Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Blabber

Brabble Frabbitz said:

But theologues abandon such common sense


Then again, he also said:

It's such a reflex of yours, dashing off to the logical fallacy chart to determine which one a detractor violated. I wasn't even saying Christianity is wrong on any particular position.

and

I have a knack for spouting off, then realizing the need to restrict my comments to rational argumentation

and

But what the hey -- a fallacy doesn't cost me a dime and sometimes it's fun to sling a few.

and also, ironically:
I can't stomach arrogant hypocrites.

That's worth a chuckle.

15 comments:

Brabble Frabbitz said...

Rhology, I'm simply honest. We all like to veer off from a strictly logical battle of wits from time to time and let fly with some well-deserved ridicule. You do it. I do it. Admittedly, it's nothing to be proud of ... but I'm simply up front about what I'm doing. (You aren't, BTW.)

Rhology said...

You know what? I think you have a knack for spouting off, then realizing the need to restrict your comments to rational argumentation. Then you just do it all over again.

Brabble Frabbitz said...

OK, maybe so. What of it? I'm not perfect.

Rhology said...

So...your obvious hypocrisy doesn't bother you?

Brabble Frabbitz said...

Well ... as a matter of fact, I did blubber into my pillow for about an hour last night over my obvious hypocrisy. But I'll try my darnedest to behave from now on.

Rhology said...

OK. I just compiled this post to help anyone reading you to know hot to take you seriously, or at least not until you start taking logic seriously.

Brabble Frabbitz said...

Oh, I see. It's a public service announcement. Well, I've got something for you: a mathematical equation. Put on your thinking cap and see if you can figure it out:

Rho's denunciation of hypocrisy in others = projection

Brabble Frabbitz said...

But let's not fight, OK? People may start to think we're a couple.

The Jolly Nihilist said...

I must admit, I was a bit mystified by the remark that seemed essentially like a shoulder shrug to deploying logical fallacies.

Even though Rhology, at times, can be an infuriating person with whom to debate (no offense meant), because he parses one's statements so closely, looking for any violation of argumentative protocol, I've found it to be helpful, myself.

Rhology has not changed any of my fundamental views (nor I any of his, for that matter), but he has helped me to formulate my arguments more carefully, inoculating them against many potential rebuttals and criticisms. If nothing else, I use the word "should" a hell of a lot more sparingly now. :-)

Brabble Frabbitz said...

"I must admit, I was a bit mystified by the remark that seemed essentially like a shoulder shrug to deploying logical fallacies."

Here's what I was trying to communicate with that remark (I did so poorly, admittedly). Rhology's response to one of my comments suggested to me that he had misunderstood what I was saying ... because he was SO quick and eager to pin a classic fallacy on me. Without even hearing what I was saying, he was already chomping at the bit, typing up a "gotcha."

As so many are fond of saying, I was taken out of context here.

Honestly, I like logic. I heartily endorse it.

Rhology said...

I use the word "should" a hell of a lot more sparingly now

As well you should. ;-)

thechemistscorner said...

This did make me chuckle. Thanks Rho.

Paul C said...

"As well you should. ;-)"

How is that a moral injunction, Rhology?

Oh, I know - it isn't. Because the word "should" can and is used without any moral element at all.

Rhology said...

W/o a normative element? No, don't think so.

Paul C said...

W/o a normative element? No, don't think so.

Normative != moral.