Wobbly Headed Bob
Smash Journeyman
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2010
- Messages
- 367
Said it like the embodiment of the Dunning Kruger effect you are. The fact that I point out your logical fallacies doesn't imply that I'm committing an argumentum ad logicum fallacy. If maybe you were competent in argumentation, you'd know that argumentation is all about focusing in logic. And if you knew anything about logic and analytic philosophy, you'd know the role of semantics in logic, which is particularly problematic when it comes to the way philistines like you think.You must have an exciting life if you get off whenever someone uses a word differently than you do.
Especially when they did so correctly.
downgrade
verb
: to give (someone or something) a lower rank or grade
: to cause (someone or something) to be thought of as less valuable, important, etc.
(source: Merriam Webster)
You've clearly convinced nobody, Mr. Argumentum ad Logicum. All you do is flame people, focus on logic, semantics, and grammar, and yet you're still wrong.
And yeah, it's easy for the butthurt, incompetent, pseudo-intellectual kid that says that something he dislikes is wrong. It's like a dumbass creationist kid telling Stephen Hawking that he is wrong when Stephen Hawking visits his school of *******. If you want to pretend that you somehow refuted a scholar in the subject, then I suggest you at least say something intelligent first, and realize that the fact that I treat you like **** (since there's no reason to consider you otherwise) is and will forever be irrelevant to the cogency of my arguments. Try again.
The act of rebuttal effectively downgrades an argument. In the same vein, downgrading is something that I ought to do, since it has a basis. That's the difference between "downgrading" and "degrading". The former is not objectionable, while the second is right on your typical dumbass platitudinous internet autist line of reasoning.
Last edited: