TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- What are the techno Tracks being played in the Opening Ceremonies of the Olympics??
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur Did you make that up, or did you get that from the Dictionary of Incorrect Definitions? Because it's wrong.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ad%20hominem

http://education.yahoo.com/referenc...ry/ad%20hominem

http://www.answers.com/topic/ad-hominem

http://www.bartleby.com/61/71/A0087100.html

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ad+hominem

Now fuck off.

Wow. I'll never trust those sites again. Because they're wrong.

The ad hominem fallacy means that you attack the person making the argument rather than the argument itself (the operative word being hominem, ie: man). It doesn't really say anything about personal considerations or logic and reason, for it can quite easily contain ample amounts of both, and doesn't care if it contains much of either.

for example: Michael Moore is a fat slob, therefore he's wrong about Bush.

This is an ad hominem argument. Discrediting the person rather than his words. Michael Moore may indeed be a fat slob, and calling him one can still be a logical statement providing it can be backed up reason, but his physical appearance has no bearing on his opinions about Bush. Calling him a fat slob does not harm his position.

To get back to what we're talking about, my arguments towards trance music can not possibly be ad hominem unless I actually attack someone. To wit, I would have to say something like: Tiesto is a fucktard, therefore all trance music sucks.

I think you'd be hardpressed to find any honest statement of mine in the past seven years on the entire internet that viciously attacks the character of anyone, celebrity or no, in the electronic music scene as a firm discreditation of their words or opinions.

Sorry, but I don't do character assassination. I may attack Tiesto's competence (and gleefully do so all the time), but I don't attack him directly, and even if I did, I would never use such personal attacks as a justification for any point I was trying to make or to destroy anything he created. In fact, I'm quite ambivalent towards these people's personalities, and don't see who they are being as interesting as what they do. Attacking what trance is and what Tiesto plays is not ad hominem.

In fact, you know what IS an ad hominem? This statement:

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Or your blatantly ad hominem opinions on trance

So, in conclusion: Jack, when you get into college, please pick up a course on Logic and Critical Thinking. It will be the most valuable class you'll ever take in your entire life.

(note: if you had bothered to do some further reading on the sites you just posted, you'd know that your definition is depricated. For now on, if you want to point out other people's logical fallacies, use this guide: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adhomine.html )

"Everybody else is wrong but me."

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery "Everybody is wrong but me."

correction

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur I think you'd be hardpressed to find any honest statement of mine in the past seven years on the entire internet that viciously attacks the character of anyone, celebrity or no, in the electronic music scene as a firm discreditation of their words or opinions.

Surely not?

Although it's easy to pass something off as ironic when pressed to it.

Well, if five sites (and they were random choices from Google- I was surprised at how they all correlated) are mistaken in a definition, then that's probably God fucking me over.

You generalise. All the time. The nostalgia thing is a prime example. You don't take into account the specifics- in your lengthy duel with Yale Trance you tripped yourself up over a good point because you generalised the people involved. You didn't look at the specifics of the situation, and it cost you. I used "ad hominem" because you pigeon-hole people in debates and then use that template to attack, rather than the actual details at hand. Example: you say that people that listen to epic trance would never accept it in its true trancey form. It's attacking the listener for something you don't even know is true, simply to make your argument gel.

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur Wow. I'll never trust those sites again. Because they're wrong. The ad hominem fallacy means that you attack the person making the argument rather than the argument itself (the operative word being hominem, ie: man). It doesn't really say anything about personal considerations or logic and reason, for it can quite easily contain ample amounts of both, and doesn't care if it contains much of either. for example: Michael Moore is a fat slob, therefore he's wrong about Bush. This is an ad hominem argument. Discrediting the person rather than his words. Michael Moore may indeed be a fat slob, and calling him one can still be a logical statement providing it can be backed up reason, but his physical appearance has no bearing on his opinions about Bush. Calling him a fat slob does not harm his position. To get back to what we're talking about, my arguments towards trance music can not possibly be ad hominem unless I actually attack someone. To wit, I would have to say something like: Tiesto is a fucktard, therefore all trance music sucks. I think you'd be hardpressed to find any honest statement of mine in the past seven years on the entire internet that viciously attacks the character of anyone, celebrity or no, in the electronic music scene as a firm discreditation of their words or opinions. Sorry, but I don't do character assassination. I may attack Tiesto's competence (and gleefully do so all the time), but I don't attack him directly, and even if I did, I would never use such personal attacks as a justification for any point I was trying to make or to destroy anything he created. In fact, I'm quite ambivalent towards these people's personalities, and don't see who they are being as interesting as what they do. Attacking what trance is and what Tiesto plays is not ad hominem. In fact, you know what IS an ad hominem? This statement: So, in conclusion: Jack, when you get into college, please pick up a course on Logic and Critical Thinking. It will be the most valuable class you'll ever take in your entire life. (note: if you had bothered to do some further reading on the sites you just posted, you'd know that your definition is depricated. For now on, if you want to point out other people's logical fallacies, use this guide: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adhomine.html )

