01 Feb 10
Originally posted by PalynkaWhen you know what you're doing, you're relaxed. Surgeons (including heart and brain surgeons)
I don't think painkillers will help if you insist on banging your head against the wall.
But I admire your perseverance.
frequently joke with their team during the long procedure to keep them on balance and at ease.
01 Feb 10
Originally posted by BlackampWhat considerable lengths you persist in going to... to parse, justify and explain.
if you want to have a discussion about the nature of knowledge, both a priori and a posteriori, or about whether there is synthetic a priori knowledge, or about whether the analytic-synthetic distinction is valid, or anything along those lines, that's fine.
but don't expect meaningful input from Grampy. that's why i responded the way ...[text shortened]... one of his posts, he'll just try to stonewall with some 'blah blah noted' kind of rubbish.
01 Feb 10
Originally posted by BlackampIf engaging in this type of conversation is "fine," as you put it, then why do you refuse to join in the same?
if you want to have a discussion about the nature of knowledge, both a priori and a posteriori, or about whether there is synthetic a priori knowledge, or about whether the analytic-synthetic distinction is valid, or anything along those lines, that's fine.
but don't expect meaningful input from Grampy. that's why i responded the way ...[text shortened]... one of his posts, he'll just try to stonewall with some 'blah blah noted' kind of rubbish.
If we're not to expect "meaningful input" from GB, how in the hell did the conversation get started?
'Cogent criticism?' When did you offer anything remotely resembling a cogent thought in these matters?
01 Feb 10
Originally posted by FreakyKBHso Pastor Bob has rustled up another true believer to make the forums safe for his drivel. that makes two of you.😴
If engaging in this type of conversation is "fine," as you put it, then why do you refuse to join in the same?
If we're not to expect "meaningful input" from GB, how in the hell did the conversation get started?
'Cogent criticism?' When did you offer anything remotely resembling a cogent thought in these matters?
02 Feb 10
2 edits
Originally posted by FreakyKBH...the AH argument...speaking to a bigger picture: one which houses the frame and the picture... That isn't ad hominem, thats simply what a good argument should "speak to."
Favorably.
The 'weakness' of the AH argument is that is is not thought of as speaking to anything but the frame, whereas all of the other arguments are thought of as speaking to the picture. AH rejects the frame without considering the picture--- frame only, which is why it has been hitherto fore been held to be a distraction from the actual argument. ...[text shortened]... picture: one which houses both the frame and the picture in view, the idea behind the person.