Posted by Lou Pilder on February 13, 2013, at 8:33:53
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-byepstandrap » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on February 12, 2013, at 22:46:19
> I remain under the impression that it was me who had asked questions of you rather than the other way around. They were rather simple ones. Since you chose to avoid answering them, I will pause my participation along this thread. I feel that you either lack sufficient interest in resolving your chronic complaints, or perhaps simply have no respect for me or my questions as not to bother answering them directly.
>
>
> - ScottFriends,
It is writte above here about me by Scott.
But what really is in his message to readers here about me? Can you see it?
Scott uses the fallacy of false dilemmma toward me here. And it is allowed by the administration to stand here even though accusations toward another are not supportive, but Mr Hsiung states here that support takes precedence. That could muddle one's thinking as to what support means here, does it not? You see, psychologists have studied how hate is promulgated in a community by the community leaders. But do you want to join the hate posted here toward me and suffer the huge psychological effects indicated by hatred allowed in a community? The accusation that I could have no respect for someone is confrontational. And confrontations being allowed by the leader here can harm people trying to overconme depression and addiction. Confrontations in a community like this could lead to death of the soul, death of the spark that could light the light of peace to lift one out of the darkness of hate and depression. My friends, wake up. See what is plainly visible being allowed here toward me. See how Phil recognises it and posted about how he could not rise out of the ashes of depression as long as he was a part of it. Take Phil's lead here.
Friends I should say, how can anyone get well when hate can be considered supportive? I say that any b**b can write slander and hate when it is allowed by the leader of the community. It takes more thinking to see how the hate is stabbed into another here on the guise of support.
Let us look a little more into Scott's statement which is fallacious on it's face and accusative to its core.
The fallacy of false dilemma uses the black and white thinking of "either or" thinkng. Here are the two
A.you either lack sufficiant interest in resolving your chronic complaints
OR, perhaps
B.simply have no respect for me or an questions as not to bother answering them directly.
Now what is presenterd is that either A is true or B is true WHEN BOTH CLAIMS CAN BE FALSE. This is the falllacy of {false dilemma}. The fallacy leads to the thinking that if claim A is false, then claim B must be true. That is the fallacy, for B and A can be disjoint and both false.
I am sorry that people are led to a path of fallacious thinking here and that antisemitic statements are allowed to stand here and hate toward me is also allowed to stand, even though the leader has stated that one match could start a forest fire. My friends, one match can start a forest fire and when one knows that and allows the fire to spread, then do not they also spread the fire?
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:1034274
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20130109/msgs/1037986.html