How can you debate if you believe in relative truth?

[Tidus44]

Reminds me of Ralph Wiggum when asked what 5-3 is and he replies "My cat's breath smells like cat food".

 

One can ignore the original premise and insert a parameter that was never implied, but this does not prove anything except dishonesty or perhaps the inability to formulate a logical rebuttal.

 

One can also ignore the question, rephrase or introduce new false arguments, but this also does not prove anything, it is simply misdirection. Funny, but it is a common tactic used by the very politicians who imply they know the truth.

 

Not that I don't understand, not everyone is capable of a honest or logical response. Since you are obviously uninterested in intelligent discussion, I'll simply ignore any future posts.

[HeyYou]

Reminds me of Ralph Wiggum when asked what 5-3 is and he replies "My cat's breath smells like cat food".

 

One can ignore the original premise and insert a parameter that was never implied, but this does not prove anything except dishonesty or perhaps the inability to formulate a logical rebuttal.

 

One can also ignore the question, rephrase or introduce new false arguments, but this also does not prove anything, it is simply misdirection. Funny, but it is a common tactic used by the very politicians who imply they know the truth.

 

Not that I don't understand, not everyone is capable of a honest or logical response. Since you are obviously uninterested in intelligent discussion, I'll simply ignore any future posts.

Not familiar with binary are you?

[HeyYou]

So, don't like my argument, so you resort to insults? That's nice. I actually expected better of you. Wouldn't be the first time I misjudged someone.

[Lisnpuppy]

Enough...stop it right there right now or I am just going to close the topic.~Lisnpuppy

[rizon72]

 

 

 

 

It is hard to debate some facts, like 4x3=12, though under the latest educational reform here in the US (Common Core) if you say 4x3=11 and show how you got there, you get credit.

 

Now that is honestly one of the most ridiculous statement to make about Common core that is so misleading to the point it is just total misinformation... Common Core is about providing a consistent and clear understanding of what students are expected to learn so the U.S. can compete on a global level of understanding and education. The problem is regulating the standards effectively and efficiently state by state. Common Core in no way is about providing credit to students just by showing their effort when answers are incorrect...

 

http://www.corestandards.org/

 

I guess... "If you tell a lie often enough, it becomes truth, a truth which is hard to shake even with real facts."

 

 

You obviously never saw this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DW0VxxoCrNo

 

 

lol After watching the short vid you linked it seemed you missed the entire point of her "hypothetical" example. They want students to "explain their reasoning and explain how they came up with their answer." Never once was the video implying in any way shape or form of "giving credit" to students for incorrect answers but more so helping them to understand why they came up with the wrong answers to begin with...

 

 

Color, if you read my original post, you'd see I said "and show how your got there". To me that still doesn't excuse the wrong answer. If you don't get the right answer, its wrong, doesn't matter if you 'knew' how to do it.

[Ghogiel]

So, don't like my argument, so you resort to insults? That's nice. I actually expected better of you. Wouldn't be the first time I misjudged someone.

Arguments are invalid if they rely on a non sequitur.

 

Now one someone might come here and make an argument and say that logic could be the wrong way to form a solid argument. The problem with that is they would have to use logic to demonstrate that as sound XD.

[HeyYou]

Where did my argument contain a non-sequitor.

[Keanumoreira]

Here is a philosophy I follow: perception is the only truth. The great thing about that philosophy is that it is difficult to argue with, for in doing so, you have just exercised that philosophy. :P

 

 

To be honest, the way I see it, all truth is in the eye of the beholder. Everyone uses the Socratic Method to some degree to gain some amount of understanding of a world within a world that we know little about. So is anyone really wrong? Is anyone really right? Can you really prove anything? I'm not disagreeing with Newton's Laws or the Theory of Relativity here, but think about this: the way we understand what is commonly believed to be true ("commonly" being the keyword here) is not all that common. We are all different; we can all look at the same thing or concept but our understanding of it, even if similar in "truth", will not be 100% alive. Perhaps that is why we all believe different things, or the same things, just differently. :P

[Ghogiel]

Where did my argument contain a non-sequitor.

 

 

"Truth" is NOT indisputable. One mans truth, is another mans lie.

 

 

This.

 

It is a bald assertion and a conclusion.

 

All logical leaps are non sequiturs.

[Harbringe]

This whole relative truth according to ones opinion is the dumbest thing I have ever heard as an opening premise . It doesn't work because no matter what anyone says about anything in particular it can always be refuted according to one personal idea of relative truth . Its like an argument that will go on and on and never stop . Sorry people up is up and down is down and truth is truth and a lie is still a lie no matter what your personal or relative opinion . To believe in relative truth is to believe in a lie and is just plain dumb . No wonder politicians have such a field day with the electorate .