censorship and vandalism stops with civil war figures.

Well yes. That too.

But also it is a general fallacy that shouldn't be used as an argument.

you don't like it as a place to take an argument, and that's fine. but can you say that things have never snowballed from one incident to go further and further? do things just always happen in a vacuum, out of nowhere?

No. But each action and consequence has a chance to then respawn new actions. The fallacy isn't that a chain of events can happen. It's that there is inevitability in the final outcome based on the first step.

you're mistaking my use of the argument. it's not that it will inevitably happen. and that is why i keep saying that i hope it doesn't. that i hope it only goes "this far".

Deal with each link in its turn. If it goes all the way to removing anyone who was born before 1945 you'll have every chance to try and stop it along the way.

there is always a chance to stop censorship along the way, from going too far, or becoming too unruly.

Tiggnutz wrote:I like having zombs on my side of an argument someone who reacts with reason not emotions

Sadly he's hit logic with his reason.

showa58taro wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:I like having zombs on my side of an argument someone who reacts with reason not emotions

Sadly he's hit logic with his reason.

no i have hit stubbornness. we're both arguing from logic.

showa58taro wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:I like having zombs on my side of an argument someone who reacts with reason not emotions

Sadly he's hit logic with his reason.

The best of us can see further than what's right in front of us I can't always do that. Respect

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:I mean you know that "Slippery Slope" is a specific logical fallacy.

in this specific instance, maybe so. i really hope you're right. i hope the censorship and vandalism stops with civil war figures.

Well yes. That too.

But also it is a general fallacy that shouldn't be used as an argument.

you don't like it as a place to take an argument, and that's fine. but can you say that things have never snowballed from one incident to go further and further? do things just always happen in a vacuum, out of nowhere?

No. But each action and consequence has a chance to then respawn new actions. The fallacy isn't that a chain of events can happen. It's that there is inevitability in the final outcome based on the first step.

you're mistaking my use of the argument. it's not that it will inevitably happen. and that is why i keep saying that i hope it doesn't. that i hope it only goes "this far".

Deal with each link in its turn. If it goes all the way to removing anyone who was born before 1945 you'll have every chance to try and stop it along the way.

there is always a chance to stop censorship along the way, from going too far, or becoming too unruly.

Exactly. So saying we shouldn't do something that is right at this point in time because it will possibly lead to something wrong in the future discredits the notion of our ability to see what is right or wrong.

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:I like having zombs on my side of an argument someone who reacts with reason not emotions

Sadly he's hit logic with his reason.

no i have hit stubbornness. we're both arguing from logic.

It's true. My point is that I'm not arguing from emotions.

Tiggnutz wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:I like having zombs on my side of an argument someone who reacts with reason not emotions

Sadly he's hit logic with his reason.

The best of us can see further than what's right in front of us I can't always do that. Respect

Trump could take a lesson

Tiggnutz wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:I like having zombs on my side of an argument someone who reacts with reason not emotions

Sadly he's hit logic with his reason.

The best of us can see further than what's right in front of us I can't always do that. Respect

I feel like I'm being called a Prognosticator. Like a ground hog.

showa58taro wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:I like having zombs on my side of an argument someone who reacts with reason not emotions

Sadly he's hit logic with his reason.

The best of us can see further than what's right in front of us I can't always do that. Respect

I feel like I'm being called a Prognosticator. Like a ground hog.

Nah but you may be a slight more emotional driven it's ok though

Tiggnutz wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:I like having zombs on my side of an argument someone who reacts with reason not emotions

Sadly he's hit logic with his reason.

The best of us can see further than what's right in front of us I can't always do that. Respect

I feel like I'm being called a Prognosticator. Like a ground hog.

Nah but you may be a slight more emotional driven it's ok though

I thought it was me you were calling emotional. I really don't feel like I am. Bizarre. Genuinely just taking down logically flawed arguments and sticking to my principles. I also love arguing with Zombie. He's actually going to address me as a real person. Notjust a punching bag. There's respect between us.

showa58taro wrote:
Exactly. So saying we shouldn't do something that is right at this point in time because it will possibly lead to something wrong in the future discredits the notion of our ability to see what is right or wrong.

do we know right from wrong? the best of us, absolutely. do we always act, when we should? sadly not always.

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:I like having zombs on my side of an argument someone who reacts with reason not emotions

Sadly he's hit logic with his reason.

no i have hit stubbornness. we're both arguing from logic.

It's true. My point is that I'm not arguing from emotions.

do you feel like i'm arguing from emotions, then?