Sir Dillon,
In reply to:
"Also, you keep using the word "fallacious." I'm curious; what is the fallacy in our argument?"
you said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Dillon
My declration of such fallcious are the indetification of those fallacies
S.D.
|
Okay, in your haste to respond, your typing got sloppy. That's fine. But, as near as I can tell, what you meant to say was -
"My declarations of such fallacies are the identification of those fallacies."
First, let me know if that is in fact what you intended to type. IF SO, I'm not sure I understand it. It sounds an awful lot like "They are fallacies because I declare them so." Or perhaps you meant "I have already identified the fallacies in my previous posts." If one of these two interpretations is correct, please let me know. If neither is correct, could you clarify?
In reply to:
"Primarily, it seems people have been arguing that the sign posted wasn't the best way to convince people that atheism is preferable."
you said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Dillon
Hence the fallacy of that argument.
Nothing within the statement, context or otherwise, stated that atheism was "the best way" to convince people that "atheism is preferable."
Again, another subjective (and incorrect) interpretation of what was stated.
|
This is so garbled I can scarcely make out your intent at all. That reply doesn't appear to be addressing the issue (the right for the sign to be there as opposed to the merits of its content), and it's confusing in the bargain. Again, please clarify.