|
Post by rmarks1 on Jun 25, 2019 16:37:06 GMT -5
Yes, I do. Why would you say that I don't? Well if you have "proof" where is it? In other words, you have no proof so you resort to insults. So much for your "evidence? Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2019 18:26:45 GMT -5
Yes, I do. Why would you say that I don't? Well if you have "proof" where is it? I already said that I have no proof. Do you?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Jun 25, 2019 22:05:40 GMT -5
Well if you have "proof" where is it? I already said that I have no proof. Do you?
What exactly is your point here?
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2019 6:48:30 GMT -5
Do you have proof that you aren't a child rapist? It's a simple question, this isn't hard to answer.
I already said that I don't have proof. Do you?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Jun 26, 2019 13:19:36 GMT -5
Do you have proof that you aren't a child rapist? It's a simple question, this isn't hard to answer.
I already said that I don't have proof. Do you?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Jun 26, 2019 13:23:17 GMT -5
Do you have proof that you aren't a child rapist? It's a simple question, this isn't hard to answer. I already said that I don't have proof. Do you?And I already told you that my proof that I am not a child rapist is the same as your proof that you are not a child rapist. Since you now claim you can't prove you are not a child rapist, apparently neither one of us has such "proof." What's your point? Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2019 17:29:04 GMT -5
And I already told you that my proof that I am not a child rapist is the same as your proof that you are not a child rapist. Since you now claim you can't prove you are not a child rapist, apparently neither one of us has such "proof." What's your point? Bob So you cannot prove that you are not a child rapist. Why should I believe that you are not a child rapist if you cannot prove it?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Jun 26, 2019 19:38:21 GMT -5
And I already told you that my proof that I am not a child rapist is the same as your proof that you are not a child rapist. Since you now claim you can't prove you are not a child rapist, apparently neither one of us has such "proof." What's your point? Bob So you cannot prove that you are not a child rapist. Why should I believe that you are not a child rapist if you cannot prove it? Why shouldn't I believe the same about you? Actually, I have more reason to be suspicious of you because you are a Postmodernist. And Postmodernism says that if a society accepts child rape and wife-beating, then child rape and wife-beating permissible for that society. Of course you can disprove any such suspicions by simply asserting that you don't believe that obvious conclusion from Postmodern premises. Just say that child rape is Universally Wrong and must be condemned by all societies. Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2019 5:00:07 GMT -5
You are free to believe what you want.
Fact is that you cannot prove that you are not a child rapist.
Therefore, you have no grounds to object if people were to call you a child rapist. Correct?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Jun 27, 2019 11:45:30 GMT -5
You are free to believe what you want. Fact is that you cannot prove that you are not a child rapist. Therefore, you have no grounds to object if people were to call you a child rapist. Correct?
But that means you also have no grounds to object if someone were to call you a child rapist.
In fact, there are grounds to object. Very solid grounds.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE A NEGATIVE!
If someone makes a claim, it is up to them to provide evidence for that claim.
And that is a basic rule here on the FACTS Board. Otherwise we would have to "prove" that ghosts don't exist, UFO's are not space ships from other planets, and the Jews were not trying to take over Germany before the Nazis saved the country.
CARDINAL RULE: The person making the claim is the one who has to provide the Proof.
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2019 12:09:04 GMT -5
So what you are saying is that if you, Bob Marks, make a claim, it is you who has to provide proof that your claim is in fact correct.
Am I reading that correctly?
What constitutes "proof"? Is anything that you call "proof" applicable and sufficient?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Jun 27, 2019 12:39:18 GMT -5
So what you are saying is that if you, Bob Marks, make a claim, it is you who has to provide proof that your claim is in fact correct. Am I reading that correctly? Yes. And the same applies to you and your claims. If the supporting evidence is not sufficient, other people will point it out. Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2019 18:34:34 GMT -5
If the supporting evidence is not sufficient, other people will point it out. By which you, mean, these other people will be wrong, because the supporting evidence is always sufficient if I believe it to be the case.
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Jun 27, 2019 20:32:25 GMT -5
If the supporting evidence is not sufficient, other people will point it out. By which you, mean, these other people will be wrong, because the supporting evidence is always sufficient if I believe it to be the case.
No. I never said that at all. You made it up.
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2019 12:57:48 GMT -5
Let's say you believe that your supporting evidence was sufficient and I disagreed.
