Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:50 pm
Age wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 4:42 am
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:10 pmThis thread is defined by its first post. That's all there is to it.
EB
If this thread is defined by its first post, then
just about any argument that starts with "As far as 'we' know" could be taken as being valid or invalid.
???
Are you sure of that?!
Yes.
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:50 pmLook at this argument:
Okay
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:50 pmAs far as we know, water is H2O;
Ice is frozen water;
Therefore, Trump is H2O and Vladimir Putin is water.
You say
that is valid?!
I looked at
that argument. Now, why would you, and why did you, ASSUME such a ridiculous thing as this, and then write such a stupid remark as you have here?.
I NEVER said that
that is valid. But if I was ever given a chance to reply to your statement, or given a chance to answer your statement that has a question mark on the end of it, then I would say, No. I NEVER would and I NEVER could say that
that argument is valid until I had clarified some things up with you first.
Did you NOT read the actual words that I wrote, which are in front of you?
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:50 pmAge wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 4:42 am
The CORRECT answer is depended SOLELY upon on who/what is the 'we' you are referring to?
Sure.
Yes.
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:50 pm If you don't know who
we are then I'm not sure who
I am and even who
you are.
Well I do NOT know who/what the 'we' is that you are referring to in YOUR argument.
And, I am pretty sure that you do NOT even know who/what 'I' am' and who/what 'you' are also but that does not really have much to do with what I was saying, which was the CORRECT answer is SOLELY depended upon who/what the 'we' IS that you are referring to.
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:50 pmAnd then there's no need to post anything here or indeed anywhere.
If that is what you now see or believe, then so be it.
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:50 pmAge wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 4:42 am
Until that is made KNOWN how could any one really respond accurately?
Supposed it is "
made known", would
we really know it, though?
At least I would. Then I could correctly answer your question. That is what you are seeking here, am I right?
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:50 pmWe're not discussing soundness here but validity.
Yes I know.
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:50 pmSo, whether there is a "
we" and whether it knows anything is completely irrelevant.
What assumptions are you making to get so far off track from what I am talking about?
If you start an argument with "As far as 'we' know ...", and you want to know whether the argument is valid or not, from another's perspective, then I am telling you from MY perspective I need to KNOW who/what is the 'we' that you are referring to before I could correctly answer your question.
NEVER have I even suggested anything about "whether there is a 'we' or not, nor have I ever suggested any thing about whether the 'we' knows any thing or not. So, I agree with you that THIS is completely irrelevant, and still wonder WHY you would even bring such an irrelevant statement into a discussion where NEITHER things have even been alluded to previously?
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:50 pm Just assume it does,
Just assume WHAT, does WHAT?
By the way I do NOT like to assume any thing whatsoever. So, I will NOT assume any thing here.
If you are unable to or unwilling to answer some simple open clarifying questions, then that is what it is.
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 12:50 pm using the usual definitions of the words used in the argument as can be found in any English dictionary.
EB
Okay but so what?
What the word 'we' mean, in any dictionary, has absolutely NO bearing on who/what the 'we' refers to in YOUR argument.
(I ask the most simplest, straightforward of questions to people, which usually triggers the most off topic, irrelevant - and some times the most stupid and ridiculous of - ASSUMPTIONS, which then those people then start BELIEVING that their OWN assumption is what I am actually talking about and referring to. When it is clearly OBVIOUS that I was NOT.)