wilburforce wrote:
I really don't understand how calling his argument, not himself, disingenuous, is a personal attack. I don't see how that is logical at all, and none of the explanations provided have made any sense to me logically. I am not attacking him personally, I am attacking his argument which is unfounded and not based in reality or evidence.
No.
Let's be perfectly clear about this: You attacked him.
You did not call his
argument disingenuous,
which would have been fine, but rather called
him disingenuous (and other things besides) for using the argument.
Had you restricted your comment to the argument,
there would have been no problem.
What you have done in making your case here is to downplay what you actually said and claim that the very clear, very personal nature of your posted words was more or less equivalent to an acceptable argument against an idea. But those are
not equivalent. As has been stated clearly in the rules, attacking the argument is fine, attacking the person is not.
I thought I made my problem with his argument pretty clear, but apparently I didn't choose my wording carefully enough. I will try to do so in future.
26 Dec 2015, 5:33 pm
