Thanks from the SAPP 38 drivers

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

I have already answered his question on page ten of this thread. I noticed that you never commented on my explanation RE: dung. Care to give me a clear and concise rebuttal if my logic is faulty? If it's faulty, could you be so kind as to point out the errors? If  it's not faulty then I can assume that you would agree that I'm correct?
Why did you use my post as a quote and then not even answer any of it? I'm curious that's all.

Let me state this is plainly and clearly as possible, in simple English. If you associate with a group, ie, attend their gatherings, "fly their colors", etc, then by doing so you do condone and affirm their actions. It is a simple rule of civilized society, dating back to when the first humans began social interactions. That is where your logic is faulty, and where you are incorrect.

By associating with a group, willingly and voluntarily, you are saying "I like who these guys are, I like what they do, I like how they act, I want to be around them, I want to be part of their group, I want to be with them and I want to be like them." That is just plain common sense, and again, follows with a basic and long standing rule of human social interactions.

Your "debate skills", mentioning "fallacy of division", etc, do not make up for the fact that the basic premise of your argument is flawed beyond repair. It violates the basic and long standing rules of human socialization and interaction. So, once again, your position is ludicrous, untenable, and flawed.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

If you knew what a fallacy of division represented then we wouldn't be having this discussion. If you knew how to reason we would not be having this discussion.  I would suggest that you study argumentative analogies-there's two types, one has a premise/conclusion structure and the other has an explanatory function.  You tend to try and argue from Ignorance-another fallacy, your position is proven by a lack of conclusive evidence against it. I have shown otherwise.
Regards
Tunes.

I strongly suggest that rather than study on "how to debate", and "how to use terms of debate and argument" that you study the actual subject of the debate. For all of your verbose flourish, you are failing to grasp the main point of contention.

If you are missing the subject, here it is again, in plain English:

One of the basic laws of sociology states that humans tend to congregate in like groups, with very similar morals, morays, and values. They group themselves according to what they see as acceptable and desirable.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

I have already answered his question on page ten of this thread. I noticed that you never commented on my explanation RE: dung. Care to give me a clear and concise rebuttal if my logic is faulty? If it's faulty, could you be so kind as to point out the errors? If  it's not faulty then I can assume that you would agree that I'm correct?
Why did you use my post as a quote and then not even answer any of it? I'm curious that's all.

You should be aware that the user settings for everyone are not the same. As an example, with my current settings, this thread doesn't have ten pages. Rather than stating "I answered his question on page ten", try either actually answering his question, or at least pointing on the number of the post in which you claim to have answered his question.

[saantana]

 

Thank god I'm in neither squad! Or organization, or whatever.

[iTunes]

Let me state this is plainly and clearly as possible, in simple English. If you associate with a group, ie, attend their gatherings, "fly their colors", etc, then by doing so you do condone and affirm their actions. It is a simple rule of civilized society, dating back to when the first humans began social interactions. That is where your logic is faulty, and where you are incorrect.

By associating with a group, willingly and voluntarily, you are saying "I like who these guys are, I like what they do, I like how they act, I want to be around them, I want to be part of their group, I want to be with them and I want to be like them." That is just plain common sense, and again, follows with a basic and long standing rule of human social interactions.

Your "debate skills", mentioning "fallacy of division", etc, do not make up for the fact that the basic premise of your argument is flawed beyond repair. It violates the basic and long standing rules of human socialization and interaction. So, once again, your position is ludicrous, untenable, and flawed.

