HOME | DD | Gallery | Favourites | RSS
| Slenderous
Slenderous
βοΈ
[25479595]
[2013-02-03 18:38:36 +0000 UTC]
"Leedle Leedle Lee"
(Canada)
# Statistics
Favourites: 2717; Deviations: 192; Watchers: 55
Watching: 159; Pageviews: 19934; Comments Made: 1155; Friends: 159
# Interests
Favorite visual artist: Alex GreyFavorite movies: Don't really have any. :P
Favorite TV shows: Trailer Park Boys, The Thick of It, Kenny vs. Spenny
Favorite bands / musical artists: Tool, Rush, Rage Against The Machine, Smashing Pumpkins, etc.
Favorite books: V for Vendetta
Favorite writers: N/A
Favorite games: Wolfenstein The New Order, TF2, Bioshock.
Favorite gaming platform: Don't care.
Tools of the Trade: Mechanical pencils, Prismacolor markers, Sharpies.
Other Interests: Animation.
# Comments
Comments: 621
Heh, remember me Slendy? I deactivated last october
π: 0 β©: 0
Yeah. Hitchens' Razor most definitely applies.
Sorry, gotta reply here, that woman blocked me months ago. Seems like she can't handle rationality.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, shamefur disupray.
They always argue the same way, too. It gets frustrating.
π: 0 β©: 1
Wanna give some help with FCU777? I argue better with an accomplice.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, sure. Although you'll have to do the posting, she blocked all of my accounts by now.
Send me a note with a link to the discussion, and I'll do my best ^^
π: 0 β©: 1
Here you go. 
comments.deviantart.com/1/3932β¦
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh boy. She's in that mode already. I fear there may be no reasoning whatsoever by now, but here's what I'd write:
Cherry-picking: When only select evidence is presented in order to persuade the audience to accept a position, and evidence that would go against the position is withheld. The stronger the withheld evidence, the more fallacious the argument. (Source: www.logicallyfallacious.com/in⦠)
Since you only offered short, simple statements like "the Bible has been proven true", "all the prophecies coming true" and "Since the beginning.", without backing them up in any way with supporting arguments, sources or other kinds of evidence, I am able to simply dismiss them, while adressing every single one of them, therefore I am not cherry-picking.
I can simply dismiss them because since you did not give any evidence for them, I do not require any evidence to counter them, since the philosophical principle of Hitchens' Razor applies:
"What can be ASSERTED without evidence can be DISMISSED without evidence." (Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitchens⦠)
Furthermore, your claim that the bible has been proven true is an extraordinary claim, and as such requires extraordinary evidence (meaning very large amounts of evidence. A few supposedly true prophecies are NOT sufficient evidence, even if you could prove that they were actually fulfilled, which you can't). If you cannot provide such evidence, your claim that the bible has been proven true is to be considered FALSE and can simply be DISMISSED as nonsense. Dismissing it in such a way is NOT cherry-picking.
Learn definitions.
Learn logical reasoning.
Learn debating correctly.
π: 0 β©: 1
Splendid. Thanks again.
π: 0 β©: 1
Aaaaand she went and proved the point. Case closed.
π: 0 β©: 1
Sadly, she's too dense to see it.
π: 0 β©: 2
OH LOL. Now she thinks I'm god-bashing. XD
π: 0 β©: 1
Heh. Yeah, I saw.
"and don't play smart."
Like that's not what she's doing in every single comment. Hypocritical cow.
π: 0 β©: 0
thank you for the watch, llama and point~! ^^
π: 0 β©: 0
long time no see i hope you are well and safe
π: 0 β©: 0
Thank you for the favorite.
I'm glad you find my art brilliant.
π: 0 β©: 0
Thank you for my new pet llama, his name is Steve.
π: 0 β©: 0
Thank you for the llama, mister. Here is one to repay the favor.
π: 0 β©: 1
Why thank you.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
You are welcome.
π: 0 β©: 0
Love your stuff, sir. It was well-deserved.
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm glad you think so.
π: 0 β©: 0
| Next =>