Originally Posted by
Bluedriver
For the record Southerner refuses to answer this post according to his private message to me. He also criticises me for taking him literally.
So, that is my big reading comprehension fail, I took him literally at his word.
Okay. So I tried to take this discussion private because, seriously, no one gives a flying fook.
Here is what I said in the private message. Verbatim. "You choose to take the most literal, least generous interpretation of everything anyone says." Which, you know, isn't quite the same thing as what you just said above. It's similar. I mean, the word "literal" is in there.
When you're engaged in a philosophical discussion with someone, one way of arguing that is a type of logical fallacy and is a breakdown of the discussion is when you take the most literal interpretation of someone's words, give them the least generous interpretation, and then beat them over the head with that absurd interpretation. This is a form of the "straw man" fallacy.
So, I said what I said, which you've quoted several times so I will spare everyone the pleasure. From that you took this, which is very clearly NOT what I intended or meant:
You think *you* are the unbiased arbiter of reality, no known or unknown internal biases what-so-ever?
That's just insane, and you have now lost what little credibility you had.
That, sir, is a straw man. It very clearly isn't what I meant, and it's the least generous (putting words into my mouth) interpretation of what I said. And I've tried to clarify, ad nauseum. I'm tired of it. Everyone on this site is tired of it, and I'm done with you. If you choose to keep engaging, then I'll just block you and be done with it.
So yeah, your reading comprehension sucks, you're intellectually dishonest, and engage in logical fallacies to "win" arguments. Bravo.
Screw beer, I need a whiskey.