For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Sure it makes sense. That's why I am using it.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:27 pm Non-sequitur doesn't make sense outside of that context. Or at least you'd have to present whatever alternate usage you're employing that you feel makes sense.
Wagers on whether I'm surprised that you won't attempt to present anything non-evasive?Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:28 pmThe non-argumentative, non-fallacious and non-Philosophical use of non-sequiturTerrapin Station wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:27 pm Non-sequitur doesn't make sense outside of that context. Or at least you'd have to present whatever alternate usage you're employing that you feel makes sense.
You mean like you are evading my questions with non-sequiturs?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:29 pm Wagers on whether I'm surprised that you won't attempt to present anything non-evasive?
What question do you believe I evaded? What you could do instead is explain why the answer I gave doesn't count as an answer in your view.Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:29 pmYou mean like you are evading my questions with non-sequiturs?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:29 pm Wagers on whether I'm surprised that you won't attempt to present anything non-evasive?
Ok, Freud.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:31 pm This is really all just about you getting bent out of shape in the past that something(s) you presented in a philosophy context were basically torn apart with objections. That's why you basically avoid presenting anything. That way your ego can't be hurt that way again.
I know you have a gold medal in playing stupid. No need to flash it around.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:31 pm What question do you believe I evaded? What you could do instead is explain why the answer I gave doesn't count as an answer in your view.
Not bothering is an option, obviously.Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:34 pmI know you have a gold medal in playing stupid. No need to flash it around.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:31 pm What question do you believe I evaded? What you could do instead is explain why the answer I gave doesn't count as an answer in your view.
And yet, here you are. Though you've switched strategies to playing a psychologist now.
I'm not saying me not bothering. As I said, "What question do you believe I evaded? What you could do instead is explain why the answer I gave doesn't count as an answer in your view." If you don't want to bother, okay. <shrug>
You evaded the question on which I called out your non-sequitur.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:38 pm I'm not saying me not bothering. As I said, "What question do you believe I evaded? What you could do instead is explain why the answer I gave doesn't count as an answer in your view." If you don't want to bother, okay. <shrug>
You'd need to explain why the answer I gave doesn't count as an answer in your view.Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:39 pmYou evaded the question on which I called out your non-sequitur.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:38 pm I'm not saying me not bothering. As I said, "What question do you believe I evaded? What you could do instead is explain why the answer I gave doesn't count as an answer in your view." If you don't want to bother, okay. <shrug>
Because the premise of the question rests upon a contradiction.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:40 pm You'd need to explain why the answer I gave doesn't count as an answer in your view.
Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:16 pmNon-sequitur.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 2:15 pm Because a world independent of referrers is the majority of what's the case.
How could any referrer be interested in a world without referrers?