Pointless argumentative thread alert

[Joe Wordsworth]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What the hell happened here???

Originally posted by shereads
"You only ever harm people and kill them" is not based on a view, a judgment, or an appraisal. That's the statement I'm referring to. I never said people can't pull opinions out of thin air.

If you're referring not to me, but to a person or entity who appears to have harmed and killed/to be harming and killing people, you are forming an opinion based on a view, a judgement, an appraisal that may be right or wrong. Absent a context, it's a bogus illustration of a point.

In the context of the thread, and your entirely undertandable objection to the implication that religion is entirely bad, the opinion could easily be disproven by providing evidence that religion also does other things besides harming and killing people. You've already done that by citing charitable organizations with a religious base.

It's not based on one, but it is a view, judgement, or appraisal.

 

[shereads]

It can be argued that if I don't get some work done, I will lose my income source and become a bag lady. Living in a tropical climate, wearing all of my clothing at once is not an appealing prospect.

So I'm going to announce myself the winner of whatever I was arguing in a style that ought to be familiar to anyone who used to be a child with a sibling:

"You're stupid."

"You're stupid."

"Stop repeating what I say."

"Stop repeating what I say."

"Cut it out!"

"Cut it out!"

"Mom, she's repeating everything I say."

"Mom, she's repeatiing everything I say."

(This continues for next 700 miles, with brief restroom intermissions.)

 

[shereads]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What the hell happened here???

deleted double post

 

[shereads]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What the hell happened here???

It's not based on one, but it is a view, judgement, or appraisal.

Not unless there is some evidence to view, to judge or to appraise, it isn't. Which is why I added that context is essential.

If I claim that the sky is the color of emeralds, it's a view, a judgement or an appraisal of evidence only if I have some vision impairment. Otherwise, I'm not proposing anything for the sake of argument, I'm just blurting out random craziness to which you'd be silly to respond.

When some amount of evidence, however slight, is subjected to some degree of scrutiny, however sloppy, one arrives at a view, an appraisal or a judgement and might even express an opinion.

But in the absence of any evidence whatsover, one is simply making a statement. All dogs are a horse named Blackie.

Statements can be right or wrong, and you can prove them to be so.* Views, appraisals, judgements and opinions can be disputed, but without providing evidence to the contrary that is meaningful to the person expressing the view, there's no way to invalidate his view completely.

I win. I gotta go. <------- The first is a judgement; the second is a strong opinion.


*Edited to add: You can't prove anything to Amicus. See? Even absolutes aren't absolute.

 

[shereads]

Before I go, here's a simpler and absolutely virtually nearly impossible-to-refute summary of what I said up there:

One cannot form a view, a judgement or an appraisal of nothing. One views a situation in a certain way. One makes judgements based on evidence, and biased judgements based on incomplete evidence. One appraises the value of a thing based upon some factor or another.

Views, judgements, appraisals are not statements of fact, so they can't be disproven. They are evaluations of what appears to be evidence for or against something. In the absence of any evidence at all, there is no judgement to be refuted. In the presence of evidence, providing contradictory evidence only means that contradictory conclusions can be drawn.

 

[doormouse]

It can be argued that if I don't get some work done, I will lose my income source and become a bag lady. Living in a tropical climate, wearing all of my clothing at once is not an appealing prospect.

So I'm going to announce myself the winner of whatever I was arguing in a style that ought to be familiar to anyone who used to be a child with a sibling:

"You're stupid."

"You're stupid."

"Stop repeating what I say."

"Stop repeating what I say."

"Cut it out!"

"Cut it out!"

"Mom, she's repeating everything I say."

"Mom, she's repeatiing everything I say."

(This continues for next 700 miles, with brief restroom intermissions.)

awwww

but Mum, HE started it

 

[The Mutt]

awwww

but Mum, HE started it

If you two don't stop it I'm going to pull this car over and spank your little bottoms.
So please don't stop.

 

[doormouse]

If you two don't stop it I'm going to pull this car over and spank your little bottoms.
So please don't stop.

LOL

How tempting that sounds

Do I really have to wait for that spanking???

 

[Lisa Denton]

LOL

How tempting that sounds

Do I really have to wait for that spanking???

