General Discussion

Jedi Guy

(3,524 posts)

50. I don't think you understand how debate/argument works.

Sat Nov 13, 2021, 07:15 PM

Nov 2021

You asserted something. I countered with examples which undermine your assertion. Your response is basically, "Nuh uh, because Paul Butler says so." I neither know nor care who Paul Butler is. If he's some legal expert, so what? I'm sure other legal experts disagree with him. You're simply choosing him as your authority because his opinion aligns with yours. His opinion is not the be-all and end-all. That is not an argument, that is a classic appeal to authority.

When writers or speakers use appeal to authority, they are claiming that something must be true because it is believed by someone who is said to be an "authority" on the subject.

If you are correct in this judge being biased, you should be able to refute the points that I made... but you aren't. You're simply repeating your assertion over and over again as if it's established fact, when in fact it is merely your (or Paul Butler's) opinion.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

64 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Rittenhouse Trial [View all] H2O Man Nov 2021 OP

Do you think we'll end up with a mistrial? Saoirse9 Nov 2021 #1

I don't. H2O Man Nov 2021 #27

Thank you, H2O MAN. As I've posted prior, majority of my extended family are lawyers with a judge, hlthe2b Nov 2021 #2

How are the jury instructions biased? Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #6

Anything to defend Kyle. Gotcha. hlthe2b Nov 2021 #9

When unable to provide a reasonable response, dodge the question. Gotcha. N/T Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #10

I posted a long detailed thread elsewhere. I no longer debate with those so clearly in the defense hlthe2b Nov 2021 #11

So because I don't agree with your assessment of the judge, I support Rittenhouse? Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #12

I believe that I've had this discussion you in great detail previously... hlthe2b Nov 2021 #13

I don't believe you are correct. Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #31

Thank you! H2O Man Nov 2021 #53

Hm. The very first definition of "argue" is... Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #61

Yeah, that's about what I figured. N/T Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #60

Give up medicine JonAndKatePlusABird Nov 2021 #58

Anyone who thinks the judge is biased should have watched yesterday's proceedings Sympthsical Nov 2021 #25

Well, it's as we've discussed previously. Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #32

Part of it H2O Man Nov 2021 #33

"deep emotional attachment to Kyle" Sympthsical Nov 2021 #35

I think that H2O Man Nov 2021 #38

It is astonishing it wasn't moved to a different county and appoint a special prosecutor. LiberalFighter Nov 2021 #26

Right. H2O Man Nov 2021 #39

The weak case under law probably is why Amishman Nov 2021 #62

I posted something H2O Man Nov 2021 #29

Everyone flips out when he sides with the defense on something. Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #3

Hard to do when prosecutors must call victims "rioters, looters or arsonists." Kid Berwyn Nov 2021 #17

Oh my gentle Jesus, really? Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #20

No, that's not what I meant or wrote. Kid Berwyn Nov 2021 #42

You wrote... Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #43

A hobgoblin of little mind. Kid Berwyn Nov 2021 #64

Respectfully disagree. H2O Man Nov 2021 #40

Let's be clear here. By "ruled incorrectly" you mean "ruled for the defense." Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #44

No. H2O Man Nov 2021 #45

Simply asserting "you are wrong" does not make it so. Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #46

Exactly. H2O Man Nov 2021 #47

I don't think you understand how debate/argument works. Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #50

Your foundational error H2O Man Nov 2021 #52

You know what's really amusing about you clinging to Paul Butler's "expert" opinion? Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #57

This message was self-deleted by its author malaise Nov 2021 #4

Well said WaterMan malaise Nov 2021 #5

Thank you! H2O Man Nov 2021 #41

Fortunately, most of Schroeder's junk was not in front of jury. And, he is allowing lesser charges, Hoyt Nov 2021 #7

I was surprised to learn that it's fine to walk down crowded city streets with a loaded AR Tomconroy Nov 2021 #15

Yet it's not ok to defend yourself against an assault weapon, with a skateboard. mzmolly Nov 2021 #37

Thinking, and hoping, that a jury can still filter out judicial biases if they exist bucolic_frolic Nov 2021 #16

You mean Traildogbob Nov 2021 #22

Thanks! H2O Man Nov 2021 #48

I have been thinking of Ito's giddy preening throughout this trial. tblue37 Nov 2021 #8

Right. H2O Man Nov 2021 #49

It's like Schroeder can't wait to adopt Rittenhouse. Kid Berwyn Nov 2021 #14

Wow, it's like they had the same father and mother. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Nov 2021 #19

Thank you! H2O Man Nov 2021 #51

I'm not seeing a link that you mention in paragraph 3, the 1st sentence ms liberty Nov 2021 #18

Schroeder reminds me of teachers I had in rural Ohio in the early 70s. yardwork Nov 2021 #21

I confess, I am not following this thing at all. malthaussen Nov 2021 #23

False equivalence happy feet Nov 2021 #24

Have you been watching the trial? Sympthsical Nov 2021 #28

Perhaps if you H2O Man Nov 2021 #34

I meant the whole trial Sympthsical Nov 2021 #36

I think that regardless of outcome, Rittenhouse will be hailed as a hero to the maga-class Bristlecone Nov 2021 #30

Who am I to judge. egduj Nov 2021 #54

"Your guy..." H2O Man Nov 2021 #55

Copy-paste error! JonAndKatePlusABird Nov 2021 #59

I've struggled with this case. Calista241 Nov 2021 #56

The Chicago police riot outside the 1968 Democratic convention Martin Eden Nov 2021 #63