[MD] Quality decline in U.S. politics

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting ian glendinning <psybertron at gmail.com>:

> Platt inserted ...
> 
> On 7/18/07, pholden at davtv.com <pholden at davtv.com> wrote:
> > Quoting ian glendinning <psybertron at gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Platt, I don't need lectures from you on "ad hominem".
> >
> > The lecture was from Pirsig in case you didn't notice.
> [Ian] Of course I noticed, you even cited the quote, that's why I
> didn't need it; I'm as familiar with it as you are, and it was
> irrelevant to my point. However "in case you didn't notice" is (ad
> hominem) suggesting I'm stupid.

Do you really think that ad hominems only apply to the word "stupid." Is this
the level of your self-congratulatory intellect?

> > > I've NEVER called you or your points "stupid".
> > > I quite legitimately say you are evil and dishonest, and constantly
> > > engaing in ad hominem digs. I (and Arlo it seems) choose to point out
> > > that dishonesty.

You don't think name-calling (evil and dishonest) is a personal, ad hominem
attack. Good Lord, I'm dealing with an idiot. 

> > To say I am evil and dishonest is an ad hominem attack. It "does not tell us
> > about the condition of the sun."
> 
> [Ian] Good, I wasn't talking about the sun, I was talking about your
> morals. You were the subject of my argument. That has nothing to do
> with ad hominem.

Name-calling is an argument? How dishonest can you get? If I'm the subject, how
come you don't change the subject line?
 
> > > Platt, I referred to Arlo and myself, because those were the three
> > > people involved in the point ... ie I was talking to you about Arlo's
> > > mail .... so, yes I'm saying Arlo and I are on the OK side of you
> > > (IMHO natch).
> > >
> > > It's only you I'm expressing opinions about, everyone else is err ...
> > > OK by me ... that is they are not the subject of any points in this
> > > correspondence.
> >
> > But you do include yourself and Arlo as being "representative" of this
> > forum do you not? And you do think your words are OK, right?
> 
> [Ian] More representative of its values than you, more OK than you, if
> you must. No absolute truths here.

Yes, of course. "More representative of its values than you, more OK than your."
Arrogance at its height.

> > So pat yourself on the back. It's nice to have an ego.
> 
> [Ian] So again Platt, pat yourself on the back ... ATFQ - where did I
> ever call you "stupid" - you immoral, ignorant liar ? I'm not
> suggesting that as part of some rhetorical trick, I'm explicitly
> asserting it.

Again, to get it through your thick head. "Stupid" is not the only word
that constitutes an ad hominem attack. 

Platt






-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/