|
Post by rachel on Dec 23, 2006 21:03:41 GMT
How about innocent until proven guilty? Anyway, despite our differences, I wish you all a very Merry Christmas . I'm off now, to try and sort my house and life out, with 14 people coming Christmas Day. Arrgghh!
|
|
|
Post by abcde on Dec 23, 2006 21:51:58 GMT
How about innocent until proven guilty? Someone's guilty But remember, we're using 'believer logic' here. So I say Tracy is guilty unless she can be proven innocent (which could be established by revealing who the guilty person is). Believers take the illogical stance that psychics' claims are true until someone proves them false (exactly the same as assuming guilt until innocence is proved) - so why can't we turn that twisted logic back on you?
|
|
|
Post by rachel on Dec 23, 2006 21:55:37 GMT
Because the fair rules of the land are 'innocent until proven guilty'. Why should it be different on this forum to the rest of the world? Anyway, I really am off now. MERRY XMAS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR!
|
|
|
Post by antmania on Dec 23, 2006 21:59:17 GMT
Happy Xmas to you Rachel and to all Posters on here.Have a great time over the next week or so and be suitably refreshed. Now.......where are those damned spirits *hic*
|
|
|
Post by Meercat on Dec 23, 2006 22:10:03 GMT
Because the fair rules of the land are 'innocent until proven guilty'. Why should it be different on this forum to the rest of the world? Yep, but youre talking about legal procedure in a UK Court.(not the World) The same place where the defence "someone else did it on my behalf and I didnt know about it", and "i didnt know it was going on" unfortunately falls under "Ignorance is no defence in the eyes of the law"
|
|
|
Post by abcde on Dec 24, 2006 2:13:38 GMT
Because the fair rules of the land are 'innocent until proven guilty'. Why should it be different on this forum to the rest of the world? It's not - it's different in the world of psychic sycophants. That's the whole point It's people like you who break the 'rules' with your twisted logic - you just can't see it! Should I bother to use logic against those who are immune to it? No, probably not.
|
|
|
Post by Me on Dec 24, 2006 9:19:35 GMT
Tut LR .....and loose that little bit of meat in their jaws.. I am surprised at you
|
|
|
Post by Me on Dec 24, 2006 9:22:42 GMT
Intent is also taken into account. To break a rule you will know that you are breaking it,if you do not know that you are breaking it then other considerations have to be taken into account!
Big assumption!
|
|
|
Post by Me on Dec 24, 2006 9:26:27 GMT
Believer Logic...... If you are going to apply logic to any situation,regardless of your viewpoints or where they stem from. whatever name you place upon that logic. It is still logic being applied. It is only within the spectrum of each groups logic to what they perceive is the most effective, that they would then deem to be the correct conclusion.
This does not mean that 100% that groups logic is correct!
|
|
|
Post by shazzz on Dec 24, 2006 11:09:33 GMT
i would love for this thread to be in English.
or least a level of English i understand
|
|
|
Post by abcde on Dec 24, 2006 12:02:03 GMT
Believer Logic...... If you are going to apply logic to any situation,regardless of your viewpoints or where they stem from. whatever name you place upon that logic. It is still logic being applied. You're missing the point. I used the term 'believer logic' as a euphemism for 'lack of logic'. Logic can only be applied one way. If you don't apply logic to your reasoning then you'll end up with false conclusions. For example, believing that all psychics are real until someone proves them false. This just results in people believing in phony psychics (hence the term 'believer logic').
|
|
|
Post by hotchic on Dec 24, 2006 14:07:38 GMT
I am a believer.....but I would not believe in all psychics.
I like men, but there are only a handful that I trust.
|
|
|
Post by Me on Dec 24, 2006 14:08:51 GMT
Believer Logic...... If you are going to apply logic to any situation,regardless of your viewpoints or where they stem from. whatever name you place upon that logic. It is still logic being applied. No I understood your point 100% including the undertones implied within that statement! That is your presumption that believers do not know how to apply logic affectively and in an unbiased manner, in relation to their varying experiences that form a foundation to their opinions of mediums and the paranormal in general. It is only your opinion based upon your presumptions ,that believers & what they deem correct, apply an incorrect method of logic to their conclusions.
|
|
|
Post by Me on Dec 24, 2006 14:09:44 GMT
i would love for this thread to be in English. or least a level of English i understand
|
|
|
Post by abcde on Dec 24, 2006 14:21:24 GMT
That is your presumption that believers do not know how to apply logic affectively and in an unbiased manner No, it's not a presumption. There are endless examples of fallacious reasoning by believers. If there's any presuming going on, it's the presumption that psychic ability exists when it has never been proven and there are other explanations for why people believe in it. It is only your opinion based upon your presumptions ,that believers & what they deem correct, apply an incorrect method of logic to their conclusions. No it's not 'only an opinion' - see above. Believing in psychic ability is based upon (although not exclusively) the fallacies of: Argument to Ignorance and Wishful Thinking. Of course, there's also the perceived 'infallibility of the senses' (i.e. personal proof) which works along with Confirmation Bias etc. This is known - it's not merely an 'opinion'.
|
|
|
Post by lowrider on Dec 24, 2006 14:31:04 GMT
Watch out Kendra. He will unleash his Latin next. This of course from a man who does not know the difference between a psychic and a medium,well if you believe the story's on his web site.
|
|
|
Post by Me on Dec 24, 2006 15:14:01 GMT
No, it's not a presumption. There are endless examples of fallacious reasoning by believers. Actually it is a presumption..I will explain.. For you or anyone else to make a statement and not a presumtion, you have to take into account and prove factually you have done this,how every single believer has formed their opinions,what logic was used and applied to form that judgment in the first instance. Secondly to test all possible alternatives and to prove 100% that the believer in that instant was wrong, and incorrect method of logic was used to interpret the experience or event! I presume....you have not done this. Nor has anyone else, so yes it is a resumption. You cannot make a statement based upon fallible reasoning. There may be endless examples of fallacious reasoning by believers,but this is not concrete 100% proof of the variables every single believer has used and applied..Unless every single believer has been tested,questioned and one by one the foundation they base that reasoning on can be 100% without doubt dismissed. It is OK theorising,but to make it a statement is incorrect to do so. A hypothetical statement yes,but not a statement as it stands alone without the added truth of it being theoretical! I have no doubt there are thousands of theories and possible explanations that can be applied to each case. This does not mean that each one is untrue,nor does this prove that the belief in that event,experience or foundation it is judged upon is incorrect! It is only your opinion based upon your presumptions ,that believers & what they deem correct, apply an incorrect method of logic to their conclusions. yes it is an opinion..see above I would say the confirmation bias would cover all that you have just stated. unfortunately as you are not privy to every process that is applied on whether to accept paranormal explanation or not of each individual concerned who believes in this, and bases there opinion upon this process..you can not state that even personal proof is bias confirmation as that in itself is not bias..it is confirmation. And in so accepting that confirmation after apply various logical conclusions to that situation etc,you nor anyone else have no foundation to state it is biased confirmation. You can only ever presume! Oh really That statement in itself.. it is known..would then involve surely all members of the population including believers. If that statement is correct,then the believers who disagree with the dismissive arguments of paranormal activity,spirit communication etc, would then in turn make that statement obsolete and non factual!
|
|
|
Post by Me on Dec 24, 2006 15:14:30 GMT
Watch out Kendra. He will unleash his Latin next. This of course from a man who does not know the difference between a psychic and a medium,well if you believe the story's on his web site. Thanks for the warning LR
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Jon Donnis on Dec 24, 2006 15:49:42 GMT
I know a lot of sceptics use latin, and personally it is not something i do.
Now I think that I may start using Greek terms, Greek beats Latin in top trumps anyway!
Hell latin came from Greek language anyway!
I have just thought, if using Greek terms means smartness, then me and Mia can be the best!
Maybe someone will give us a Phd along the way!
|
|
|
Post by Koolg on Dec 24, 2006 16:59:59 GMT
It is interesting to note that NONE of the Higgites ever answer any of the points or questions put by anyone else. Thats tell me a lot. Its the old fingers in ears LA LA LA syndrome i30.Report this post to Admin please.com/albums/c301/koolg33/lalala3fo.gif[/IMG]
|
|