By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
DonFerrari on 22 February 2018
Edit Thread
JWeinCom said:
DonFerrari said:

1 - So are you worried about the reviewer that is misrepresenting and interpreting the game to fulfill a SJW agenda?

2- I really don't think there is more than one website for every 7 habitants on earth.

3 - So you are worried about the historian being correct, but not enough to care and check as you did OP?

You should follow more topics in this site, as there is a lot of pro-SJW stuff and distortions to support it in several posts and topics. But if you haven't seem ok, since you don't like both distortions I'm ok.

I got to it based on your answers and portrayal, so even though it was a hyperbole (exaggerating to show it doesn't make sense, I believe it is called reduction to ridiculum), but yes I stand corrected.

1.  I'm not worried about the reviewer, but my lack of concern has nothing to do with the reviewer's agenda.  If the review was on a website I actually used, I might care.  

2.  Don't think that was the relevant part of what I said, but you'd be surprised.  http://www.internetlivestats.com/total-number-of-websites/ 

3.  This was a pretty easy thing to check.  The amount I cared was proportionate to the amount of effort it would take to investigate.  To actually check the historian's accuracy, I would have to start sending emails, research 1600s Czech Republic, and so on.  

In other words, I cared enough to click the review and read it.  I don't care enough to engage in a research project.  I'd say that's pretty typical human behavior.

4.  Looking at the hot topics on the front page, there are 4 that are to one extent or another complaining about sjw stuff.  Two of them I'd say are generally fair, one (this) is misleading, and one is absolutely batshit.  I see no topics actually promoting any kind of social justice.  That's not to say there's not stupid stuff on both sides within the topics, but on this site, it seems like the anti-sjw people are the ones really pressing the issue.  Of course, that's just what I notice, and I'm not claiming to be perfectly unbiased.  Could be certain things are flying under my radar.

5.  It's reductio ad absurdum... but that's not the same thing as hyperbole.

In a valid reductio ad absurdum argument, the "exaggeration" has to actually be a logical and necessary extension of the original argument.  For example, if I said "Nintendo games are always better than Sony games" and you said "Then you're saying Animal Crossing Amiibo festival is better than Uncharted 4?" Then that would be a valid reductio ad absurdum argument because the exaggeration would actually have to be true if my premise were true.  If I said "Nintendo games are usually better than Sony's" and you said "Then you're saying Animal Crossing Amiibo festival is better than Uncharted 4?" then that would not be a valid reductio ad absurdum argument, because that exaggeration would not have to be true if my premise were true.

In this case, your hyperbole didn't necessarily follow from what I was saying.  That's an appeal to the extremes fallacy.  In general, reductio ad absurdum arguments only work when someone takes an extreme and rigid stance.  Otherwise, it doesn't work.

But, if you stand corrected, then that's fine.  

1 - ok

2 - Yep it was just me making fun of your billions... surprised that it really spiked that high, there may be a plethora of shit on that count =]

3 - Nope, even reading the comments from the review on EG would give you the answer, also the fact that the reviewer "talked to one historian" instead of fact checking, writing all the historian said and other things that would undermine his already flimsy speculation. Because he tries to say the realistic portray is based on "you can't prove there weren't black people over there" while his presented evidence is that "perhaps there could have been if one black person had detoured from the silk road all the way to that small land and got someone pregnant". Which in fact would make in quite few generations a lose of any significant color against the normal tan from peasants daily on the field. All the research you would have to do is called thinking.

4 - funny because on my front page I rarely see things that aren't either gaming or shitting on Trump... at this moment besides this topic there is another one talking about race that I didn't even entered but probably is a batshit contest on what configure a racial determination.

 

5 - Hyperbole isn't the same thing reductio ad absurdum for sure. Still that is one way to do it.

Amplifying what you said to the extreme from what I can tell is a reduction ad absurdum, since if just pushed further from what you said (since you didn't say anything on the contrary or that could invalidate the inference at the time).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."