No waiting here, line that lil bottom up. Uh, do you know there's a mouse on your head?

 

[doormouse]

No waiting here, line that lil bottom up. Uh, do you know there's a mouse on your head?

PMSL!!!!


That's meeeeeeee

(the cat is my alter-ego LOL)

 

[Lisa Denton]

PMSL!!!!


That's meeeeeeee

(the cat is my alter-ego LOL)

You been up all this time? Don't you guys sleep in Australia? Or is it like Australian days are longer or something?
I wonder if min will mind that we are hi-jacking this pointless thread? I just can't seem to come up with any meaningless arguements at the moment.

 

[doormouse]

You been up all this time? Don't you guys sleep in Australia? Or is it like Australian days are longer or something?
I wonder if min will mind that we are hi-jacking this pointless thread? I just can't seem to come up with any meaningless arguements at the moment.

I'll hit the sack soon,.. yes, we do sleep LOL

I've been writing... too pre-occupied to sleep.

I have to get up in three hours... so I'll have to sleep soon

 

[Lisa Denton]

Hi Joe. How are you today? How is your dog? Whats the weather like there? Is it raining or sunny?

Here it is sunny and kinda cool which is surprisingly nice. Usually at this time it is scorching hot. My back is still hurting from a fall I took a couple days ago, nothing is broke or torn, just sore. I hope to get to mowing the yard later if my back keeps improving.

This is how I usually speak to people and like to know about them, what they like and dis-like. I don't want to argue but when I get to know someone we can debate and dis-agree and cuss each other out ..................... and then go on to talking about the olympic games or what good movies we have seen lately.

If you wish to speak to me, ask me anything, or even dis-agree with me? I wish you would do so as if I were a person, not something else, something to be analyzed and studied and then proven wrong. I am, I hope, a nice and intelligent person able to converse and debate in my own slightly illogical fashion.

I don't wish to be proven wrong constantly or have my words thrown back at me as being without reason or logic, unless it is by someone who also thinks I may have something of value to say occasionally.

Constant dis-agreement is not constructive discourse as far as I am concered and perhaps we should agree to just post around each other if that is all you want.

While I may have offended you slightly, it was not my intent.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Lisa Denton
Hi Joe. How are you today? How is your dog? Whats the weather like there? Is it raining or sunny?

Here it is sunny and kinda cool which is surprisingly nice. Usually at this time it is scorching hot. My back is still hurting from a fall I took a couple days ago, nothing is broke or torn, just sore. I hope to get to mowing the yard later if my back keeps improving.

This is how I usually speak to people and like to know about them, what they like and dis-like. I don't want to argue but when I get to know someone we can debate and dis-agree and cuss each other out ..................... and then go on to talking about the olympic games or what good movies we have seen lately.

If you wish to speak to me, ask me anything, or even dis-agree with me? I wish you would do so as if I were a person, not something else, something to be analyzed and studied and then proven wrong. I am, I hope, a nice and intelligent person able to converse and debate in my own slightly illogical fashion.

I don't wish to be proven wrong constantly or have my words thrown back at me as being without reason or logic, unless it is by someone who also thinks I may have something of value to say occasionally.

Constant dis-agreement is not constructive discourse as far as I am concered and perhaps we should agree to just post around each other if that is all you want.

While I may have offended you slightly, it was not my intent.

You entirely turn me on, you know that?

I mean, seriously. Damn.

 

[Guest]

You entirely turn me on, you know that?

I mean, seriously. Damn.

Joe, I have had a very stressful day at work (had sole responsibility for someone else's work) and I've been in a state of dismay about this place for a while, so your post here was a shocking ray of light. You made me laugh outloud with a joy for life and even some hope, the kind I get from young people like you and Lisa.

bless you, Perdita

 

[Pure]

Question: Is it a pointless argument to argue about the good or ill conduct of those making pointless arguments?

 

[Lisa Denton]

You entirely turn me on, you know that?

I mean, seriously. Damn.

RFLMAO!!! You got me in the Vulcan Death Claw with that!!!!!

Joe!! That was totally illogical, cool.


