On Tue, 19 May 1998 14:20:17 -0400, Ed Brayton wrote:
...]
>>>GM>There are lots of skeletal differences. Some dinosaurs may have had
>>>>>feathers.
>>>SJ>Then why would they not be called birds?
>>GM>Sigh. This is why I am giving up on you Stephen.
>SJ>I regard this as an ad hominem. When you get stuck for an answer you
>>often assume a lofty tone prefaced by "Sigh", and blame the questioner.
EB>Then you regard incorrectly. Do you not know what an ad hominem IS? Ad
>hominem means dismissing an argument based on irrelevant characteristics
>of the person making the argument - attacking the person instead of the
>argument. An example of an ad hominem would be, "Mediate Creation is
>nonsense because you are Australian and everyone knows Australians are
>stupid." Or, "Evolution is bunk because evolutionists beat their wives".
They would indeed also be ad hominems.
EB>Affecting what you perceive as a "lofty tone" is NOT an ad hominem
>attack.
If it is "against the man" then it is, by definition, an ad hominem.
EB> Furthermore, Glenn is, in my view, correct in giving up on
>trying to hold a conversation with you.
Glenn has announced on a number of occasions that he is giving
up on trying to hold a conversation with me. Yet he always returns!
EB> I have rarely had an exchange
>with a person who matches your presumptuousness.
Yes. I presumed that when you said you were a "deist" and a "staunch
advocate of the theory of evolution" you meant it!
EB>I gave up on trying to
>hold a conversation with you (I am responding to this only to challenge
>your claim that Glenn engages in ad hominem attacks, not because I
>expect anything useful to come of it on your end of it) because you
>jumped to the conclusion that I was "attempting to evade" your question
>when, in fact, I was answering the question as you had written it
>("Which theory do you advocate" is a very different question than
>"Explain what you mean by evolution"; you asked the first).
Whew! I'm out of breath just reading this one sentence!
EB>I even gave
>you the opportunity to back away from that jumped-to conclusion and say,
>"Perhaps I didn't word that the way I meant it. I meant to ask you to
>explain your own conception of evolutionary theory", but you refused,
>repeatedly. That you thereafter have the sheer nerve to accuse anyone
>else of a "lofty tone" is staggering.
That's rich! *You* say that you are a "staunch advocate of the theory of
evolution" and when I ask which "theory of evolution?" you ask me which
"theory of evolution" *I* mean!
>SJ>Ed has challenged me to give examples of your ad hominems:
>>
[...]
>>
>>so from now on I will add them to a new thread called "Glenn's ad hominems
>>FAQ", classified in alphabetical order. Here is the first:
EB>Great idea. Perhaps I will start a new thread called "Stephen's rudeness
>and misconceptions of the nature of logical fallacies FAQ", classified
>in alphabetical order. Here are the first two examples:
[...]
EB>This should be fun!
It's OK by me Ed. I ask no quarter. Do your worst. It won't be much different from
what the evolutionists have been doing for the last 2-3 years. It will only confirm
further to me the adverse effect of evolution on those who believe it.
Steve
"Evolution is the greatest engine of atheism ever invented."
--- Dr. William Provine, Professor of History and Biology, Cornell University.
http://fp.bio.utk.edu/darwin/1998/slides_view/Slide_7.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen E (Steve) Jones ,--_|\ sejones@ibm.net
3 Hawker Avenue / Oz \ Steve.Jones@health.wa.gov.au
Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ Phone +61 8 9448 7439
Perth, West Australia v "Test everything." (1Thess 5:21)
--------------------------------------------------------------------