NationStates Jolt Archive


Next time you pass judgement

Vittos Ordination
09-11-2004, 22:29
Next time somebody on here passes a personal judgement on another member, a candidate, a television/radio personality, how about you go ahead and post the qualifications that grant you the privilege to pronounce judgement.

I think that might limit the flamewars on here.
The breathen
09-11-2004, 22:36
that's a pretty good Idea. hope it works.
Dobbs Town
09-11-2004, 22:37
Would personal experience count as a qualification?
The Black Forrest
09-11-2004, 22:42
Well if the candidate wants my vote, he gets to be judged......
Texan Hotrodders
09-11-2004, 22:43
Next time somebody on here passes a personal judgement on another member, a candidate, a television/radio personality, how about you go ahead and post the qualifications that grant you the privilege to pronounce judgement.

I think that might limit the flamewars on here.

Why don't we just evaluate their arguments instead of asking what their qualifications are?

Example: Given that I have no medical degree, no degree in physics or astrophysics. Given that I advise you not to throw yourself into open space without a spacesuit because fatality will be the result of space's effects on your physiology.

Is my argument somehow invalidated because I don't have the appropriate qualifications? Of course not. My qualifications are irrelevant for the purpose of the argument.
Lunatic Goofballs
09-11-2004, 22:43
Does 'I recognize my own kind' count, ya lunatic?
Superpower07
09-11-2004, 22:48
Judge lest not ye be judged
Vittos Ordination
09-11-2004, 22:49
It seems people on this thread are misinterpreting what I mean. I have no problem with people questioning a persons argument or position. What I am targeting is the "_______ is stupid/fat/dumb hick/pussy/sinner/etc".

These do not belong in any sort of intelligent debate, and I believe that anyone who falls back on personal attacks is usually guilty of being whatever insult they throw out.
Sdaeriji
09-11-2004, 22:51
Since we all know that this is never going to happen, why don't you give up this moral crusade now?
Texan Hotrodders
09-11-2004, 22:58
It seems people on this thread are misinterpreting what I mean. I have no problem with people questioning a persons argument or position. What I am targeting is the "_______ is stupid/fat/dumb hick/pussy/sinner/etc".

These do not belong in any sort of intelligent debate, and I believe that anyone who falls back on personal attacks is usually guilty of being whatever insult they throw out.

I agree. What you describe; those are ad hominem attacks, and invalid as an argument. Unless you're debating the nature of a member's character flaws, which is flamebait, so we wouldn't want to do that anyway...
Vittos Ordination
09-11-2004, 23:06
Since we all know that this is never going to happen, why don't you give up this moral crusade now?

I hoping someone actually tries it, I would love to see someone offer up justification for calling someone a stupid hypocrite. Also I am not big into moral crusades, I just want to see a few less good discussions get ruined by flamebaiters.
Faithfull-freedom
09-11-2004, 23:08
Well when you pass judgement upon someone you fail to understand, you show that you hate them. When you choose to accept and understand them, its called love.
Dobbs Town
09-11-2004, 23:08
Since we all know that this is never going to happen, why don't you give up this moral crusade now?

Wow, now THAT's the defeatist outlook for you...we don't all of us know that this is never going to happen, so why should this poster give up anything now, or at any point? Are you stating your intention to disregard his suggestion? To what end?

It is a laudable goal, and might prove interesting for NSers to attempt. It might just elevate the level and quality of discourse from the schoolyard slagfest we know it to be, more often than not.

Surely this is a good thing, Sdaeriji, and not something to dismiss out of hand.
DeaconDave
09-11-2004, 23:15
I agree. What you describe; those are ad hominem attacks, and invalid as an argument. Unless you're debating the nature of a member's character flaws, which is flamebait, so we wouldn't want to do that anyway...


Ad hominem attacks, whether valid or not, are the basis of NS debate.
Vittos Ordination
09-11-2004, 23:21
Ad hominem attacks, whether valid or not, are the basis of NS debate.

It would be interesting to start a thread where all you use are ad hominem attacks and then try to support them.

DeaconDave you are a liar, you are not in fact a deacon, nor are you religious. I can say this because I have never lied in my life. :D