Україна | Ukraine 🇺🇦

11 readers

1 users here now

Welcome to Ukraine!

Ласкаво просимо в Україну!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

WSJ: Ukraine could be forced to compromise. With support for the war against Russia waning in the U.S., the counteroffensive may define a new border. (archive.ph)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

275 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thank you for providing us with a summary of logical fallacies you like to use. Would you like to comment on the content of the article now?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"i know you are but what am i?" is not much of an argument.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Would you like to comment on the content of the article now?

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

interesting how you keep changing the subject whenever you're losing the argument.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm doing no such thing. My original reply was:

feel free to actually address what the article is saying

I've consistently been making the same point while you've been trying to derail it with irrelevant nonsense because evidently only thing you know how to do is to try and change the subject when you're losing the argument.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

i prefer not to waste my time on speculation from biased sources.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you actually cared about your time you wouldn't have made 50 vapid comments in this thread. And once again, every source is biased because humans have biases inherent in their world view. Saying that a source is biased is completely meaningless. All that says is that you are unable to argue against biases different from your own.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Whataboutism

Whataboutism or whataboutery (as in "what about…?") denotes in a pejorative sense a procedure in which a critical question or argument is not answered or discussed, but retorted with a critical counter-question which expresses a counter-accusation. From a logical and argumentative point of view it is considered a variant of the tu-quoque pattern (Latin 'you too', term for a counter-accusation), which is a subtype of the ad-hominem argument.[1][2][3][4]

The communication intent is often to distract from the content of a topic (red herring). The goal may also be to question the justification for criticism and the legitimacy, integrity, and fairness of the critic, which can take on the character of discrediting the criticism, which may or may not be justified. Common accusations include double standards, and hypocrisy, but it can also be used to relativize criticism of one's own viewpoints or behaviors. (A: "Long-term unemployment often means poverty in Germany." B: "And what about the starving in Africa and Asia?").[5] Related manipulation and propaganda techniques in the sense of rhetorical evasion of the topic are the change of topic and false balance (bothsidesism).

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That doesn't even apply in this context. 😂

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"nuh uh!" is not an effective form of argument

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's a good thing I'm not using it then.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"nuh uh!" is not an effective form of argument

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

Thank you for your amazing insight.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Winning an argument is done with facts, not with linking random wikipedia articles.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Moving the Goalposts

Moving the goalposts is an informal fallacy in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded. That is, after an attempt has been made to score a goal, the goalposts are moved to exclude the attempt. The problem with changing the rules of the game is that the meaning of the result is changed, too.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Linking random wikipedia articles

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

congratulations on identifying wikipedia articles

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You and your bot are cluttering this thread with contextless stuff.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

you and your pointless complaints are cluttering this thread with irrelevant whining

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago

Pretty rich of you complaining about cluttering the thread when you have not made a single constructive comment, and just keep spamming here. You're like a random noise generator.