Author Topic: Madeleine McCann: Mari Luz Cortes connection, fact and fiction.  (Read 1971 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Robittybob1

  • Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 15386
  • Total likes: 2387
  • Wisdom and understanding please.
    • The Lord Jesus - search for Madeleine McCann
Re: Madeleine McCann: Mari Luz Cortes connection, fact and fiction.
« Reply #180 on: November 01, 2018, 07:08:11 PM »
You are right.  It was.  I agreed with you.
I still allow criticism of the subject.  You could say "I think your understanding of the issue is incorrect", but not "I think you are incapable of understanding the issue".
What are you doing to find Madeleine?

Online Davel

Re: Madeleine McCann: Mari Luz Cortes connection, fact and fiction.
« Reply #181 on: November 01, 2018, 07:15:14 PM »
I think this debate is in response to a post made by SIL (now deleted) but I thought I'd let SIL know why I deleted the post IMO it was an "ad hom" argument.

Makes sense
UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED ALL POSTS ARE MY OPINION

Offline slartibartfast

Re: Madeleine McCann: Mari Luz Cortes connection, fact and fiction.
« Reply #182 on: November 01, 2018, 10:32:46 PM »
I still allow criticism of the subject.  You could say "I think your understanding of the issue is incorrect", but not "I think you are incapable of understanding the issue".

Well explained.
It is a lack of contrition that makes a person who has done wrong fixate on being proven blameless.

Offline Carana

Re: Madeleine McCann: Mari Luz Cortes connection, fact and fiction.
« Reply #183 on: November 05, 2018, 11:06:54 PM »
Put it this way I am trying to understand it and apply the rule that arguments should not be "ad hominem".

"ad hominem

adverb & adjective
1.
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
"an ad hominem response"
2.
relating to or associated with a particular person.
"the office was created ad hominem for Fenton""

The question "Perhaps you don't understand what it says?" is questioning a person's understanding and their potential to understand.
IMO it is definitely "directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining".

Kick the ball, not the player.