Hian, you honestly could've just said nothing under the sun could convince you to change your opinions and left it at that without getting all holier than thou about the whole thing and basically saying my opinion is invalid because it sounds too much like something you don't believe in and therefore isn't worth responding to, which seems like a rather fallacious argument. Maybe if you explained why you don't agree with that way of thinking since responding to everything else you said apparently meant nothing, we actually would've gotten somewhere. After all, you can't just dismiss something purely because you don't agree. It's pretty clear any further debate with you would be a waste of time. Just try to be nicer about expressing your opinions in the future alright? I've brought that up with you before.
A.) I didn't say your opinion is invalid - I said I'm not inclined to accept it when you don't argue your presuppositions. For all I know your argument might hold perfect water, but you've so far to provide me the actual argument - only the assertions that would follow from its conclusion.
B.) I am not saying nothing under the sun can change my mind - I'm saying your way of arguing right now won't, and you've given me nothing to suspect that's going to change.
C.) As for it being worth responding to - did you even read my post? I said I already wrote out a full reply and that you can have it if you want to. That's still the case, but instead of saying "Okay hian let's have this conversation" and moving forward in a format that won't clog up this thread you accuse me of being "holier than though" and not being nice.
To that I'll give you the same challenge I gave the last person, possibly you, who made that claim - find me a concrete example of me being mean to you and I'll think about changing my attitude. As it is, you seem to be conflating "mean" with being disagreement not wrapped in pillows.
As it is, I also framed my reason for wanting to cut this exchange short for the sake of saving YOUR time, as well as mine.
Take that into consideration will you before you run off on the assumption that I'm just being mean and dismissive.
Also, there's no fallacy in me not wanting to re-engage in a debate I've done dozens of times before because you give me the impression that you're only going to say things I'm already familiar with. It' not a fallacy because it's not an argument. I'm not saying you're wrong - I am simply saying I am not sure I can spend the time to stick around and find out.
Starling, I have nothing against you personally, and I respect your opinion and your intellect. End of story. I am not saying this disagreement means I think you're dumb and ignorant or anything to that effect. Quite the contrary, I hold your opinions on this forum, along with the likes of Twilight, Forcestealer, Octo, and Lex in high regards. On this though, I don't see us agreeing and I don't feel compelled to try to change your mind, and I would understand if you weren't particularly interested in changing mine either.
However, given your lengthy reply I didn't just want to roll over as if I agreed by omission, and I also wanted to inform you that I had an actual reply for you should you want it, whilst giving you an impression of what that reply would entail so you would have a better idea of whether or not you could be bothered to continue the exchange. Again, that offer still stands.
Perhaps, in having clarified that, you can now try to afford my posts with a slightly higher degree of charity?
