tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post2616406040271208102..comments2024-03-27T09:11:00.450-04:00Comments on Incinerating Presuppositionalism: My August Comments to B.C. HodgeBahnsen Burnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11030029491768748360noreply@blogger.comBlogger49125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-71064445349086079332013-10-17T22:08:48.853-04:002013-10-17T22:08:48.853-04:00Hi Photo,
Perhaps what might "demonstrate&qu...Hi Photo,<br /><br />Perhaps what might "demonstrate" having something "intelligent to the discussion" for Hays would be complete agreement with whatever he says and no questions asked. Whenever I read his interactions with people who don't agree completely with him, I get the very unshakable impression that he's ticked off and wants to use every opportunity to wrestle a person down on the mat and take him out for the count. He clearly wants to win every match, and this usually involves demeaning his opponents with belittling witticisms and biting repartees. It’s as though he simply cannot have an adult conversation with anyone outside the choir. His goal seems entirely to smear atheism and atheists for being atheists. He does this with Arminians and Catholics, too. If he has a family, they probably hate to be anywhere around him. But I have to hand it to him – he’s definitely wise in his own eyes. That makes one pair.<br /><br />Regards,<br />DawsonBahnsen Burnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11030029491768748360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-23295794633517182692013-10-17T21:53:45.158-04:002013-10-17T21:53:45.158-04:00Dawson,
Thanks a lot for your words. I was far fr...Dawson,<br /><br />Thanks a lot for your words. I was far from feeling offended by Hays. I re-read what I said, noticed that there was nothing wrong with it, and my conclusion was that Hays preferred to deal with the apparently easy target, rather than deal with the one who "goes for the kill."<br /><br />I'm happy to see your new entry by the way.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-50267179636703427132013-10-17T09:43:08.397-04:002013-10-17T09:43:08.397-04:00Hi NAL,
Thank you for the heads up on this!
I we...Hi NAL,<br /><br />Thank you for the heads up on this!<br /><br />I went over to Hodge’s blog and saw this entry: <a href="http://theologicalsushi.blogspot.com/2013/10/christianity-doesnt-require-omniscience.html" rel="nofollow">http://theologicalsushi.blogspot.com/2013/10/christianity-doesnt-require-omniscience.html</a><br /><br />I don’t think this is the entry you had in mind (perhaps you had <a href="http://theologicalsushi.blogspot.com/2013/09/he-doesnt-have-to-be-harvard-man.html" rel="nofollow">this one</a> in mind?), but there’s some interesting discussion in the comments between Rian, Steve Hays and Photosynthesis.<br /><br />I have posted a new entry on my blog - <a href="http://bahnsenburner.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-primacy-of-inner-over-outer.html" rel="nofollow">The Primacy of the Inner over the Outer</a> - which documents some of my reaction to a portion of Hays’ remarks that I read there.<br /><br />And Photo, <br /><br />I noted that Hays preferred to ridicule you instead of address what you had written. Such is to be expected from Hays in many cases. But I saw nothing in your comments “demonstrating that you have nothing intelligent to contribute to this discussion,” as Hays hastily stated. Hays prefers that non-Christians take him seriously. And if you don’t, you’ll get his backhanded remarks and condescension in response. Been there, done that, got the blog entries to show it. As my pastor used to say, “Consider the source.” In some cases, this is legitimately rational advice.<br /><br />Okay, gotta run!<br /><br />Regards,<br />DawsonBahnsen Burnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11030029491768748360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-12521268758198545872013-10-16T15:46:11.600-04:002013-10-16T15:46:11.600-04:00A commenter named "Rian" is taking B.C. ...A commenter named "Rian" is taking B.C. to the cleaners. I'm standing back and enjoying the show, although I still think B.C. get his metaphysical cart before the epistemological horse. NALhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12244370945682162312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-51830848301531560772013-10-14T03:34:40.297-04:002013-10-14T03:34:40.297-04:00@ActionJackson
