A pure insult isn't an argument ad hominem, because it isn't an argument. An argument most have some intrinsic logic directed against the ideas or have some support on facts. Like saying his arguments on freedom are irrelevant because he had slaves.
An insult, at most, might be a preparation for an argument ad hominem.
An insult is an opinion. An argument is an opinion. It's a statement of fact. Facts can be valid or invalid. An argument ad hominem is still an argument. If it is fallacious, then it weakens the argument because the facts they represent are invalid or irrelevant. Calling Jefferson a hypocrite about his opinions about freedom knowing he was a slave owner, doesn't necessarily invalidate his opinion, but it calls many things into question and should not be used to strengthen a contemporary modern argument about freedom on its own merit because it's cliche. |
|
|
|
HAHAHAHA.
A MA GAWD. Watching Huobi makes me imagine how them chinese boys are sitting behind their PC's.
HO LEE FUK. WE TEECH EM WESTELN PEOPLE SOME POOPIE OF THEY OWN YES.
Racism aside, it's a fair assessment. |
|
|
|
|
Gawd, someone let me talk to Stefan Molyneux about this. I'm sure he would try to champion this line of thinking.
|
|
|
|
Calling someone an hypocrite isn't an argument, is an insult, may or may not be justified. But of course, as all insults, it's ad hominem.
This makes no sense. Of course ad hominem is an argument, it may be a fallacious one, but it's still an argument. If it also serves to point out another fallacy, then it may be a valid argument. This is getting so sophomoric and nothing to do with my points about buying drugs from strangers. I would pay to see someone argue this in public in front of cameras. It would be worth the laughs you would get from (insert argument ad populum here). |
|
|
|
With freedom comes freedoms we do not agree with.
You hit the nail on the head. "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -Jefferson Carry on. Said the slaveholder. Carry on. Argumentum ad hominem Calling one a hypocrite is not ad hominem. No, but claiming his opinion is invalid because he's a hypocrite, is. Argument from authority then. I didn't use this quote to strengthen my case. He merely put it to words rather well (and just stealing it is bad) And I impuned his moral authority. Your argument is subjective and invalid. |
|
|
|
With freedom comes freedoms we do not agree with.
You hit the nail on the head. "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -Jefferson Carry on. Said the slaveholder. Carry on. Argumentum ad hominem Calling one a hypocrite is not ad hominem. No, but claiming his opinion is invalid because he's a hypocrite, is. Argument from authority then. |
|
|
|
With freedom comes freedoms we do not agree with.
You hit the nail on the head. "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -Jefferson Carry on. Said the slaveholder. Carry on. Argumentum ad hominem Calling one a hypocrite is not ad hominem. |
|
|
|
With freedom comes freedoms we do not agree with.
You hit the nail on the head. "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -Jefferson Carry on. Said the slaveholder. Carry on. |
|
|
|
|
Most of 'murikan history is whitewashed. Fifty years from now some kids will buy a book that mentions "Bit-Coin was a poorly managed economics experiment filled with observational bias."
|
|
|
|
To people defending Silk Road:
Do you really put things in your body that you have no idea where they came from? Aren't you worried about hot shots? I know they have a rating system, but is it worth trusting with your life?
I don't put drugs in my body - but if I did, and lets say I was a drug addict (and so compelled to use, so to speak) I think I'd rather trust someone selling drugs with a proven track record and who had established a relationship of trust with individuals in the same predicament as myself. What has any of this to do with bitcoin ? Bitcoin is "good" because its not used in transactions where the purchased product is contraband ? Bitcoins "high moral ground" was never based on this, for me at least. Using fiat to acquire illegal drugs in the traditional fashion [ie. cash to a Machiavellian gangsters flunkey], certainly is able to claim no moral victory whatsoever. In other words, "I don't know so I'll go along with a tiny new fad that failed." With freedom comes freedoms we do not agree with.
The moral high ground includes tolerance of other people's freedoms.
You know something has created more freedom when the "bad" part of it is the fact that some people are now free to do "X" that you do not agree with.
That's right, and to protect society, those abusing freedoms will have their freedoms mitigated. Those are called statutes and referred to as "laws". |
|
|
|
|
To people defending Silk Road:
Do you really put things in your body that you have no idea where they came from? Aren't you worried about hot shots? I know they have a rating system, but is it worth trusting with your life? They are after all, DRUG DEALERS. They are not doctors or even trained chemists. If you're going to buy potent substances like that, don't you think you ought to at least know where and how they live? Bitcoin is creating some crazy notions about how society should be and Silk Road is one of the most insane. Is that all we have here anymore is scammers, drug dealers, and one real actual chick?
|
|
|
|
|
Can you imagine what could be accomplished if we didn't have egos?
|
|
|
|
|
Life is short. Do what you can. Hope for the best.
|
|
|
|
it's about understanding Bitcoin as a whole; the technical aspects plus the economic incentives involved. if he fails to understand either one of those, he fails to understand Bitcoin.
The same can be said for economists who dismiss BTC. They fail to understand the technology behind it. Funny thing is when you think about it, they fail to understand the economics behind it too. Funny, but not surprising at all.  People with a degree in economics will be among the last to truly understand the economics behind Bitcoin. Too much disinformation posing as knowledge stands between them and understanding. Now Secret Squirrels destroying non counterfeitable cryptocurrencies with stealth addresses.  |
|
|
|
I never understood why China dumps their bitcoins when news of bitcoins being banned hits. If China banks ban buying bitcoins with fiat doesn't that mean the bitcoins they're
holding become more valuable and therefore more reason not to dump?
They don't have my derp coins, does that make them priceless? |
|
|
|
price will never go below 570 again.
The logarithmic overlay verifies this. |
|
|
|
|
If China is correct in their assessments about Bitcoin, then Western nations will likely follow suit.
|
|
|
|
Stupid question: is this 100% compatible with the coinprism implementation of colored coins?
No, it isn't compatible with CoinPrism. Although we might add support for CoinPrism colors some time later. So it's Betamax vs. VHS all over again? If I understand it correctly, Coinprism uses a centralized server, while chromawallet does not. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