Perdita!!! Are you sayin there is hope for humanity? Will you stay around and bless us with your insight?

Pure!!! I was a mess, my ill conduct, which was tempered to a point, was brought about by temporary sanity. Its o.k., I'm all over it now.

 

[Pure]

sher said,

//Views, judgements, appraisals are not statements of fact, so they can't be disproven. They are evaluations of what appears to be evidence for or against something. In the absence of any evidence at all, there is no judgement to be refuted. In the presence of evidence, providing contradictory evidence only means that contradictory conclusions can be drawn.//

I take it you've never had your home or your jewelry appraised.

Do you really believe there are no bad (defective, grossly inaccurate) appraisals?

Myself, if I heard, "Your diamond ring is worth $10,000" as an appraisal, and no reputable jewellry dealer or gemologist was willing to give me more than $10 for the thing, I'd say that appraisal was 'disproven' (shown to be bad, defective and/or grossly inaccurate).

 

[shereads]

sher said,

//Views, judgements, appraisals are not statements of fact, so they can't be disproven. They are evaluations of what appears to be evidence for or against something. In the absence of any evidence at all, there is no judgement to be refuted. In the presence of evidence, providing contradictory evidence only means that contradictory conclusions can be drawn.//

I take it you've never had your home or your jewelry appraised.

Do you really believe there are no bad (defective, grossly inaccurate) appraisals?

Myself, if I heard, "Your diamond ring is worth $10,000" as an appraisal, and no reputable jewellry dealer or gemologist was willing to give me more than $10 for the thing, I'd say that appraisal was 'disproven' (shown to be bad, defective and/or grossly inaccurate).

An appraisal, judgement or view is not a statement of fact. It's an expression of how someone perceives certain evidence, given the perspective and circumstance of the person whose opinion it is.

If you asked for a written appraisal of your diamond, there would probably be a legal disclaimer to that effect in the fine print. If not, you might argue that the figure of $10,000 was presented to you as fact, but until you've proven that the price you were offered was the highest price you could have possibly obtained, you haven't proven it was "wrong," only that it wasn't a view shared by the buyers you dealt with.

The fact that you can't find anyone to buy the diamond for anywhere close to the appraised amount could be attributed to a number of things, depending upon how well you exhausted every possible opportunity to get a high price for your diamond. If you decided you had to sell it to the sixth person who told you it was worthless, or the sixtieth, you would not have proven that the appraisal was "wrong." You can demonstrate the weaknesses of an opinion or a value judgement, but you can't prove that it was without any validity in the circumstance that produced it. By definition, an appraisal has not been presented to you as a fact.

 

[Pure]

Sher said,

An appraisal, judgement or view is not a statement of fact. It's an expression of how someone perceives certain evidence, given the perspective and circumstance of the person whose opinion it is.

If you asked for a written appraisal of your diamond, there would probably be a legal disclaimer to that effect in the fine print. If not, you might argue that the figure of $10,000 was presented to you as fact, but until you've proven that the price you were offered was the highest price you could have possibly obtained, you haven't proven it was "wrong," only that it wasn't a view shared by the buyers you dealt with.

I see the assertion that an appraisal is not a statement of fact.
Apparently you're saying, only statements of fact can be supported or refuted according to evidence. You've not given any reasons in support of this claim.

I think there's quite a clear sense in which an appraisal of a house or jewelry can be wrong. Indeed, cases of fraud are prosecuted on this basis. (I.e., I bribe a gemologist to give an inflated appraisal of my ring, then lose it and claim a vast amount of money, which it really wasn't worth. He is complicit in fraud; how? through making a false [defective, totally unfounded) appraisal].

I agree there is an open endedness to the 'proving' or 'disproving', but that's true of many statements of fact. I.e., Bush invaded Iraq primarily to secure its oil.

Surely you'll agree that an appraisal that's not remotely related to what any informed buyer will pay is just wrong. To the statement "Pure's ring is worth $10,000" we may respond. NOT true. We may well give a reason: It's a zircon, not a diamond.
Appraisals are routinely checked, and bogus ones are identified.