System J once again made look a fool, will he finally commit suicide

go outside - get some frsh air - get off the net and stop argueing about the obscurities of obscure music.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J surely not

Yeah, that was something called "a joke". I was prompted by Jon to stir the pot on TC, and since I didn't have the energy, time or compulsion to actually do something truly breathtaking, resorted to derailing a heated thread into a rank re-enactment of a Monty Python skit....you know, the one about arguments....but you wouldn't play along.

"No it's not."
"yes it is."

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J Well, if five sites (and they were random choices from Google- I was surprised at how they all correlated) are mistaken in a definition, then that's probably God fucking me over.

No, that's you fucking yourself over trying to sound like you know what you're talking about when you really don't. That's okay. We've all been there. Lick your wounds and move on.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J You generalise. All the time. The nostalgia thing is a prime example. You don't take into account the specifics

Exceptions don't prove the rule.

quote:

Originally posted by stren pff lame excuse; even african countries are in the olympics

YEAH! haven't you ever seen "cool runnings?"

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur Wow. I'll never trust those sites again. Because they're wrong. The ad hominem fallacy means that you attack the person making the argument rather than the argument itself (the operative word being hominem, ie: man). It doesn't really say anything about personal considerations or logic and reason, for it can quite easily contain ample amounts of both, and doesn't care if it contains much of either. for example: Michael Moore is a fat slob, therefore he's wrong about Bush. This is an ad hominem argument. Discrediting the person rather than his words. Michael Moore may indeed be a fat slob, and calling him one can still be a logical statement providing it can be backed up reason, but his physical appearance has no bearing on his opinions about Bush. Calling him a fat slob does not harm his position. To get back to what we're talking about, my arguments towards trance music can not possibly be ad hominem unless I actually attack someone. To wit, I would have to say something like: Tiesto is a fucktard, therefore all trance music sucks. I think you'd be hardpressed to find any honest statement of mine in the past seven years on the entire internet that viciously attacks the character of anyone, celebrity or no, in the electronic music scene as a firm discreditation of their words or opinions. Sorry, but I don't do character assassination. I may attack Tiesto's competence (and gleefully do so all the time), but I don't attack him directly, and even if I did, I would never use such personal attacks as a justification for any point I was trying to make or to destroy anything he created. In fact, I'm quite ambivalent towards these people's personalities, and don't see who they are being as interesting as what they do. Attacking what trance is and what Tiesto plays is not ad hominem. In fact, you know what IS an ad hominem? This statement: So, in conclusion: Jack, when you get into college, please pick up a course on Logic and Critical Thinking. It will be the most valuable class you'll ever take in your entire life. (note: if you had bothered to do some further reading on the sites you just posted, you'd know that your definition is depricated. For now on, if you want to point out other people's logical fallacies, use this guide: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adhomine.html )

you know, both of you guys come off as arrogant pricks half the time, but i must admit i lol'ed at the pwnage here

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur No, that's you fucking yourself over trying to sound like you know what you're talking about when you really don't. That's okay. We've all been there. Lick your wounds and move on.

Well I do realise that now.

Er... what the hell was my original point again? Ah yes- aren't you making exceptions for yourself here?

One event i'll always remember...

Greece 2004: All the Dutch athletes goin crazy to Tiesto.

They really put a smile on my face.

quote:

Originally posted by halexander837 One event i'll always remember... Greece 2004: All the Dutch athletes goin crazy to Tiesto. They really put a smile on my face.

I'll remember that as one of the most retarded scenes I have ever seen.
I'd be ashamed if I were a member of the Olympics organisation thingy that organised all that stuff back then.

quote:

Originally posted by SYSTEM-J aren't you making exceptions for yourself here?

no

I just love to get that pot moving.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ_Massive I'll remember that as one of the most retarded scenes I have ever seen. I'd be ashamed if I were a member of the Olympics organisation thingy that organised all that stuff back then.

oh crap... i deeply apoligize... i should've known better.

quote:

Originally posted by halexander837 oh crap... i deeply apoligize... i should've known better.

Didn't you know that this place isn't for opinions of our own?

Alright so...


.............


.......


.....


...

.










































What were the tracks being played at the open ceremonies?

only positive opinions allowed
lol

Queen

Nimwits!

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery Didn't you know that this place isn't for opinions of our own?

Right! Never mind

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.