If you go over to that blog you wi...@ActionJackson<br /><br />If you go over to that blog you will see in the comments that QH made a mess of defending objectivism. He got dismissed out of hand. I suspect he is simply sore that Dawson did not come to the rescue. This is what I noticed almost right away, the brazen attempt to manipulate people and why I took such a harsh stance with him. Anyway peace. Justin Hallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17804641315202800289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-67281128469632183642013-10-13T15:24:03.668-04:002013-10-13T15:24:03.668-04:00"Dawson Bethrick has made it his business lo ..."Dawson Bethrick has made it his business lo these many years, to defend and espouse Objectivism, and claim it's correct, while other worldviews like Christianity are false."<br /><br />I'm pretty sure his blog is about "Incinerating Presuppositionalism". Not about "defending Objectivism against blogs from any and all commenters." <br /><br />The argument against mystic presuppositionalism what brought me here.ActionJackson864https://www.blogger.com/profile/16636476428009956875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-91312223651077859842013-10-12T12:30:14.515-04:002013-10-12T12:30:14.515-04:00Oh my god... I have just read through a comment lo...Oh my god... I have just read through a comment log over at AynRandcontrahumannature. Our QauntumHaecceity comes off like some sort of objectivist version of Nide only with better grammar and spelling. Speaking of which sorry again QuantumHaecceity about miss spelling your handle. It was sloppy of me and I offer no excuse only an apology. That being said I now better understand your motives. You're pissed because we wont do your work for you. They roundly disregarded you over there as a troll, which you are and now you want us to fight your battles for you. Mmmmm.... yeah not going to happen kid. Justin Hallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17804641315202800289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-28162373906281545932013-10-12T11:29:35.887-04:002013-10-12T11:29:35.887-04:00@QuantumHaecceity
All for you buddy
http://court...@QuantumHaecceity<br /><br />All for you buddy<br /><br />http://court-of-reality.blogspot.com/2013/10/an-open-challenge-to-quantumhaecceity.htmlJustin Hallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17804641315202800289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-36780074324535322172013-10-12T01:46:51.506-04:002013-10-12T01:46:51.506-04:00Still dropping links instead of presenting argumen...Still dropping links instead of presenting arguments in your own words I see. As long as its links we get from you it wont be the substance you want from us, just scorn. Its simple, present them in YOUR OWN WORDS, damn slacker. Justin Hallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17804641315202800289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-52982829075214574122013-10-11T23:53:13.613-04:002013-10-11T23:53:13.613-04:00@Ydemoc
"If you can't, than you are with...@Ydemoc<br /><br />"If you can't, than you are without a brain"<br /><br />Cool beans bro. And, what have we to say on your part about these below:<br /><br />http://aynrandcontrahumannature.blogspot.com/2013/09/ayn-rand-epistemology-45_18.html#more<br /><br />http://aynrandcontrahumannature.blogspot.com/2013/09/ayn-rand-epistemology-45.html#more<br /><br />http://aynrandcontrahumannature.blogspot.com/2013/08/ayn-rand-epistemology-44.html#more<br /><br />http://aynrandcontrahumannature.blogspot.com/2013/03/ayn-rand-epistemology-31.html#more<br /><br /><br />I mean, I don't know how many times I have to say it. I'm interested in the substance and the intellectual arguments of Nyquist being dealt with. You guys keep dragging it to personal insults and personal based red herrings.<br /><br />Just deal with the substance or disengage. Simple as.<br /><br />It's devastatingly telling you guys are ignoring interacting with those critiques, but rather wallow in this childish nonsense.QuantumHaecceityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10939627623915545949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-61324981923772606022013-10-11T23:46:44.871-04:002013-10-11T23:46:44.871-04:00@Justin Hall
"I am not an objectivist as Yde...@Justin Hall<br /><br />"I am not an objectivist as Ydemoc would tell you"<br /><br /><br />Good lord really? That makes your behavior even more bizarre and ridiculous.<br /><br />Dude, just stick to substance Justin. Stop all this whining and crying, and middle school cynicism.QuantumHaecceityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10939627623915545949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-15744842882202101692013-10-11T23:26:15.849-04:002013-10-11T23:26:15.849-04:00"Hell I may even write about you over on my b..."Hell I may even write about you over on my blog as a text book example of bad behavior in online forums."<br /><br /><br />Hahaha! Who cares. That mess is so silly and petty. Right up your alley with the other dark cynicism and whining.<br /><br />Still haven't engaged anything intellectually. Which is devastatingly telling. But you do decided to ratchet up the worthless personal attacks by making a blog post about it.<br /><br />Oh no, Justin Hall made a blog post on his blog to whine somemore. Oh no. LOL!<br /><br />I wonder if it crosses your mind just one iota, how utterly childish and infantile that is. To actually take negative junk, and not only continue to engage in it, when the other person has explicitly stated they want to stick to substance, but to vindictively try to make your insults and whining more public, like a child throwing a temper tantrum in his room, but then wants to do in in front of other people, so his tantrum can get more attention.<br /><br />QuantumHaecceityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10939627623915545949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-12215797115132463332013-10-11T23:19:52.663-04:002013-10-11T23:19:52.663-04:00QuantumHaecceity,
