swansont Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 My view is you've alleged Deutsch's dishonesty without a factual and reasonable basis. According to this the resume said "Class of 2003" and also that he was hired last year, after working on the re-election and inaugural committee, which would have happened in 2004. That would seem to preclude the "in anticipation of a degree" defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustStuit Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 Yes, there seems no logical reason for him to include that he graduated there, let alone be accepted and never metion it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 According to this[/url'] the resume said "Class of 2003" and also that he was hired last year, after working on the re-election and inaugural committee, which would have happened in 2004. Bush-Cheney Reelect was active in 2003. And how are you connecting this fluff to the issue of when Deutsch's resume was issued and transmited? That would seem to preclude the "in anticipation of a degree" defense. Actually, it has nothing to do with the defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 Yes, there seems no logical reason for him to include that he graduated there, let alone be accepted and never metion it. Why? Because swansont said so? C'mon, JS. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aardvark Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 My view is you've alleged Deutsch's dishonesty without a factual and reasonable basis. I point to the absence of any evidence or valid reasoning on your part to establish your case. The factual and reasonable basis that Deutsch used a resume to get a job that had a major untruth on it equals evidence and valid reasoning. I'd go further to say that you're allegations stem entirely from a cynicism (it's human nature to lie) that quite frankly means we wouldn't get along IRL, but that's my own personal view. The allegations stem from Deutsch having been caught lying on his resume. He was caught in the act. Nice and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 The factual and reasonable basis that Deutsch used a resume to get a job that had a major untruth on it equals evidence and valid reasoning. 1. It has not been established that Deutsch's resume played any role in his appointment. 2. How does assuming your conclusion in the premises constitute valid reasoning? The allegations stem from Deutsch having been caught lying on his resume. So the allegation is supported by...um...itself? How is that valid reasoning? He was caught in the act. Nice and simple. And I gather you take that on faith, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 pcs, you have a rather odd definition of faith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aardvark Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 1. It has not been established that Deutsch's resume played any role in his appointment. Oh dear. Please try harder. 2. How does assuming your conclusion in the premises constitute valid reasoning? No assumption necessary. He used a resume with false information. He was caught. Join the dots, it's easy:-) So the allegation is supported by...um...itself? How is that valid reasoning? No. The allegation is supported by the evidence. The false information on the resume. And I gather you take that on faith, right? You can gather that if you want. The rest of us will be happy sticking to the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 pcs, you have a rather odd definition of faith No I don't. Faith is belief without justification--that's the standard definition. Aardvark (and you on more than one occasion) have expressed views devoid of any rational basis--empirical or otherwise. Thing is neither of you seems willing to admit it. Oh dear...Please try harder. Okay. You personally have failed to present supporting evidence. I also suspect you will continue to fail in this regard. No assumption necessary. He used a resume with false information. He was caught. Yes, you need some additional assumptions to make the leap from the discovery of an inaccurate resume to an allegation of fraud. Try again, my friend. Join the dots, it's easy:-) But I don't share your faith. No. The allegation is supported by the evidence. Which is another one of your faith-based beliefs, apparantly. The false information on the resume. Actually, it relies only on the faith that the allegation stands through self-evidence. The resume's inaccuracy is incidental to your argument. You can gather that if you want. The rest of us will be happy sticking to the facts. I think you mispelled "our superstitions" there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aardvark Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 No I don't. Faith is belief without justification--that's the standard definition. Aardvark (and you on more than one occasion) have expressed views devoid of any rational basis--empirical or otherwise. Thing is neither of you seems willing to admit it. Rational basis, false information on resume. Okay. You personally[/i'] have failed to present supporting evidence. I also suspect you will continue to fail in this regard. Supporting evidence, false information on resume. Yes, you need some additional assumptions to make the leap from the discovery of an inaccurate resume to an allegation of fraud. Try again, my friend. False information on resume is fraud. Misrepresenting yourself to enter into a legally binding contract of employment is fraudulent. No assumptions required there. But I don't share your faith. You don't know my faith. Which is another one of your faith-based beliefs' date=' apparantly.[/quote'] Evidence informs my beliefs on this matter. The evidence of the false information on the resume. No faith required. Actually, it relies only on the faith that the allegation stands through self-evidence. The resume's inaccuracy is incidental to your argument. No. The allegation stands because of the evidence. Deutsch used a resume with false information. That is fraudulent, therefore Deutsch is guilty. Reasoning backed by factual evidence. I think you mispelled "our superstitions" there. If ''superstitions'' means reasoning based on factual evidence then sure why not? Come on, try harder. You were amusing me but now you seem to be losing the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 Rational basis, false information on resume. So your argument is that an inaccurate resume is always fraudulent. Without a rational basis for that argument, it's a statement of faith. No assumptions required there. Sure. Inaccuracy where it conserns resume = fraud. That's your assumption. Thanks for finally pointing it out in your own words. You don't know my faith. Yeah I do. False information on a resume = fraud. Evidence informs my beliefs on this matter. No it doesn't. Faith does. If ''superstitions'' means reasoning based on factual evidence then sure why not? No, it means belief held without rational basis. Like yours as far as the discussion is concerned. Come on, try harder. You were amusing me but now you seem to be losing the thread. So I can randomly declare victory and win, too, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 meh, don't feed the troll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silkworm Posted February 12, 2006 Author Share Posted February 12, 2006 This is why I avoid the politics forum. Nothing valued here has anything to do with truth. It's all just marketing. I'll try to avoid this part of the forum more in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 meh, don't feed the troll Another non sequitur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 did i say it was in response to you? actually, depending on how you look at it, it was in response to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 did i say it was in response to you? I assumed it wasn't in response to anything. Hence, a non sequitur. actually, depending on how you look at it, it was in response to you. In what way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 lets see, you are a troll. that's where it came from. until you stop being a troll, i'm done responding to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 lets see, you are a troll. that's where it came from. until you stop being a troll, i'm done responding to you. And it ends...with an ad hom. Nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 it's really sad that stuff like this happens. we should have to take an IQ test before we can register to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 it's really sad that stuff like this happens. we should have to take an IQ test before we can register to vote. 54 percent of American college graduates voted for President Bush in 2004. [1] Do you have some solid evidence supporting your correlation between intelligence and the propensity to elect a President that appoints ID proponents to Nasa PAO? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 college graduation!=intelligence dammit, i said i wasn't going to respond to you in this thread any more. meh, while i'm at it: And it ends...with an ad hom. Nice.no, it was a factual observation, not an ad hom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aardvark Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 Do you have some solid evidence supporting your correlation between intelligence and the propensity to elect a President that appoints ID proponents to Nasa PAO? What a lovely example of a strawman. He made no such correlation, you did, and yet you then ask him for evidence to support the assertion that he did not make. You're starting to amuse me again. Well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcs Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 college graduation!=intelligence IQ, however, is a positive predictor of educational success (Matarazzo, Herman 1984). dammit, i said i wasn't going to respond to you in this thread any more. meh... You're free to stop whenever you'd like. while i'm at it:no, it was a factual observation, not an ad hom. I'd dispute that it is factual, but it definitely was an ad hom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the tree Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 No-one's going to question it and no-one doubts it, so it's factual. Acording to the link you posted, an ad hominem fallacy is has the "basis of some irrelevant fact about the author" and as it was a direct and factual awnser to your question, it was not irrelevant thus not an ad hominem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 IQ, however, is a positive predictor of educational success (Matarazzo, Herman 1984). uh huh. one of my uni friends scored "retarded"(68) in his last IQ test but i'd say hes just as intelligent as me and i scored 120 on that same test. I severely doubt that IQ tests are even remotely accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts