Comment on After they kill Wikipedia history will be AI hallucinations.
_cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day agoYeah, there’s no point in engaging with anything you just wrote, because you’re very clearly dedicated to whatever this wonderful and deep narrative is that you’ve crafted. But I will point out one thing you said that’s so very obviously wrong.
All of your ad hominems
I didn’t make any ad hominems. You see, almost every person who has ever cried that in an argument has had no idea what an ad hominem actually is. If I say “you’re wrong because you’re an Argonian, and you can’t be trusted”, that would be typical Imperial racism and also an ad hominem. But if I say “you’re wrong, because your arguments suck. and also, argonians have stinky fish breath”, that would be classical Imperial racism, but would not be an ad hominem. An ad hominem is an attempt to refute an argument by using a personal attack. It is not, as is commonly believed by internet keyboard warriors the world around, merely a personal attack.
Oh, and if you’re going to call someone a nazi, at least make it someone the average person would believe is a nazi. If I was anything of the sort, I personally know three admins of my instance who would not hesitate to ban me in an instant, and one or two of them could probably dox me if they wanted to.
LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Here’s an ad hominem and ableism. Your refusal to debate the argument here is a fallacy and bad faith.
2nd instance of ad hom and ableism in this comment alone.
Thanks for reminding me you failed to answer any questions and lost this devate completely.
Strawman, that was never said. I also have a longform comment to that user already explaining why the science of the pee drinking stuff is bogus, so somehow you did a double strawman.
3rd instance of ad hom and ableism
Now for this comment.
That’s literally just having integrity and debating a position. You can’t argue because you don’t know how to argue this topic in good faith and apparently too childish to admit it.
This is an ad hom, and further, you are basing the entirety of your refusal to discuss in good faith on ad homs in the previous comment.
This is also a fallacy and bad faith argument, it would be dismissed. Circular reasoning.
That’s what you did. Literally.
You are one or you support them which makes you one.
Really bad application of appeal to authority - fallacy. Lemmy mods dont determine who is a Nazi lol
_cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
In order to “argue in good faith”, you have to be conversing with someone who has the capacity to critically consider their own viewpoints and change them when presented with evidence that’s contrary to them. And let’s be honest here, that ain’t you.
But hey, if you think I’m a nazi, then I encourage you to report me. Because I’m pretty sure being a nazi is against the rules of both this community, and my own instance, so if you feel so strongly about it, you should do your Lemmy civic duty and bring it to the attention of the mods and admins.
LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 22 hours ago
Lol, I don’t cause you to argue in bad faith (with entire comments full of fallacies), that’s you who does so of your own brainpower.
You’ve not once made a valid counterargument or even provided evidence. What evidence? The only content I’ve seen is your ableism and ad hominems. Can you actually form an independent, good faith argument backed with valid evidence? I haven’t seen evidence of THAT being able to happen yet.
_cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 hours ago
I don’t need to provide any evidence? You’re the one making claims, the burden of proof is on you. Nobody has to do any work to disprove claims YOU’RE making.
also, your fallacy is the fallacy fallacy. yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy