no he didnt fail to demonstrate anything, you just lack the perspective to understand this discussion, as proven by the fact the point went completely over your head, WHOOSH
nobody mentioned explosiveness, now youre just saying things that were never said
your "Ad Hominem fallacy" defense... its ironic youd even say that considering your "I am tired of hearing from people who don't practice BJJ beyond white belt" quip LOL
and that "Ad Hominem fallacy" defense doesnt even apply to you here because this isn't an argument
if two people are discussing whether anal or vaginal sex feels better, and the virgin says "anal" ... he cant scream "aD hOmiNEM fAlLacY" as a defense when he's told he lacks the real world experience to have a true opinion
this is basically what youre doing right now... you just keep revealing how little you know about what youre typing
"sit down kid, you havent trained enough to be so aggressively opinionated" LOL
to address the strawman, that is not whats happening here LOL ... you are literally grasping at straws at this point
im not misrepresenting anything with the virgin analogy because it is not misrepresenting your "bjj is better" position... at least use the strawman correctly if youre going to use it lmaoooo
and since you are using the "conventional norms" definition of "argument" , my point stands that he didnt fail to explain anything... you just lack the perspective to understand the conversation
are you trying to defend yourself using rhetorical terms, yet not using the rhetorical definition of argument? thats just disingenuous lol
regarding your final two paragraphs , please refrain from attacking me personally and stick to my position that you are the equivalent of a virgin "arguing" that anal is better than vaginal :)
and also, lets not forget the most important quality of an argument... the person who is delivering it
pointing out the speaker's lack of credibility is not a logical fallacy... you should know this if youre a true student of rhetoric... ironic how youre the one using fallacies incorrectly and trying to say that im the one being incorrect LOL
maybe the virgin analogy is too hard to understand for you so ill make it simpler
a blind person can argue that green is better than blue all he wants, but it doesnt change the fact he has never seen the colors... and no amount of ad hominen can change that his entire argument is flawed because you cant explain colors like you can explain 1+1=2
-1
u/[deleted] Nov 28 '24 edited Jan 26 '25
longing stocking history toothbrush degree grandiose dog grandfather snow handle
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact