Thursday, October 04, 2007

Notable Quotable - Non-Responsiveness

The Testimony of the Man
"if a man is not willing or able to defend his own arguments, he is not worth all that much time dealing with publicly" (source)

Thrice (at least) the man's arguments were rebutted by the present author
(link) (link) (link) (link)

The man's unwillingness or inability to defend his own arguments was demonstrated
(link).

Thus, according to the man, the man is not worth all that much time dealing with publicly.

On the other hand, the man finds plenty of pretexts (link) (link) (link) to mention a certain elder whom he claims has "ignore[d] literally a dozen or more of my in-depth critiques of his work" (source).

Finally, from the same man comes the claim: "Two times refuting his charges is more than enough. He wouldn't deserve any further attention or publicity if he wants to engage in a one-way monologue / preaching exercise. He can always preach to his buddies. Why should I waste my valuable time?" (source)

One assumes that the elder about whom the man is fond of complaining has reached a similar conclusion. Indeed, the man himself states (speaking about the elder):

"If he chooses not to respond to a critique (or to my two challenges to engage in debate in his chat room), it's because his critics are idiots. If I choose to not respond to some [opposing] screed, it is because I am supposedly an idiot and a coward. See how it works (the [other side] is always at fault, any way you look at it)? Very convenient double standard there, isn't it?" (source) (side identification and link to the two challenges omitted)

The present author notes that this creates an interesting (is it triple or quadruple?) standard.

-Turretinfan

4 comments:

  1. Thus, according to the man, the man is not worth all that much time dealing with publicly.

    Great. Then why do you persist?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Cute.

    For one thing, I don't believe you. I don't accept your judgment.

    But you don't have that out, do you?

    -Turretinfan

    ReplyDelete
  3. The latest missed opportunity to deal with doctrinal issues here (link).

    -Turretinfan

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dear Zog,

    I appreciate your kind words.

    -Turretinfan

    ReplyDelete

Comment Guidelines:

1. Thanks for posting a comment. Without you, this blog would not be interactive.

2. Please be polite. That doesn't mean you have to use kid gloves, but please try not to flame others, even if they are heretics, infidels, or worse.

3. If you insult me, I'm more likely to delete your comment than if you butter me up. After all, I'm human. I prefer praise to insults. If you prefer insults, there's something wrong with you.

4. Please be concise. The comment box is not your blog. Your blog is your blog. If you have a really long comment, post it on your blog and post a short summary of it here.

5. Please don't just spam. It's one thing to be concise, it's another thing to simply use the comment box to advertise.

6. Please note, by commenting here, you are relinquishing your (C) in your comments to me.

7. Remember that you will give an account on judgment day for your words, including those typed in comment boxes. Try to write so you will not be ashamed if it is read back before the entire world.

8. Stay on topic. If your comment has nothing to do with the post, email it to me (my email can be obtained through my blogger profile), or simply don't post it.

9. Don't post as "Anonymous." If you are going to post anonymously, at least use some kind of recognizable "handle," so we can tell you apart from all the other anonymous folks. (This is moot at the moment, since recent abuse has forced me to turn off "anonymous" commenting.)

10. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you; and abstain from doing to others what you would not wish upon yourself.