Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (82116)	1/8/2010 6:00:39 PM
From: LLCF	Respond to of 82486

<He created a specific context with a definite objective which I and I alone am criticising> No, I am even more critical than you. The whole piece is one BIG FAT cascade of strawman fallacy starting from the beginning. The need for PopeGreg to see a contrary link is silly at best, amazingly childish or even impish at worst. Anyone can look on any number of websites to find contrary assertions... www.anythinghavingtodowithbuddhism.com come to mind. :)) Further, spending an hour or less reading ANYTHING on the topic fills one in on what is being talked about vis a vis "all is an illusion" topic.... the guys is utterly clueless. FWIW, I havent seen ANY link by PopeGreg that is even as mainstream as something from NewAdvent or the Vatican. It's all pretty 'wacko' stuff. This is my favorite: <<What you need to do is provide an in context quotation and an authoritative source >> Ummm, WHAAAAA? As if that wacko guy is authoritative? Secondly, if he is WHERE IS POPE GREGS SUPPORT? Where is HIS support for the guy?!? He doesn't even know what the hell the guy is talking about!! LOL DAK

To: one_less who wrote (82116)	1/9/2010 2:30:54 AM
From: Greg or e	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82486

You accused the man of constructing a Straw Man argument then failed completely when challenged to substantiate your accusation. Holding you to your own standards where you demand "link or lie" that makes you are a liar. (Just being frank and honest here) "His actual assertions are not empirical" Of course they are. His statements about the content of Monistic beliefs are factual doctrinal statements that are easily confirmed or refuted. If you claimed that Christianity denies that Jesus is the third person of the Trinity your claim would be just as easy to refute. Constructing a Straw Man involves making statements and then criticizing the untruthful statements instead of the actual position. He stated the doctrinal positions of Eastern Pantheistic Monism correctly and then contrasted them with the Christian position. That is not Straw Man argumentation and it's dishonest of you to claim that it is.