The claim - that you can dismiss what is asserted without evidence - is itself asserted without evidence. Therefore, by its own terms...
-
Yes, if you insist on the most literal-minded interpretation imaginable, which wld of course make any conversation impossible.
I'm not insisting it should be read as "can" - you are! If it's read as "can" it's worse, obviously. Self-defeating if it's not.
-
-
That’s not how it shld be read, that’s the quote. And yes, you are insisting on an interpretation that’s uncharitable and unreasonable.
-
Sorry, I don't understand what point you're trying to make - the quote is manifestly self-defeating.
-
Yes, you keep repeating that. My point: your insistence that only your interpretation is correct is highly uncritical.
-
I think we might have had this conversation before... it's ringing a few bells. I think my interpretation is entirely reasonable! :)
-
Um, yes, but what you think abt it is neither here nor there. Critical thinking ≠ being satisfied that one’s opinion is critical.
-
Right, but discussions about the purview of critical thinking are somewhat undermined by a 140 character limit! :)
-
Poor excuse. One can have a discussion over more than one tweet, you know? Kind of like we’ve been having right now, w you replying 5 times.
-
It's a perfectly reasonable excuse! We're not really discussing anything. We're talking past each other.
- 7 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I’m fairly certain that you are aware that “can be done” can have more meanings than just “it is physically possible to do”. :)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.