Moralism? Um, no.
-
-
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @FoxTango6
still twisting yourself into pretzels to support Trump, I see. what about questioning a candidate on whether he/she committed $400M in inheritance tax fraud, will release their tax returns even if they're under some mysterious never-ending audit, & gets loans from Russian banks?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @polyglotme @FoxTango6
Totally reasonable to ask for tax returns. And it would be monumentally stupid to provide them to the ignorant press who would (of course) misinterpret them by accident or intention. Sometimes both sides are right.
2 replies 3 retweets 25 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @FoxTango6
"monumentally stupid to provide them to the ignorant press who would (of course) misinterpret them by accident or intention." that's the kind of argument dictators use to justify getting rid of free speech & a free press. you're making a perfect-or-useless logical fallacy here.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @polyglotme @FoxTango6
I have a chapter in Loserthink about analogies like that one. Analogies are good for describing things, but using them for prediction, as you did, is pure nonsense.
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @FoxTango6
analogies are the basis for applying logic to reality. by refining analogies, u can show people when their views are illogical, inconsistent, or hypocritical. analogies & hypotheticals, are basic tools in law, engineering, & science. as a former engineer, u should know that.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Einstein's papers are full of analogies & thought experiments (Gedanken in German). Supreme Court opinions are also full of analogies. yet, I should believe you that analogies are poor forms of argument. just because you assert it to be so? that only works in Trump-land.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @polyglotme @FoxTango6
If you use analogies the way Einstein did, you are doing it right. He used them to explain new concepts. Courts use them to establish precedent. Neither use them to predict, which is the loserthink way.
2 replies 1 retweet 7 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @FoxTango6
I did say "that's the kind of argument dictators use to justify getting rid of free speech & a free press" but that's not a prediction. I was't predicting Trump will become a dictator, just pointing out that dictators use the same argument u made to justify hiding information.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
I accept your clarification that the sentence had no relevance whatsoever.
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.