Religion

marylandblue

(12,344 posts)

64. Yes, and you asserted that I made a fallacy

Tue Sep 25, 2018, 03:37 PM

Sep 2018

and asserted that fallacies required intent, which means that you were certain of my intent as well.

I did not intend to make any fallacies, therefore I could not have made one. If you don't believe me, you are calling me a liar.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

73 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

When Prophets Come Alive [View all] guillaumeb Sep 2018 OP

Muhammad, Jesus, Mary, Buddha, Rumi didn't exist. AZ8theist Sep 2018 #1

Rumi most certainly did exist cvoogt Sep 2018 #3

Someone claiming to be a "mystic"... AZ8theist Sep 2018 #5

I am not saying he claimed to be a mystic cvoogt Sep 2018 #7

William Davies, Sun Myung Moon, and David Koresh Major Nikon Sep 2018 #6

And you have a right to your own belief. guillaumeb Sep 2018 #9

There is little reason to think that Muhammad did not exist. rogerashton Sep 2018 #31

Mythical or historical figures, who MineralMan Sep 2018 #2

Mostly I agree cvoogt Sep 2018 #4

Who would read Rumi to Trump? guillaumeb Sep 2018 #11

Tell that to the 85% of your fellow humans guillaumeb Sep 2018 #10

I think I just did. MineralMan Sep 2018 #12

Well, no. Actually you told it to the small population at DU, guillaumeb Sep 2018 #13

Uff da! MineralMan Sep 2018 #14

Of course, Gil's immense fan club don't post their opinions at all. Mariana Sep 2018 #17

So secretive, in fact... trotsky Sep 2018 #20

I yam out here in the general population. 🤔 No secrets. eom sprinkleeninow Sep 2018 #27

Gil has explained that some of those Mariana Sep 2018 #30

I do encourage him publicly here. As it is evident. sprinkleeninow Sep 2018 #43

You are the only public member of his fan club marylandblue Sep 2018 #35

So GUIL is a partly secret or prosecuted prophet? Bretton Garcia Sep 2018 #38

Yes. Persecution is an occupational hazard of being a prophet. marylandblue Sep 2018 #42

So maybe Guil is an ancient prophet "come to life," literally? Bretton Garcia Sep 2018 #46

Okay I can dig it. Only I have no inkling of who the others are. sprinkleeninow Sep 2018 #44

The nice thing about the internet is that they can all come here marylandblue Sep 2018 #15

Well, they could. guillaumeb Sep 2018 #16

Well, I don't expect that, of course. MineralMan Sep 2018 #32

Argumentum ad populum fallacy. trotsky Sep 2018 #18

Funny, coming from you. guillaumeb Sep 2018 #19

Point out the fallacies I've used, gil. trotsky Sep 2018 #21

I just did. guillaumeb Sep 2018 #22

Good lord you don't even understand what the fallacies are. trotsky Sep 2018 #23

Were you addressing yourself? guillaumeb Sep 2018 #24

Not when you use it incorrectly, no. trotsky Sep 2018 #25

This may, or may not, help: guillaumeb Sep 2018 #26

Yet that's not what you're doing, gil. trotsky Sep 2018 #29

No, it did not help. guillaumeb Sep 2018 #34

The narrative that the religious beliefs of the RCC (i.e., canon law)... trotsky Sep 2018 #47

And in case you have forgotten, guillaumeb Sep 2018 #50

But you didn't acknowledge it being a religious belief. trotsky Sep 2018 #53

So a post about RCC Canon Law is not about religious belief? guillaumeb Sep 2018 #56

I agree it's illogical. But it's been your stance. trotsky Sep 2018 #57

I was speaking of your assertion, not mine. guillaumeb Sep 2018 #58

Because you haven't answered. trotsky Sep 2018 #60

But I did answer, guillaumeb Sep 2018 #62

Please link to these alleged posts. trotsky Sep 2018 #63

Do you agree or disagree with my bolded statement, guillaumeb? trotsky Sep 2018 #73

That's why I named Guillaumeb's fallacy after you marylandblue Sep 2018 #36

I am flattered, but confused. guillaumeb Sep 2018 #37

Your claimed intent is irrelevant marylandblue Sep 2018 #39

Your response is fallacious, unless you can prove some type of mind reading ability. guillaumeb Sep 2018 #40

After claiming intent is part of every fallacy, and that I could not impute intent to you marylandblue Sep 2018 #41

Your response dismissed my explanation because you claimed to have an insight into my intent. guillaumeb Sep 2018 #49

Check. You can question other people's intent, but nobody can question yours. eom. marylandblue Sep 2018 #51

I question, but you made an asssertion. eom guillaumeb Sep 2018 #54

Check. marylandblue Sep 2018 #59

No, you asserted that in spite of my statements, guillaumeb Sep 2018 #61

Yes, and you asserted that I made a fallacy marylandblue Sep 2018 #64

Circularity in evidence. guillaumeb Sep 2018 #65

The circle includes you, so I take it you admit your intent? marylandblue Sep 2018 #66

No, I am outside of the circle. guillaumeb Sep 2018 #67

You just made the same claim here marylandblue Sep 2018 #68

No, I claimed to be a mind reader. eom guillaumeb Sep 2018 #69

Which means you claimed to know his intent marylandblue Sep 2018 #70

If someone chronically engages in whataboutism and tu quoque, guillaumeb Sep 2018 #71

You have your own patterns which allow others to intuit your intent marylandblue Sep 2018 #72

guillaumeb's fallacy trotsky Sep 2018 #48

Did "Muhammad, Jesus, Mary, Buddha or Rumi" have any flaws? trotsky Sep 2018 #8

I do not necessarily belive in profits Doreen Sep 2018 #28

It is simplistic, guillaumeb Sep 2018 #33

😍 sprinkleeninow Sep 2018 #45

Beautiful Thoughts Karadeniz Sep 2018 #52

A nice response. guillaumeb Sep 2018 #55