Skip to main content

Reply to "Ideal reparations."

I tried to ignore it but here's a list of logical fallacies you've committed since you've been on this site:

argumentum ad ignorantiam
Arguments of this form assume that since something has not been proven false, it is therefore true. Conversely, such an argument may assume that since something has not been proven true, it is therefore false.

argumentum ad baculum
The reader is told that unpleasant consequences will follow
if they do not agree with the author

argumentum ad consequentiam
The author points to the disagreeable consequences of
holding a particular belief in order to show that this belief is

Prejudicial Language
Loaded or emotive terms are used to attach value or moral
goodness to believing the proposition.

Changing the subject

argumentum ad hominem
The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the
argument itself. This takes many forms. For example, the
person's character, nationality or religion may be attacked.
Alternatively, it may be pointed out that a person stands to
gain from a favourable outcome. Or, finally, a person may be
attacked by association, or by the company he keeps.

this list goes on and on
Appeal to Authority
Anonymous Authority
Style over Substance
Hasty Generalization
Unrepresentative Sample
Slothful induction
Straw Man
Post Hoc
Wrong Direction
Complex Cause
Irrelevant Conclusion

For a guy boasting about receiving a Master's Degree you sure don't make alot of sense. Your logic is horrible. If you had an ounce of integrity then you'd probably be taken serious, but every single word that you type has one purpose and one purpose only, that is the contradict the last word you typed.

Dude you're pathetic.
So keep committing your fallacies and showing your intelligence. It's fun to watch. What are you going to do now, bring a post from the Sista's Spot into Reparations, somehow miraculously tying the two together to make sense within your pyschotic mind?