Why am I wrong to disagree with you?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 28, 2019 14:03:45 GMT -5
Let's say you believe that your supporting evidence was sufficient and I disagreed. Why am I wrong to disagree with you?
The main reason is when you disagree, you seldom give reasons or supporting evidence.
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2019 17:01:17 GMT -5
Will you agree with me whenever I give reasons or supporting evidence?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 28, 2019 17:59:19 GMT -5
Will you agree with me whenever I give reasons or supporting evidence?
I will agree with you if the reasons and supporting evidence you give prove to be valid.
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2019 11:49:22 GMT -5
Will you agree with me whenever I give reasons or supporting evidence?
I will agree with you if the reasons and supporting evidence you give prove to be valid.
Bob
Who decides whether my reasons and evidence are valid, and what objective and objectively verifiable criteria are they using?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 29, 2019 12:14:20 GMT -5
I will agree with you if the reasons and supporting evidence you give prove to be valid.
Bob
Who decides whether my reasons and evidence are valid, and what objective and objectively verifiable criteria are they using?
Anyone who reads your reasons and evidence has to decide that for themselves using the standard rules of logic and evidence.
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2019 11:35:38 GMT -5
Who decides whether my reasons and evidence are valid, and what objective and objectively verifiable criteria are they using?
Anyone who reads your reasons and evidence has to decide that for themselves using the standard rules of logic and evidence.
Bob
What methods do you use to ensure that you are applying these standards in a manner that is objectively verifiable and universally applicable?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 30, 2019 12:58:22 GMT -5
Anyone who reads your reasons and evidence has to decide that for themselves using the standard rules of logic and evidence.
Bob
What methods do you use to ensure that you are applying these standards in a manner that is objectively verifiable and universally applicable? The methods of logic. What methods do Postmodernists use?
Oh wait. Postmodernists believe that logic is merely a method used by white, Western Imperialists to impose their will on people of color, don't they?
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2019 8:22:34 GMT -5
What methods do you use to ensure that you are applying these standards in a manner that is objectively verifiable and universally applicable? The methods of logic. Which methods are these, and how do they ensure that every person would come to the exact same conclusion?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 31, 2019 12:14:29 GMT -5
Which methods are these, and how do they ensure that every person would come to the exact same conclusion?
You've been to college and taken courses in philosophy so you already know what logic is. In fact, you have even (attempted) to use it in some of your posts.
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2019 12:39:48 GMT -5
Which methods are these, and how do they ensure that every person would come to the exact same conclusion? You've been to college and taken courses in philosophy so you already know what logic is. In fact, you have even (attempted) to use it in some of your posts. Bob
And you apparently haven't, which is why you evidently struggle with the idea that "logic" is not simply a word you can say to make your beliefs objectively correct, but is a vast field of academic research, with several competing approaches to the issue of truth and objectivity in speech and discourse.
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 31, 2019 13:43:48 GMT -5
You've been to college and taken courses in philosophy so you already know what logic is. In fact, you have even (attempted) to use it in some of your posts. Bob
And you apparently haven't, which is why you evidently struggle with the idea that "logic" is not simply a word you can say to make your beliefs objectively correct, but is a vast field of academic research, with several competing approaches to the issue of truth and objectivity in speech and discourse.
So you want me to give you reasons for my views?
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2019 16:26:23 GMT -5
I want you to explain how logic renders your personal evaluation of my evidence objective and universally applicable.
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 31, 2019 18:31:29 GMT -5
I want you to explain how logic renders your personal evaluation of my evidence objective and universally applicable.
So you want me to prove logic?
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2019 8:51:15 GMT -5
No, I want you to explain how logic proves your personal opinion to be an objective truth.
How does logic allow you to discern objectively whether my evidence is valid or not?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Sept 1, 2019 12:02:30 GMT -5
No, I want you to explain how logic proves your personal opinion to be an objective truth. Do you have any evidence that my personal opinions are NOT objectively true? If so, please present it. LOL! For one thing, knowledge of errors in logic enables me to identify all of the Complex Question Fallacies, Strawman arguments, Shifting the Goalposts, and the other logical errors in your posts. I already gave my arguments. I don't have to do anything more. Now it is up to you to demonstrate that they are wrong. Can you? Bob
|
|