 It is a simple rule of civilized society, dating back to when the first humans began social interactions. That is where your logic is faulty, and where you are incorrect.
could you point me to a site or book etc so I can read this?
Can you tell me what my basic premise was? and where it's faulty beyond repair?
Lets look at your argument:

Let me state this is plainly and clearly as possible, in simple English. If you associate with a group, ie, attend their gatherings, "fly their colors", etc(1), then by doing so you do condone and affirm their actions (2). It is a simple rule of civilized society, dating back to when the first humans began social interactions.(3) That is where your logic is faulty, and where you are incorrect.(4)

By associating with a group, willingly and voluntarily, you are saying "I like who these guys are, I like what they do, I like how they act, I want to be around them,(5) I want to be part of their group, I want to be with them and I want to be like them.(6)" That is just plain common sense, and again, follows with a basic and long standing rule of human social interactions.(7)

Your "debate skills", mentioning "fallacy of division", etc, do not make up for the fact that the basic premise of your argument is flawed beyond repair.(8) It violates the basic and long standing rules of human socialization and interaction.(9) So, once again, your position is ludicrous, untenable, and flawed.(10)
Conclusion: My position is ludicrous.
Argument yes/no yes
Premises1-9
Inductive strength-weak/invalid
Your conditional premise of: "If you associate with a group, ie, attend their gatherings, "fly their colors", etc(1), then by doing so you do condone and affirm their actions" does not in anyway, have a link to any of the non conditional premises. It's doesn't affirm the antecedent or deny the consequent to any of your non conditional premises.
In between these are  attempts to ridicule and reduce to the absurd.
No offense intended in anyway, merely trying to reason with you in a dignified manner.
Regards
Tunes.

[CAP1]

"by being associated with them through that squad.....it brings your character into judgement."
And that is faulty reasoning Cap, I  have just shown that in my earlier explanation. RE:"AH division" Please, If my logic if faulty, if ack ack's comments were not a fallacy of division (my explanation)  then I'd like to be shown that.
 

i'm not saying that my reasoning isn't faulty......nor am i saying that it is right.

 the unfortunate fact is, however, that, this is how we all, as human beings judge people. we base our judgements on their actions, their friends and acquintances, how they look, etc.


 i run my own shop. i've had it for a year and a half now. i still can't afford to hire anyone. but i can assure you, the person i do hire will not be someone that looks like i did when i was 20. know why? people will see a 20 year old long haird freak(pretty much what i looked like back then) working in my bays. they will then judge me, and my shop based on that.
 do i like that? hell no! do i think it's right? hell no!!  but it IS the way things are.


here in our little online community, we only really have 2 of those options, and they're often inter-twined. we have those one associates with, and we have ones actions.

in this case........the people you choose to associate with. most probably the majority of your squad are really cool people. but there are 2 members of less than good value. they spend their time trying to instigate things. they do things they(and you) know is/are wrong. that's the people you associate with. the way that your actions are tied into this, is the fact that you accept their behaviour. you do this by continuing to associate with them.

 so......since this is all we have at our disposal to get a "Read" on you, or to form an opinion, i'm sure that although you don't want to, you can see what we're all trying to say.
 we may well be wrong in our reasoning. it's definitly not right that we reason this way, but it is the way things are.



again, this is not an attack on you, or the squad in general...and i'm not even trying to make you see things my/our way.....i'm merely trying to get you to see our side of this.


 a guy that hangs out with alcholics, will most likely either become one, or is one
 a guy that hangs with drug dealers, most likely either will deal them, or use them.
 a guy that hangs with emt's will most likely do his best to help those in need.
 

 now.....if i were in that squad before all of this happened.....i can assure you that i wouldn't be now...or at least not as long as the offending members were.

 

[CAP1]

Somebody has this in their signature block and I cannot remember who. However it seems fitting for this discussion.

Japanese Proverb

When the character of a man is not clear to you, look at his friends.

you just said more in that single sentence, than most of the rest of us have said in paragraph after paragraph/../......

[CAP1]

Let me state this is plainly and clearly as possible, in simple English. If you associate with a group, ie, attend their gatherings, "fly their colors", etc, then by doing so you do condone and affirm their actions. It is a simple rule of civilized society, dating back to when the first humans began social interactions. That is where your logic is faulty, and where you are incorrect.

By associating with a group, willingly and voluntarily, you are saying "I like who these guys are, I like what they do, I like how they act, I want to be around them, I want to be part of their group, I want to be with them and I want to be like them." That is just plain common sense, and again, follows with a basic and long standing rule of human social interactions.

