4 ms·
> You seem to be confusing disagreements with ad-hominem. Incorrect, and this is ad hominem. >>>>> impression of a deep understanding of Who is being referre
by Maursault 4y ago
> You seem to be confusing disagreements with ad-hominem.
Incorrect, and this is ad hominem.
>>>>> impression of a deep understanding of
Who is being referred to? Who is being characterized? Certainly not no one. Thus, ad hominem attack.
> you're free to commit logical fallacies as much as you want, but the moment someone else does, you halt all discussion and just shout "fallacy!"
This is ad hominem. But it is also a straw man masquerading as tu quoque.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- bheadmaster 4y agoI'm abandoning this conversation because you seem unwilling to respond to the point of my post and bring any kind of argument to the table that isn't "fallacy!". Also, fallacy fallacy.
- Maursault 4y agoAd hominem and invincible ignorance. Who says what never matters, it is what is said that is the province of valid argument. I have made no unsupported assertions regarding the truth values of fallacious responses to my initial argument, only identified these responses as specific fallacies to justify not responding. Thus, I have not made any appeal to fallacy, leaving the accusation(s) of such as straw man arguments. I would be more than happy to entertain valid argument, but none have been made in this thread in response to my OP in preference to attempts to humiliate, ostracize and bully me. Any scrutiny whatsoever of me is fallacious argument.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- rhelsing 4y agoI agree with you. There was no attempt to engage the material of your original post. It was classified as psycho-babble from the outset and thus engaging it seriously would nullify that classification.
- bheadmaster 4y agoThere was no attempt to engage with the material of the original post, because the original post contains no material, just various claims pulled out of thin air: > Kanye is a garden variety manic-depressive > It is likely West has one of the more benign flavors of NPD > I think his biggest problem is BPD and drug abuse The rest of the post is either true-sounding-at-first, but completely meaningless claims, or completely obvious things that provide no insight whatsoever. > NPD patients usually don't suffer Completely false. Narcissistic injury is extremely painful, and one of the reasons narcissists lash out in the first place. > [NPD treatment can] correct if not cure the disorder in under 2 years Also not true. Narcissism is a personality disorder, and "curing" narcissism in 2 years is not common. Everything "can" be done, theoretically, but the implications of the sentence is that Narcissism is somehow special in that regard. It's not. > but due to the combination with NPD and vast wealth, and probably being surrounded by those that will never deny him his insane impulses, he's probably not going to get help until he bottoms out in clinical major depression for months, if he survives it So assuming he's NPD, his wealth and sycophants will lead him to destruction? Yeah, quite profound. He also has clinical major depression? Where did that come from? "Psycho-babble" is a perfectly appropriate description of the original comment.
- Drblessing 4y agoThis is the greatest argument thread on Hacker News I've seen a while, and brought me lots of joy. Hats off to you gentlemen.