Stating something is true with no supporting argument other than “I said so” followed by some shaky(at best) logic doesn’t leave much in the way of conversation points.
But lets give it a go.
Firstly there was no demand or proposal for any demographic to partake in the activity mentioned.
Secondly, assuming the first point wasn’t true, by your rationale there would be no way to mention any activity without it being a suggestion that all current recipients must immediately perform said activity, which it patently ridiculous.
Thirdly, the suggestion that you are a best in class mental gymnast isn’t a thought terminating cliche, perhaps you could claim ad hominem but as I said before ,“I’m right, because reasons” doesn’t leave many conversational avenues open.
Indeed, but the definition does, I don’t care at all about this hill, but not being about to understand the application of the definition of words is going to make conversations difficult for you.
by your rationale there would be no way to mention any activity without it being a suggestion that all current recipients must immediately perform said activity,
they are advocating for a set of actions. not simply mentioning them.
Stating something is true with no supporting argument other than “I said so” followed by some shaky(at best) logic doesn’t leave much in the way of conversation points.
that’s not what happened. what i said were all truth claims. you can decide whether i was wrong about any of them (i’m not), but no argument at all is needed.
Just to be clear you are saying you didn’t provide a claim of truth with no supporting argument because, and I quote
what i said were all truth claims.
no argument at all is needed.
I know you aren’t going to understand how your reply doesn’t make sense but if in the future you come back to this , this kind of thing is what people call mental gymnastics.
It kinda feels like punching down at this point so I’ll leave you be.
Senal@programming.dev 1 month ago
Stating something is true with no supporting argument other than “I said so” followed by some shaky(at best) logic doesn’t leave much in the way of conversation points.
But lets give it a go.
Firstly there was no demand or proposal for any demographic to partake in the activity mentioned.
Secondly, assuming the first point wasn’t true, by your rationale there would be no way to mention any activity without it being a suggestion that all current recipients must immediately perform said activity, which it patently ridiculous.
Thirdly, the suggestion that you are a best in class mental gymnast isn’t a thought terminating cliche, perhaps you could claim ad hominem but as I said before ,“I’m right, because reasons” doesn’t leave many conversational avenues open.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
it is, and saying it isn’t doesn’t change that.
Senal@programming.dev 1 month ago
Indeed, but the definition does, I don’t care at all about this hill, but not being about to understand the application of the definition of words is going to make conversations difficult for you.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
they are advocating for a set of actions. not simply mentioning them.
Senal@programming.dev 1 month ago
Point to the advocation.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
that’s not what happened. what i said were all truth claims. you can decide whether i was wrong about any of them (i’m not), but no argument at all is needed.
Senal@programming.dev 1 month ago
Just to be clear you are saying you didn’t provide a claim of truth with no supporting argument because, and I quote
I know you aren’t going to understand how your reply doesn’t make sense but if in the future you come back to this , this kind of thing is what people call mental gymnastics.
It kinda feels like punching down at this point so I’ll leave you be.