• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Political theory

Harshaw said:
Another Argument from Ignorance. Nice!
Click to expand...

thats not an argument from ignorance.

im not demanding negative evidence, and the evidence is clear by the fact that neither you or your buddy here will answer anything. its truly boolean.
 
Goobieman said:
Arbitrary rules... like the person that makes the claim is respinsible for proving that claim? Apparently you do not recall, you yourself said:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...63895-political-theory-25.html#post1058484651

So, again, prove your claims. If what you say is true, then you can prove it absent ANY participation from anyone else.

And, as -you- said, you must use pure demonstratable logic without any assumptions; any axioms must be demonstrated as well.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...63895-political-theory-12.html#post1058482836

Or, man up and admit that you cannot
Click to expand...

this is an axiom that can be demonstrated. its easily demonstrated by the question. you refuse to answer because youre nothing short of dogmatic lol
 
EmpiricalTruth said:
This is an axiom that can be demonstrated.
Click to expand...
Then by all means -- begin your demonstration.
-I- am certainly not stopping you from doing so.

The picture you're painting here is that you know you cannot prove your claims and that you are avoiding doing so by whateve rmeans possible.
 
Last edited:
EmpiricalTruth said:
thats not an argument from ignorance.

im not demanding negative evidence, and the evidence is clear by the fact that neither you or your buddy here will answer anything. its truly boolean.
Click to expand...

Then clearly you do not know what an Argument from Ignorance is. You are saying your premise is proven by lack of anyone saying anything to disprove it.

If you're going to lecture people about learning logic, don't double-down on your own logical errors.
 
Harshaw said:
Then clearly you do not know what an Argument from Ignorance is. You are saying your premise is proven by lack of anyone saying anything to disprove it.
Click to expand...
Yes. That's his "proof". Ironic, isn't it?
Heck... we both know a 10-yd old that knows better than that.
 
After a full weekend of silence, it appears the communistophile had decided he cannot prove his claims, and has given up trying to do so.
 
Goobieman said:
After a full weekend of silence, it appears the communistophile had decided he cannot prove his claims, and has given up trying to do so.
Click to expand...

some people are just a bit too out there to be able to support theoretical claims on political attitudes
 
Z3n said:
some people are just a bit too out there to be able to support theoretical claims on political attitudes
Click to expand...
Hmm.
What does it say about someone who holds political beliefs based on claims he knows he cannot prove?
 
Goobieman said:
Hmm.
What does it say about someone who holds political beliefs based on claims he knows he cannot prove?
Click to expand...

he isn't well founded. I'm agreeing with you bro lol
 
BIPARTISANSHIP. :mrgreen:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom