A US National Health Care System? Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System?

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lane3 who wrote (11961)	11/29/2009 10:57:57 AM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) of 42652

The issue I think everyone else here cares about is the health care system. When you spend a lot of time nitpicking "argumentation techniques", especially mostly on one side, it appears as if your purpose is to attack every statement possible made against further socialization of our system. Whether thats true or not. And I;m sure its not true in your case. My response had nothing to do with the the policy on mammograms or the author's main theme of socialized medicine. Thats where you part company with everyone else. Your response should have had to do mainly with the topic at hand. Not the rigorous quality of every argument made agaisnt socialized medicine. My forest was the dumbing down of America as typified in this piece. You are right to think thats not the forest I'm in. deceit, misinformation, and dearth of critical reading and thinking Gee, how do you tell the first two from the last? .. argumentation technique. This particular rhetorical technique is called "enthymematic argumentation," on the off chance that you care about logic. Even sophisticated readers who are paying attention sometimes fall for this one. I can see how you might have been so focused on your forest that you misread my statement of my forest. And I can see how you might be indifferent to my forest, the dumbing down of America. But, after all my explanation, if you can't see how this particular bit I highlighted was incorrect and deceptive, you have become a willing participant in it. LOL I just have to laugh at this. We're arguing changes to our health care system here. I will happily plead guilty to not attacking every tiny flaw in arguments of folks on my side of the issue under discussion. I realize you think that makes me indifferent or hostile to LOGIC. I'm more concerned with using logic to advance positions I think is right in the 'battle of ideas'. Taking off from that "enthymematic argumentation" mention, I'll say I think you do a lot of what I'll call "exothermic argumentation" .... generating more heat than light. I am as opposed to Washington making those decisions as the author. She and I are on the same side. So what in the world would make you think that I was "aggressively looking" for some way to shoot her down? That would be action against interest. It makes no sense. What makes no sense is calling folks on your side of an argument dishonest and stupid.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next