12-10-2018, 05:16 PM
(12-10-2018, 03:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually you are the one struggling with the concepts of proper argument.
Words and statements have clear meanings. In this case you want to ignore clear meanings so that you can shift and mold some nebulous "overall concept" to fit your meaning. But that is not the way it works. You can't define meaning based just on what you want it to mean.
My job requires me to make arguments. I would get laughed at if I suggested we ignore the plain meaning of direct quotes just because I want the statement to mean something else to me.
This post is dripping with irony sir. I'm not sure if you're doing this on purpose or if you truly don't realize that you're constantly parsing, twisting, contorting and exaggerating the words of others in order to line up neatly with a narrative that you have created for them. If it's the former, then you are the most dishonest category of poster. If it's the latter, then perhaps you need to re-examine your style closely.
As to your second sentence, I sincerely hope this is not the case, but if it is -- I must question both your effectiveness and the standards required. The arguments that I've seen you demonstrate in multiple posts, in multiple threads, are extraordinarily fallacious, severely lacking in sound premises and usually profoundly short on the honest examination of intent.
If, as you say, it is your job to present arguments, then you should be well aware that to truly find the meaning of a "direct quote" -- the examination of said quote must be evaluated in the overall context of a conversation, for the sake of intention and comparison. To state otherwise is rather an odd assertion, to say the least.