You wrote: "If Bethrick wa...QuantumHaecceity,<br /><br />You wrote: "If Bethrick wants to avoid hypocrisy, and stay true to his tenets, he needs to man up and either take them on Intellectually, or admit Objectivism is wrong, and take this blog down."<br /><br />That's hilarious! Really? Those are really the only two options, huh? I'm sure you can see the fallacious nature of asserting such a forced choice. If you can't, than you are without a brain.<br /><br />Can you see it now, now that I myself, in the interest of illustration, have engaged in it? If not, here's some light reading for you: <br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma<br /><br />Ydemoc<br />Ydemochttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03498165330193613762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-62658468125549842222013-10-11T22:48:49.616-04:002013-10-11T22:48:49.616-04:00I heard you, Robert. Thanks for the link.I heard you, Robert. Thanks for the link.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08459235385224111176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-44280558001800141272013-10-11T22:34:46.921-04:002013-10-11T22:34:46.921-04:00I am not pleased with how my comments get broken u...I am not pleased with how my comments get broken up by the 4096 character limit so for everyone's benefit as well as to bring the trollish behavior of QuantumHeccentiy to the attention of a wider audience I have posted my entire reply in one unbroken post over at my blog if it interests you<br /><br />http://court-of-reality.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-troll-quantumheccenity.htmlJustin Hallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17804641315202800289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-63595331305140093572013-10-11T22:26:32.468-04:002013-10-11T22:26:32.468-04:00continued... there reason this did not post is tha...continued... there reason this did not post is that it exceed the 4096 limit, oh well<br /><br />All I have seen you do HERE is try and engineer a confrontation between two other people and then act like a frustrated spoiled child when things do not go your way.<br /><br /><br />"Even more, it makes him look foolish, and others on here, as they refuse to directly engage, refuse to go over to "enemy territory". Refuse to face the 600 pound gorilla in the room. But rather stay over here in the safe confines of friendly territory. And act like nothing is wrong with Objectivism. Banging on about how Objectivism is a coherent worldview, while not a dew drop of intellectual refutation has been made to all those attacks by Nyquist, from those like NAL or Daniel."<br /><br /><br />What do you know of me? I am not an objectivist as Ydemoc would tell you. When I said objectivism provided me with a coherent world view I meant it. Coherent however does not automatically equate to accurate or useful, only that it was internally consistent. Objectivism compared to Christianity is however a breath of fresh air and I was once once very much infatuated with it and to this day maintain in interest. However I gradually came to the conclusion that objectivism's model of ethics was too limiting and counter to human nature. I even attempted to do what you are doing here and get a colleague of mine to debate Dawson on this point. My colleague however had the good grace and maturity to do his own work and came to Dawson with his own arguments. It is unfortunate that like so many before he threw a fit when his conclusions were to accepted by Dawson on his mere says so but I digress.<br /><br /><br />My point is QH, I have gone over to the blog in question and I have read it. I even found some of his objections to objectivist epistemology thought provoking. The issue here is not the intellectual merits of objecitivsm however. The issue here is your behaviour. You have acted like a troll and an infantile man child when Dawson did not jump at your instigation. If as you have said he did not have to go over there, that you were in effect simply providing him with the information and leaving it up to him then that would have been the end of it. However you continue on and still continue on which as I have said speaks loudly to us if not in so many words that you are at core frustrated that Dawson has not done your bidding.<br /><br /><br /><br />"Justin Hall's middle school cynicism is laughable."<br /><br /><br />You may laugh all you like, it will trouble me not at all. My cynicism which started to take root long before middle school as been born of my keen observation of human nature and motives. From what you have said and done here you have cemented in my mind the identification of yourself as yet another internet troll.<br />Justin Hallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17804641315202800289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-61974037090391345522013-10-11T22:24:39.210-04:002013-10-11T22:24:39.210-04:00the second part of my original reply to QH
