3 ms·
That's not "ad hominem", it's noting how once your argument has been invalidated, you raise a new argument incompatible with the previous one. I'm not attacking
by ossobuco 2y ago
That's not "ad hominem", it's noting how once your argument has been invalidated, you raise a new argument incompatible with the previous one. I'm not attacking your person based on the hypotetical side you are with; I'm criticising your rhetoric, which is clearly not ad hominem.
Once again, as I see you're clearly out of arguments I consider this discussion resolved.
- aguaviva 2y agoIt's noting how once your argument has been invalidated, you raise a new argument incompatible with the previous one. Well I don't see it that way, and it seems you're reading a dynamic into the situation that just isn't there. But we agree in any case that the discussion has been dead for several iterations now.