OK, so I try hard not to insult JB this time ... RE: [SPORK] Something I REALLY want John Hall to Try To Understand
Sat, 22 Mar 2003 19:06:55 -0600
On Saturday, Mar 22, 2003, at 14:10 US/Central, johnhall wrote:
> Taking gratuitous shots of invective undermines your claim to return to
> respectful argument, but I'm game.
Fair point. But consider the premises.
> The distinction between just and justified raises the critical question
> of standards of evidence. A very convenient method of avoiding doing
> the just thing is to ignore all the evidence and continually chant that
> you don't have 'enough'.
Another fair point, to which I can only reply: my standards of
evidence rise above jingo and demonstrably false propaganda.
> Furthermore you are not _actually_ arguing that the means (war) are
True. If you were paying any attention at all, you would have
recognized that my arguments are against the MEANS of GETTING TO war,
not the means of DOING war itself. But you are being an intentionally
ignorant and obscurant and stupid fucker (YES: ad hominem) so I expect
no less from you.
> You thus don't have an opportunity to apply the concept
> of the ends not justifying the means.
Sure I do, you're just too stupid to understand this argument.
> Here the ends (removing SH) and
> the means (war to do this) are both justified.
Only by total illogic.
I've had enough of you, John Hall. You can just die in silence, for
all I care. I've extended all the olive branches I can handle to you
at this point. Perhaps later you can redeem yourself with the random /
relevant post, but for now you are untouchable.