“Which...the second part of my original reply to QH<br /><br />“Which is that he is not being true to the tenets he has espoused these many years. He's running away from engaging them and their powerful refutations of Objectivism, all the while still espousing Objectivism, and acting like no one has refuted it or made any critique's against it, that call it into question as a coherent and correct worldview.”<br /><br /><br />Mr Dawson does not have to due your bidding, despite your words you clearly carry the attitude that he does or you would have dropped the matter some time ago.<br /><br /><br />“Justin Hall is being utterly ridiculous. Another example of this is when he says "man up and present an argument yourself", and "If you want sport you are going to have to actually play, that is participate".<br /><br /><br />Which is laughably retarded since I've done just that. I have confronted and been confrontational to Greg and them on the Ayn Rand contra human nature blog. I have participated, I have engaged them intellectually and directly.”<br /><br /><br />But not here you have not. I don’t care what you have done at other blogs. You came here and threw down the challenge and when called on it simply posted links to elsewhere. You challenge here was not your responses to Greg but Greg's arguments themselves. His words, not yours. This is trying to vicariously win through the efforts of others. It is dishonest. If you believe the author of objectivismcontrahuman nature has made valid arguments then you should be able to reiterate them here in your own words. In other words act like an adult and do your own work. If you are willing to do so fine, let the matter rest then.<br /><br /><br />"Which makes Justin Hall look foolish as he is accusing me of not doing something, I've already done. Repeatedly."<br /><br /><br />All I have seen you do HERE is try and engineer a confrontation between two other people and then act like a frustrated spoiled child when things do not go your way.<br /><br />continued...Justin Hallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17804641315202800289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-63446836115797305942013-10-11T22:22:52.286-04:002013-10-11T22:22:52.286-04:00@Quantum
there was supposed to be a second part ...@Quantum <br /><br />there was supposed to be a second part to my post but for some reason it has not posted. I'll try posting it again later. In response to what you have said. You just don't get it. Dawson is not your play thing and toy to do your bidding. He does not have to prove anything to you or anyone else. He will spend his time anyway he so desires. I am an atheist and atheism's viability is not contingent on me going around and posting on every christian apologist site some troll thinks has made or scored some points. That is the beginning and end it. If you think the arguments are good ones post them here in your own words. <br />As for you, I will continue to call you on your trollish behavior as long as you persist in it. This is how things are going to proceed. Dawson wont do what you want and I will continue to ride you over being an internet troll. Hell I may even write about you over on my blog as a text book example of bad behavior in online forums.<br />Justin Hallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17804641315202800289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-82849055008677759702013-10-11T21:11:39.822-04:002013-10-11T21:11:39.822-04:00@Justin Hall
Justin that's a cool story bro. ...@Justin Hall<br /><br />Justin that's a cool story bro. All your demonizing, whining about childishness, and pathetic cynicism aside, the fact still remains that Dawson has refused to engage the links I've provided, you have refused to intellectually engage them, NAL has, Daniel has, nor has Robert Bumbalough, or Ydemoc.<br /><br />Fact still remains, as far as I know, none of you have gone over there and personally dealt with them, but stayed over in friendly territory, which can easily be construed as cult like cowardice.<br /><br />So all your blah, blah, blah aside, and concentration on the personal, the thing that matters, the intellectual part; the part of substance, still remains untouched by your likes.