On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 11:03:03 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 22:04:48 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
I'm not confused, but you're attempting yet another personal attack,
which
is pretty low-brow.

I've posted the facts. Your response was to try and put me down...
unsuccessfully, however.

I've told my son before that he was not a careful thinker. It was not
an attack. It was an honest critique. But, then it's my contention
that those that won't recognize their shortcomings won't be able to
correct the same. You are not a careful thinker. You inferred a
proposition from my comment that was not implied.


Firstly, that's an intensly cruel thing to say to someone.
No, it's not. You're invested in histrionics.
Saying to your
son?? Good gosh! Secondly, you don't know me near as well as you
supposedly
know your son. Based on a few posts, it seems hardly likely that you would
know me well enough to make that judgement. I think you just prefer to put
people down who don't agree with you 100%. Oh, and you're a very rude
person. Like I said, low-brow.

My apologies. I'll amend my original indictment. You have
demonstrated at least one instance of poor thinking. It's an odd
thing that you can liberally charge me with cruelty while you take
umbrage with being taken to task for poor thinking. But I must remind
myself that you are thinking poorly.


I have not and you're just being rude. I'm not sure why. What's your agenda
here? You made the statement that your treated your son to the same sort of
behavior. What was your agenda with him? Do you think it really helped him
or did it just make you feel better about your own supposed superiority over
him. How anyone could say that to a child is beyond me.

You are either thinking poorly, or you are retreating to sophistry. To
wit, I did not say that I was rendering a severe criticism to "a
child," as though it were an adult verses a juvenile. I offered an
honest criticism to a young man. And that young man understood the
spirit in which that criticism was given and did not take offense.
Even still, if he had taken offense and had reciprocated with a
criticism of me to vindicate himself, he would be guilty of the tu
quoque logical fallacy in an instance of poor thinking.

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access