Umm … why is this relevant here?
I was taking calcsam’s purported epistemology and evidentiary standards for arguments seriously. I agree it was a bit “guerilla” though.
It is not relevant at all. It’s an ad hominem; calcsam is a theist. I have downvoted it.
The more charitable interpretation is that Silas is saying “Yeah, right, that would totally work. About as well as crossing your fingers and guessing.”
Which is still pretty shitty.
Not ad hominem, ad epistemologiam.
Umm … why is this relevant here?
I was taking calcsam’s purported epistemology and evidentiary standards for arguments seriously. I agree it was a bit “guerilla” though.
It is not relevant at all. It’s an ad hominem; calcsam is a theist. I have downvoted it.
The more charitable interpretation is that Silas is saying “Yeah, right, that would totally work. About as well as crossing your fingers and guessing.”
Which is still pretty shitty.
Not ad hominem, ad epistemologiam.