<br /><br />And that's what matters. What matters is this right here, and I'm making it EXPLICIT, so there is no misunderstanding:<br /><br />Dawson Bethrick has made it his business lo these many years, to defend and espouse Objectivism, and claim it's correct, while other worldviews like Christianity are false.<br /><br />Dawson Bethrick has either explicitly or implicitly, felt that Christianity and Presuppositionalists are dishonest and not facing the truth that their worldview is false and flawed, as he has supposedly shown on his blog countless times.<br /><br />Now, the shoe is on the other foot, and the Ayn Rand contra human nature blog has supposedly shown Objectivism to be false and flawed, and it looks like for all the world, Bethrick is evading it like the plague, and running like De La Hoya against Felix Trinidad. <br /><br />If Bethrick wants to avoid hypocrisy, and stay true to his tenets, he needs to man up and either take them on Intellectually, or admit Objectivism is wrong, and take this blog down.<br /><br />This is the bottom line. And all that other stuff you're whining about, and all those 5th grade insults, is just irrelevant and a waste of time, to be frankly honest with you Justin.<br /><br />That's just the bottom line. I'm hoping you don't come back with another post filled with cynicism and insults.<br /><br />You, or any of these other people, need to either get it done intellectually, or leave it, and Objectivism alone. It's just that simple.<br />QuantumHaecceityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10939627623915545949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-50822110695941254272013-10-11T14:43:55.413-04:002013-10-11T14:43:55.413-04:00@All
as always I noticed some spelling and gramma...@All<br /><br />as always I noticed some spelling and grammar mistakes only after hitting the publish button. Apologies to all including even you QuantumHaecceityJustin Hallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17804641315202800289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-32052696738387724702013-10-11T14:33:50.613-04:002013-10-11T14:33:50.613-04:00@QuantumHaecceity
“It didn't do the trick. Al...@QuantumHaecceity<br /><br />“It didn't do the trick. All I saw Justin doing is whining and demonizing. Which frankly means nothing to me.”<br /><br />I would not say demonize, I would say I have insinuated that your behavior on this blog to date has been juvenile and trollish. If that is demonizing so be it.<br /><br />“He seems to be apt to do that to anyone that he doesnt like, or that is not clearly on his side. Like I think he did with Nide and Michael David Rawlings.”<br /><br />Really? You want to play the victim card by grouping yourself with those two individuals? Micheal David Rawlings had a very public emotional melt down right here on this blog. His behaviour was far from adult and most unbecoming. Of Nide, Chris Bolt, accomplished christian apologist author once said basically “please shut up already you are making us look bad”. Do you really want to be viewed as being in the same league or category as them? If so then you have earned all the insults you believe yourself to be a victim of.<br /><br />“In fact, Justin Hall's post is, frankly, very retarded. He acts like I'm hiding my desire to get Nyquist and Bethrick to interact and engage each other. When I'm trying to openly get that done! LOL!”<br /><br />Retarded? Is this the epitome of your vocabulary when it comes to comebacks? And you accused me of junior high cynicism... but whatever. My point was not that you were being clandestine about it but that you appear from your behaviour here to date to share a certain moral quality with the individual I recalled from my past. Namely a schadenfreude pleasure in seeing conflict between others. To speaks directly to the issue I have with you which not objectivism but your behaviour here. This is not about intellectual debate, this is about you... you personally and your trolling immature behaviour.<br /><br />“Then, he childishly demonizes this as "trying to get them to fight", which is retarded since I already told Bethrick, he didn't HAVE to deal with them intellectually. I even put that word in all caps for emphasis. Which shows that I don't see it as some entertainment, or a fight, but as I already explicitly said, it's about Dawson not evading the reality of the situation.”<br /><br />And yet you came back when It became clear that Dawson was not going to go running over there to put out the fire at your insistence with bombastic claims that Dawson had fortified and that by proxy he had all but admitted that objectivism was in ruins. Your words<br /><br />“You either need to man up, and take on the Ayn Rand contra human nature blog in full, or admit that Objectivism has been put to ruins and discard it”<br /><br /> Note that you were first to use the term "man up" Not I. <br /><br />continued....Justin Hallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17804641315202800289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-35051848501541126362013-10-10T19:30:59.207-04:002013-10-10T19:30:59.207-04:00@photosynthesis