The fact that you can't find anyone to buy the diamond for anywhere close to the appraised amount could be attributed to a number of things, depending upon how well you exhausted every possible opportunity to get a high price for your diamond. If you decided you had to sell it to the sixth person who told you it was worthless, or the sixtieth, you would not have proven that the appraisal was "wrong." You can demonstrate the weaknesses of an opinion or a value judgement, but you can't prove that it was without any validity in the circumstance that produced it. By definition, an appraisal has not been presented to you as a fact.

I think this is a quibble. I can in fact show an appraisal is without any validity. I bribed the appraiser, planning an insurance fraud.
No other reputable appraiser agrees, nor does any informed buyer. A one caret zircon is NOT worth $10,000. A statement (of appraisal) to that effect is simply false (or if you like, defective, totally unfounded, and inaccurate.).

To say, "You've only shown the appraisal to be 'extremely weak'" is less than what a normal person would say. Reminds me of Monty Python's character saying the parrot that doesn't move is 'only sleeping' (not dead). You demand that a refutation be absolutely conclusive, but that's unreasonable: as in the python sketch, the results of each test can be explained away, and in theory it's possible that the parrot WILL wake up. But we at some point say, 'By every know medical and practical test, it's dead. 99.999 per cent certainty."

There are many times in life when statements are open to continuing testing, validation or (dis)confirmation. "There are only nine planets in the solar system."

Let me give you another example of an appraisal. The label 'choice' applied, say, to an apple, meaning top quality or highest grade. There are objective criteria in terms of color, absence of bruises, etc. If a very inexperienced apple grader/appraiser says, of a rotten apple "This one is choice [=top] grade," it is simply false. It's only for the sake of an argument you would say, "The statement is weak (or weakly supported)."

My diagnosis: You are confusing two kinds of statements.
"That ring is a diamond which is worth a great deal." and the subjective statement. "In my eyes, I see before me what appears to be a diamond and which appears to be worth a great deal." It is only the latter statement which does not 'fall' on the facts. I.e., I can say "Even though you tell me it's a zircon, it still *appears to me* to be a diamond of great worth."

And of course the two statements are not equivalent or the same in meaning and/or reference.
----

What's the point of all of this. I believe it went back to whether an 'opinion' can be wrong. Well, those opinions which are appraisals can be.

This is the old question: Are all opionions expressed in these boards equally valid. Or as you sher would put it, are they all plausible, though sometimes a bit weakly based in the facts.

Answer: Of course some opinions remain subjective. "The Macintosh apple is the most delicious [to me]." However the appraisal, "This Macintosh is choice[=top] grade" can indeed be simply wrong. This is no different from "I believe Bush went to war for oil." (possibly irrefutable) and "Bush in fact went to war in Iraq for the oil."

 

[shereads]

Nope. Supported/refuted aren't the same as proven wrong/proven right.

 

[Pure]

Nope. Supported/refuted aren't the same as proven wrong/proven right.

I will settle for 'refuted' beyond any reasonable doubt. =Shown to be baseless. This would apply is a criminal trial for insurance fraud where the 'appraisal' is utterly rejected, and is the basis for a charge of abetting a fraud.

There are many statements of fact that fall into this same category:

General xxx was an incompetent general.
GWB's college academic record is undistinguished.
Pluto is the furthest out planet in our solar system.

There is simply no absolutely conclusive, 'knock down' way of proving them right. Your standard is simply set too high, in relation to normal usage.

 

[shereads]

(1) Those first two are statements of opinion.

(2) Why am I doing this?

(3)"Distinguished" might apply to GWB's college career in any number of ways.

Distinguished by cleanliness, for example.

Distinguished by his presence on the cheerleading squad.

Distinguished by the dramatic drop in cocaine prices on campus after GWB graduated.

Wait a second...You didn't mean, "academically distinguished," did you? That would fall under the category of random nonsense.

 

[Pure]

I guess I don't understand what you say a 'statement of opinion' is.

Where does
Pluto is the planet furthest from the sun, in our solar system.

fit in your scheme of 'fact' vs. 'opinion'.

Also:

The dodo is an extinct bird .

 

[shereads]

Also:

The dodo is an extinct bird .

Leave the president out of this, J.