this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2023
-4 points (38.9% liked)

Україна | Ukraine 🇺🇦

1654 readers
4 users here now

Welcome to Ukraine!

Ласкаво просимо в Україну!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
-4
WSJ: Ukraine could be forced to compromise. With support for the war against Russia waning in the U.S., the counteroffensive may define a new border. (archive.ph)
submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
227 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

You're right it wouldn't be if I actually did did either of those things. 😂

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

you know that people can see your comment history, right?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Evidently, a lot of you people also lack reading comprehension to actually understand the content of my comment history.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

ah, so your inability to make a sound argument is everyone else's fault?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Way to put words in my mouth.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

those words are here for everyone to see.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

But evidently not everyone has basic reading comprehension to read them as you so helpfully demonstrate.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Ad hominem

Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a term that refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue. The most common form of this fallacy is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The fact that you linked the description of ad hominem here just further underscores my point. Ad hominem would be me making a personal insult as a way to discredit your argument. Being made fun of is not ad hominem. In all seriousness though, there's nothing funny about having poor reading comprehension skills. Perhaps spend some time working on that instead of trolling here.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Moving the Goalposts

Moving the goalposts is an informal fallacy in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded. That is, after an attempt has been made to score a goal, the goalposts are moved to exclude the attempt. The problem with changing the rules of the game is that the meaning of the result is changed, too.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Be specific regarding which goalposts you claim were moved.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Sealioning

Sealioning (also sea-lioning and sea lioning) is a type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with relentless requests for evidence, often tangential or previously addressed, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity ("I'm just trying to have a debate"), and feigning ignorance of the subject matter. It may take the form of "incessant, bad-faith invitations to engage in debate", and has been likened to a denial-of-service attack targeted at human beings. The term originated with a 2014 strip of the webcomic Wondermark by David Malki, which The Independent called "the most apt description of Twitter you'll ever see".

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yes, you've sealioned into my post. Congratulations on recognizing that.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

“i know your are but what am i?” is not an effective form of argument.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's not the argument being made, but I guess it would take basic reading comprehension to understand that.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Ad hominem

Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a term that refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue. The most common form of this fallacy is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's pretty funny that you still don't know what ad hominem is after linking to it like a dozen times. 😂

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"nuh uh!" is not an effective form of argument

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yet here you are using it. 😂

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"i know you are but what am i?" is not an effective form of argument.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago

sdkl;/fjasdkl;fjasdl;kfjasdkl;fjasdf

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"nuh-uh!" isn't much of an argument, either

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Nuh-uh is not my argument. My argument is that @[email protected] hasn't actually addressed the content of the article linked, and keeps using personal attacks in lieu of having anything of actual substance to say.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

accusing people of doing what you're doing isn't going to get you anywhere. might get you some laughs, though.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I see you made a self referential comment.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

there's that familiar "i know you are but what am i?"

know any other tunes?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I love how you're only capable in communicating by regurgitating cliches. Even ChatGPT shows more creativity than that.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Spoiler Alert: Its ChatGPT all along

/j

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago

A budget knock off of chatgpt maybe :)

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Ad hominem

Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a term that refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue. The most common form of this fallacy is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I urge you to read the description of ad hominem that you linked until you've actually understood it. In particular, try to comprehend what this says:

Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

Ad hominem would be you making some argument and me attacking your character instead of addressing a point you made. You've made no actual point and just used personal attacks, now you've found a latin term that sounds clever to you.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Cherry picking

Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position while ignoring a significant portion of related and similar cases or data that may contradict that position. Cherry picking may be committed intentionally or unintentionally.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Feel free to enlighten us what you claim has been cherry picked or what evidence has been suppressed. Be specific.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Sealioning

Sealioning (also sea-lioning and sea lioning) is a type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with relentless requests for evidence, often tangential or previously addressed, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity ("I'm just trying to have a debate"), and feigning ignorance of the subject matter. It may take the form of "incessant, bad-faith invitations to engage in debate", and has been likened to a denial-of-service attack targeted at human beings. The term originated with a 2014 strip of the webcomic Wondermark by David Malki, which The Independent called "the most apt description of Twitter you'll ever see".

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I submitted the original post and you've sealioned into it. Congrats.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

“i know your are but what am i?” is not an effective form of argument.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's not the argument being made, but I guess it would take basic reading comprehension to understand that.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Ad hominem

Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a term that refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue. The most common form of this fallacy is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

You should really read what that quote says.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Ad hominem

Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a term that refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue. The most common form of this fallacy is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You should really read what that quote says.