Learned Hand
Posts: 214 Joined: Oct. 2009
|
For what it's worth, the two comments I was trying to leave before I realized the conversation was terminated with prejudice:
1. Because the rest of the sentence was not ironic. Try to keep up. . . . Then why do you constantly launch character attacks at those who disagree with you. You are both a liar and a hypocrite.
I'm sorry that you think I "constantly launch character attacks." I don't think I do. That's why I asked you to cite some of the "dozens of comments" you mentioned, because I'd be alarmed if I was coming off that way.
Speaking of irony, do you think it's ironic that you (a) rise the subject of irony, (b) accuse me of "launching character attacks," then ( c) call me a liar and a hypocrite without pausing for breath, in a thread in which you've called people who disagree with you credulous, idiotic, fascistic, hypocritical, liars, etc.?
I make a conscious effort to be civil, especially in heated conversations. I have to remind myself sometimes that I'm not always successful, and I certainly can be a jerk. But I make an honest effort, and I think that's reflected in the way we've conducted ourselves here and elsewhere. I've defended you at AtBC; you've called me a liar and a hypocrite.
Well, it's your party. You can say whatever you want about whomever you want, ban anyone who questions your standards of conduct, and then ban anyone who questions the banning. But like I said, I'd be pretty comfortable showing a stranger this thread as an example of how I conduct myself among strangers who disagree with me. Would you?
You once wrote, "Simple charity demands that we assume our opponents are acting in good faith, and this requires us to deal with their arguments at face value. I am certain this is how they would want to be treated, and I hope that someday they will apply the golden rule and extend the same charity to us, instead of simply assuming we are liars and attacking us on that basis alone."
I think you're finding that an easier standard to articulate than to achieve.
2. You get a 38% change of being right. RDW gets a 68%. He’s willing to bet you as many times as you want. Still think it’s a decent bet?
No, not the game you describe. The one I described is, for the reasons I set forth. That's how gambling works--whoever sets the rules makes the money.
I articulated my game because I think it gets at the significance of these data. A 38% chance that last year was the hottest year on record is actually pretty meaningful if we look at the total span of all years with recorded temperature data.
|