Philosophical Vegan Forum

noelle wrote:It's hard to carry a discussion with you because you resort to ad hominem and generally exhibit toxic behaviors. I don't agree with most of what you said, so I don't know how else I can contribute to the conversation anymore.

I agree with you. I've commented less and less on these forums, mostly because I feel a lot of thinly veiled ad hominem disguised as (or claimed to be) a rational argument. I think it's hard to point out someone's toxic behaviour when you're the only one to stand against it, so I just want to say I'm on the same page as you.

Soycrates wrote: I agree with you. I've commented less and less on these forums, mostly because I feel a lot of thinly veiled ad hominem disguised as (or claimed to be) a rational argument.

While we disagree on semantics, I like you and I think you've written some really great arguments and contributed admirably to the vegan cause.
Your grasp on logic, however, is tenuous (though your knowledge of history is great, memorizing and repeating is not understanding).
Please learn what ad hominem is. It is not calling an idea stupid.

Consider where you are- the Vegan Atheists' top video series are entitled "stupid X comments" This is not ad hominem. Sometimes ridiculous and idiotic ideas need to be called what they are. Furthermore, you should explain why they are stupid ideas/comments/etc.

It's only ad hominem if you say "This person is X (a negative personal quality), therefore the ideas said person is advocating are false."
Not "These ideas are false because of X valid reasoning, and furthermore and on an unrelated note (or even because of holding those ideas), this person is an idiot."

You have it completely backwards.

I haven't called you an idiot, but I have challenged you on your assertions.

If you want to actually engage, that's great. But every time we have disagreed you have merely made a bald assertion, taking a hard line on your narrow view of elitist linguistic descriptivism.

And you know what, if that's your view on language and you won't discuss it, that's fine - but maybe stop trying to call me out on misusing words if you won't back up your assertions? Because that is rude.

Soycrates wrote:I think it's hard to point out someone's toxic behaviour when you're the only one to stand against it, so I just want to say I'm on the same page as you.

And this is what makes you hypocritical. It's not useful to call somebody toxic, is it?

You people are the only ones engaging in ad hominem fallacies.

"Brimstone said a mean word and is toxic, therefore the arguments are wrong! Wa!"

This is the internet. Grow a thicker skin please. If I say the ideas you're advocating are idiotic, and I explain why, then how about countering that with an actual argument?

Back up your assertions with argument. That's all I ask.

Volenta is awesome. We disagree now and then, and argue a lot (sometimes heated), but I have mad respect because he'll actually think about things and back up his claims when pressed by argument.
That's how you get better at debating, and it's how you become less wrong over time - gradually - by backing up the positions you hold (or failing to do so and revising them).

If you don't even bother to try, and you just memorize and regurgitate old books, you will not grow in understanding or any form of philosophical enlightenment.

I'm wrong sometimes, and if I wasn't willing to admit that I would be wrong pretty much all of the time because I couldn't self correct - and if I didn't run my mouth and get into arguments for the past decade, I'd never have had the experience of backing up (and changing) my beliefs to be less wrong when confronted with fights I couldn't win.

Like your hard line on linguistics, I take a hard line on a few things too, and "don't be a wuss, and stand up for what you believe" is one of them. Nothing is as pathetic as people who will run their mouths as long as there's no consequence, but then when there's actual disagreement and conflict involved, they take their toys and go home because they can't take the heat.

You want to cuss at me and throw a fit? Fine. God for it. Get it all out. But when you're done, present an actual argument, and maybe we can both learn something by fighting it out and improving both our arguments and ideas.

This is what I am talking about, and this is why I will no longer participate in this community from now on.

Thank you to everyone else for your interesting and engaging discussions and enjoyable commentary.

Soycrates wrote:This is what I am talking about, and this is why I will no longer participate in this community from now on.

And thus passed Soycrates, she was too good for the internet.

I'm sorry to see you go, but if you're not interested in having discussions, I guess you have to do what you have to do.

Soycrates wrote:Thank you to everyone else for your interesting and engaging discussions and enjoyable commentary.

This is a great example of the rudeness. Polite rudeness. Why? Why would you feel compelled to add in one last jeer? What does that accomplish for you?

It just makes you look mean and petty.

I've welcomed you, tried to have discussions with you. I like you, and have been glad to see the few topical posts you made.

I was the only one to make an effort to respond to your thread, and try to engage in the topic:
http://theveganatheist.com/forum/viewto ... 5325#p5304

You have NOT engaged in much discussion here with anybody aside from me, and a little with Jebus. And you've made it very clear that you are out to ignore me. If you think I'm mean, you have another think coming when you meet somebody on the internet who doesn't like you.

You're a fellow vegan, so as far as I'm concerned you're a friend (despite the rudeness you've shown me). I've been trying to get you to engage, but I guess you don't want to.

If you ever change your mind, I'd be glad to argue with you some time.

Soycrates wrote:

noelle wrote:It's hard to carry a discussion with you because you resort to ad hominem and generally exhibit toxic behaviors. I don't agree with most of what you said, so I don't know how else I can contribute to the conversation anymore.

I agree with you. I've commented less and less on these forums, mostly because I feel a lot of thinly veiled ad hominem disguised as (or claimed to be) a rational argument. I think it's hard to point out someone's toxic behaviour when you're the only one to stand against it, so I just want to say I'm on the same page as you.

Hear hear!!!

Jebus wrote:

Soycrates wrote:

noelle wrote:It's hard to carry a discussion with you because you resort to ad hominem and generally exhibit toxic behaviors. I don't agree with most of what you said, so I don't know how else I can contribute to the conversation anymore.