Your "debate skills", mentioning "fallacy of division", etc, do not make up for the fact that the basic premise of your argument is flawed beyond repair. It violates the basic and long standing rules of human socialization and interaction. So, once again, your position is ludicrous, untenable, and flawed.

well said......


and chevies suck........

[CAP1]

Thank god I'm in neither squad! Or organization, or whatever.

we can fix that for ya.........

[CAP1]

It is a simple rule of civilized society, dating back to when the first humans began social interactions. That is where your logic is faulty, and where you are incorrect.
could you point me to a site or book etc so I can read this?
Can you tell me what my basic premise was? and where it's faulty beyond repair?
Lets look at your argument:

Let me state this is plainly and clearly as possible, in simple English. If you associate with a group, ie, attend their gatherings, "fly their colors", etc(1), then by doing so you do condone and affirm their actions (2). It is a simple rule of civilized society, dating back to when the first humans began social interactions.(3) That is where your logic is faulty, and where you are incorrect.(4)

By associating with a group, willingly and voluntarily, you are saying "I like who these guys are, I like what they do, I like how they act, I want to be around them,(5) I want to be part of their group, I want to be with them and I want to be like them.(6)" That is just plain common sense, and again, follows with a basic and long standing rule of human social interactions.(7)

Your "debate skills", mentioning "fallacy of division", etc, do not make up for the fact that the basic premise of your argument is flawed beyond repair.(8) It violates the basic and long standing rules of human socialization and interaction.(9) So, once again, your position is ludicrous, untenable, and flawed.(10)
Conclusion: My position is ludicrous.
Argument yes/no yes
Premises1-9
Inductive strength-weak/invalid
Your conditional premise of: "If you associate with a group, ie, attend their gatherings, "fly their colors", etc(1), then by doing so you do condone and affirm their actions" does not in anyway, have a link to any of the non conditional premises. It's doesn't affirm the antecedent or deny the consequent to any of your non conditional premises.
In between these are  attempts to ridicule and reduce to the absurd.
No offense intended in anyway, merely trying to reason with you in a dignified manner.
Regards
Tunes.

a question for ya.


assume you live in the PRNJ.  you drive past my shop, and i happen to have a bunch of rainbow flags flying on my building. there's a couple drag queens at the gas pumps.

what would you think/?

[iTunes]

I strongly suggest that rather than study on "how to debate", and "how to use terms of debate and argument" that you study the actual subject of the debate. For all of your verbose flourish, you are failing to grasp the main point of contention.

If you are missing the subject, here it is again, in plain English:

One of the basic laws of sociology states that humans tend to congregate in like groups, with very similar morals, morays, and values. They group themselves according to what they see as acceptable and desirable.

Are we debating? I was under the assumption that we are trying to reason with each other. I could provide  lists and  lists of reasoning laws, Philosophical laws and examples to the contrary. My point of contention is that I proved beyond doubt  that ack acks comments were faulty and I want acknowledgment of that. Instead, I'm reading all manner of sidetracks and tangents. again, (and this has to be last post tonight guys), read my explanation and let me know where it's wrong.
Thank you all for keeping this dignified and reasonable, that means a lot to me .
Later guys.
Tunes.

[iTunes]

a question for ya.


assume you live in the PRNJ.  you drive past my shop, and i happen to have a bunch of rainbow flags flying on my building. there's a couple drag queens at the gas pumps.

what would you think/?

I'd think I was driving past your shop that has rainbow flags flying with "drag queens" at the gas pumps.

[Banshee7]

You guys seriously need to take a break 

[saantana]

a question for ya.


assume you live in the PRNJ.  you drive past my shop, and i happen to have a bunch of rainbow flags flying on my building. there's a couple drag queens at the gas pumps.

what would you think/?

This, gentlemen is .. a ... HOMOPHOBE  

[CAP1]

You guys seriously need to take a break 

must......................... ............................. .........................conv ince......................... ........................waywa rd........................... ............................. soul......................... .......of.................... ............error............ .................of.......... .................his......... ............................. .............ways............ ............................. ..must....................... ..........