= “I disagree”
as you asked me to say if I don’t agree.
= “A simple reason”,
followed by the beginning of how it applies aaaaall the way back through your reasoning = “state only the beginning of it”
= “ask for agreement”
= “ask if (you) agree”
This is all very clearly included in my post that followed your advice on how delicately you want to be treated, if you’d actually read what I said.
So basically I followed your advice exactly and you are the one ignoring, I even made sure to explicitly address the question you asked:
Both the addition I used and the multiplication example you used were involved in my proof that you’re still trying to understand.
So basically:
Although tempted to go into a long detailed discussion of why you were so predictable (there is a little Kim Jong-un dominating your mind), we weren’t done with your last batch of debacles and here you divert to a new plethora of fallacies and then complain that your new distraction has been ignored.
is as I predicted 2 pages back:
literal psychological projection on your part - confirmed.
and
the null hypothesis that you intended only to waste both our time is confirmed.
I’ll file this away, along with you having nothing to offer with regard to alleged mistakes that I have made, which I’ve repeatedly asked you to disclose in spite of all your efforts to claim I’m not interested in this, reinforcing my classification of you as a fallacious, disingenuous and slanderous thinker, compromised by your political affiliations and their routine oppositional stereotyping.
and
The motion that you have nothing is carried.
This is confirmed by your repeated attempt to move away from logical content to instead politicise the discussion:
I was actually hoping to get into some political discussions but I quickly discovered that same symptom on this board is as bad, if not worse, concerning politics.
I read your excuse that:
it takes a great deal of effort to try to see the world from another person’s perspective just to ensure that you are not mis interpreting what they are trying to say. What was their environment? Who were they speaking or writing to? What were they trying to accomplish? What words did they use? What references? And finally, what did they really intend to relay to their audience at that time? And that isn’t even getting into who the person really was all about.
followed in the same post by the obvious flaw in this approach:
“presumption is the seed of all sin.” So in that regard I guess we actually we agree.
In researching the history around the person to understand the context behind their works, you are injecting your own history of yourself and your own context into theirs, doubling the muddying their actual content instead of just analysing the logic behind their points and arguments. As I’m demonstrating using proof - neither your intention nor your strong suit.
And why bring politics and association fallacies or any other red herrings into it at all?
Arguments either hold or don’t hold completely irrespective of their author and anyone’s emotions.
So we see:
here you divert to a new plethora of fallacies
Objectively applies to what you keep doing and not to me in the slightlest as I’ve just proven through quotation and logic.
Buy a mirror for god’s sake.
I’m trying to help you and all you can do is - in the terms of James that you quoted yourself “sin” - through “presumption”, and give advice that when followed, you ignore.
Stop presuming your criticisms are correct and that the only thing left is to go back to them and admit this, disregarding the possibility that they are not correct and ignoring explanations of why their underlying assumptions are wrong, with accusations of “distracting”, unbacked claims of fallacies and no justification of debacle, to justify ignoring them. If you don’t see the connection yet, don’t presume there is none, let me explain it to you.
You realise it’s possible that you’re wrong, right? All that psychological projection of “People who say things like that are saying that only God can understand things that they don’t” onto others applies the other way around, you know.
But let’s make a prediction: you disregard this possibility and most likely this whole post, which does nothing more than prove your presumptions - in order to help you. I don’t want to have to do this, I want to stay on topic. It shouldn’t need typing out, but you need to stop letting anything like the “pride, politics, and stupidity”, of which you’re presuming to only apply to others, forbid you from growing. Or just continue to think it’s all the forum’s/other people’s fault…