Ok, because you got your ideas out of a cereal packet, I'm going to correct you.
1. I was not using inductive reasoning at all. You admitted that "you would have wrote the words themselves", and made the FALSE assumption that I was trying to make an argument that because you subscribed to these views, that you are a psychopath/terrorist/serial killer. In fact this is not true - you chose to create a "Straw Man" (go look it up, you might learn something) and totally ignore the issue at hand. I DID ask you to distinguish your views from the manifesto of a paranoid schizophrenic, narcissistic criminal. You chose to ignore that.
2. You talk about deductive reasoning, yet have NOT ONCE shown any capacity to do so. Your argument here (apart from the straw man, see above) has not presented a single fact (unless you include horses...) nor demonstrated any form of logical analysis. Let's make a list of the informal Fallacies used by you so far....
-Argument from Ignorance
-ad hominem (ooh, a latin one, you'll like that!)
-Begging the question
-Confirmation bias
-False Attribution
-Kettle Logic
-Proof by Assertion
-Red Herrings
-Probably a few Slippery Slopes too. But not even sure there's enough argument for it to even be a slope...
3. In actual fact, if you want to accuse me of an Informal Fallacy, I'll happily own up to using an "Appeal to ridicule" in "proving" that you are indeed, literally, a troll. Warts and all. Amusingly, I used exactly the same "deductive reasoning" you claimed to use to support your "truth".
4. I really should listen to my mum more. She's already told me how pointless this all is. Please don't eat me, troll!
Reply With Quote