I agree with you. I've commented less and less on these forums, mostly because I feel a lot of thinly veiled ad hominem disguised as (or claimed to be) a rational argument. I think it's hard to point out someone's toxic behaviour when you're the only one to stand against it, so I just want to say I'm on the same page as you.

Hear hear!!!

Jebus, there are more things wrong with Islam and Islamic countries than I can count. If you want to criticize Islam, it is a target rich environment, a fact that reformers of Islam also understand. You don't have to make up lies in order to do so.

If you want respect, earn it with honesty. As an atheist, you should be able to aspire to a higher standard of honesty than your opponents. That, and your hostility towards correction, is how you were being an idiot.

If you have a problem with that, then appeal to some actual evidence. It's something I did and that you repeatedly failed to do (despite the fact that it was YOU making the claim in the first place). The burden of proof was not on me, but I provided a full breakdown for miniboes.

Put up or shut up. This passive aggressive nonsense should be beneath you.

You make a much stronger argument against religion when you don't fill your posts with obvious falsehoods. I criticize you because we should be on the same side here, and you're making the defenders of religion's case for them: that atheists are dishonest and misrepresenting religion. You're not helping by making such poor arguments, and you just make us all look like fools.

Unless you're actually a Muslim under cover here, and that's your goal? Hmm...

To summarize:

LIE: http://theveganatheist.com/forum/viewto ... t=10#p4808

TRUTH: http://theveganatheist.com/forum/viewto ... t=10#p4881

I'm not on a quest to defend Islam, but you're just flatly wrong, and your refusal to admit it at all (and insistence that it's others, who have sited irrefutable fact, who are wrong instead) is disturbing and dogmatic. It doesn't make atheists look good, and it doesn't really reflect well on veganism either. It irks me that your arguments are so bad that I'm forced to defend Islam on this point, when I don't even want to.

Make better arguments, stop appealing to overt falsehoods, and we won't have a problem.

If anything is an ad hominem it is this topic. I don't like personal attacks like this. Although I do agree sometimes Brimstone could use less harsh words, he always backs up his claims and in the end is only attacking the views. I think the way you handle his response to this topic is rather weird; you claim he is toxic, then he comes to his own defense and instead of bringing any arguments you say you quit the forum. I am sad to see you go and would encourage you to evaluate if you or your views are being criticized and whether or not it is justified. Thanks for your contribution to the forums anyway.

The topic was split from another (title isn't original).

The issue I take is that they're criticizing me, and yet being just as rude themselves (if not more so), but using slightly different language. You can use super nice language and yet be horribly mean and condescending, or you can use strong language and be perfectly nice, or any combination thereof.

I think what people say is more important than how they say it.

I don't mind the odd personal attack terribly much if it comes with argument, but people should also respond to arguments when there is one.

Like here, I had to defend DLH when somebody said his personal attack (of saying I had an "empty fucking head") negated his argument:

http://theveganatheist.com/forum/viewto ... =343#p4329

He shouldn't have come out of the blue (with no escalation or provocation) and said I had an empty fucking head. I merely disagreed with the relevance of some of the topic.

However, I stopped replying to DLH because he basically said logic and philosophy are all pointless sophistry, so there's not really any basis for conversation beyond that. His tirade wasn't just against me, but against intellectual comprehension of the world around us in general. How do you talk to somebody who doesn't accept logic?

I'll post another reply there to clarify, because I see he posted a kind-of apology and made a couple of actual points that I should probably address for the sake of anybody reading the thread.

I just want to state my opinion as well. (I'll keep it short)

I think brimstoneSalad is a great contribution to the community, and keeps us all sharp from making mistakes by always correcting them. There have been many discussions that were very well-mannered, and I really enjoy those conversations / discussions. And that's why it sometimes can be irritating to see brimstoneSalad sometimes taking another approach. He isn't doing it to avoid the discussion, but probably because he thinks it's useful (he's always able to come up with, possibly valid, rationalizations for it). I'm not going to argue about the truth of this usefulness, although I sometimes did in the past, but I eventually didn't want to waste much time on it. What I care about is that we're all comfortable with sharing our thoughts and to do this in a polite way. So my preference would be that brimstoneSalad (and everybody else) is to still try do it well-mannered, even when he think it's less productive or useful to do so. I think it's the most fun for all of us.

And I hope you (brimstoneSalad) can see this as constructive criticism, it's not to piss you off.

While I have to admit that BrimstonSalad has vexed me a few times, he is a great contributor on this forum, and has my support. This is a forum of different people, holding different perspectives and varying styles of communication. Rather then giving up on the forum, learn to have your views challenged and become better for it. If you feel that this forum is supposed to be a community where everyone agrees on all topics, then you are sadly mistaken. My positions and communication styles do not match up perfectly with BrimstonSalad, or pretty much anyone on the forum, but I am willing to listen and dialogue.

I constantly have to defend myself on youtube from people claiming that I am militant/rude/spreading hatred because I am critical of religious beliefs and eating animals. I get accused of ad hominem attacks all the time, yet I actively avoid doing that very thing. The issue is that people who hold views close to heart often feel personally insulted when others disagree. We must learn to accept criticism and work to be better communicators, and accept that no matter how hard we try, our words will inevitably be taken the wrong way. TheVeganAtheist forums is a place of respectful (at times heated) discussion and it is better for it. Ive learned a lot, and had my position on a number of issues widened with the input of many of our active forum members. Thank you. Keep up the good work.