Cool story bro. Meanwhile, while ...@photosynthesis<br /><br />Cool story bro. Meanwhile, while you're banging on about how your insults weren't insults, you still have not rendered a dew drop intellectually on the issues at hand.<br /><br />Which is telling. Although I must commend you for not resorting to cursing as usual. It's good to see, at least there, you can show some class and self-restraint to at least some extent.<br /><br />Looking over your posts, I can tell it's very hard for you to not insult people. As you did to Hodge, and countless times, and if I'm not mistaken, to Michael David Rawlings, and Nide. And now to me.<br /><br />Well look, if you're not capable of intellectual argumentation, can you at least explain your belligerence in the light of the fact that, as far as I know, you're not even an Objectivist. Which, to me, is rather bizarre.(bizarre from the standpoint of you getting your underwear in a bunch over something you don't even believe in or self identify as)QuantumHaecceityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10939627623915545949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-46649185555918945882013-10-10T19:19:44.195-04:002013-10-10T19:19:44.195-04:00@Ydemoc
It didn't do the trick. All I saw Jus...@Ydemoc<br /><br />It didn't do the trick. All I saw Justin doing is whining and demonizing. Which frankly means nothing to me.<br /><br />He seems to be apt to do that to anyone that he doesnt like, or that is not clearly on his side. Like I think he did with Nide and Michael David Rawlings.<br /><br />In fact, Justin Hall's post is, frankly, very retarded. He acts like I'm hiding my desire to get Nyquist and Bethrick to interact and engage each other. When I'm trying to openly get that done! LOL!<br /><br />Then, he childishly demonizes this as "trying to get them to fight", which is retarded since I already told Bethrick, he didn't HAVE to deal with them intellectually. I even put that word in all caps for emphasis. Which shows that I don't see it as some entertainment, or a fight, but as I already explicitly said, it's about Dawson not evading the reality of the situation.<br /><br />Which is that he is not being true to the tenets he has espoused these many years. He's running away from engaging them and their powerful refutations of Objectivism, all the while still espousing Objectivism, and acting like no one has refuted it or made any critique's against it, that call it into question as a coherent and correct worldview.<br /><br />Justin Hall is being utterly ridiculous. Another example of this is when he says "man up and present an argument yourself", and "If you want sport you are going to have to actually play, that is participate".<br /><br />Which is laughably retarded since I've done just that. I have confronted and been confrontational to Greg and them on the Ayn Rand contra human nature blog. I have participated, I have engaged them intellectually and directly.<br /><br />Which makes Justin Hall look foolish as he is accusing me of not doing something, I've already done. Repeatedly.<br /><br />Even more, it makes him look foolish, and others on here, as they refuse to directly engage, refuse to go over to "enemy territory". Refuse to face the 600 pound gorilla in the room. But rather stay over here in the safe confines of friendly territory. And act like nothing is wrong with Objectivism. Banging on about how Objectivism is a coherent worldview, while not a dew drop of intellectual refutation has been made to all those attacks by Nyquist, from those like NAL or Daniel.<br /><br />Justin Hall's middle school cynicism is laughable.QuantumHaecceityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10939627623915545949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-70037239076081575672013-10-10T16:37:04.134-04:002013-10-10T16:37:04.134-04:00This is not an adversarial conversation. QH and Ny...This is not an adversarial conversation. QH and Nyquest are nice people. I think they're wrong, but there's no value to me in expending the effort to review Nyquest. Curi has already shown Nyquest's work is loaded with ad hominem, appeal to authority, division and composition fallacies. Have a great day. Best and Good. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03469718358131331499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11714522.post-66629831445018997322013-10-10T14:40:12.204-04:002013-10-10T14:40:12.204-04:00Greetings friends: Nyquist is refuted.
http://www...Greetings friends: Nyquist is refuted.<br /><br />http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=13408&hl=nyquist<br /><br />http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=13408&p=186303<br /><br />He argues against Rand and the Objectivist philosophers because he finds Objectivism offensive. But as Photo pointed out, that's his problem. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03469718358131331499noreply@blogger.com