Re: Chariots of the gods? (fwd)
Deus Ex Machina (x8h1@MUSIC.STLAWU.EDU)
Fri, 4 Oct 1996 17:48:17 -0400
Jesse Cook wrote:
(much has been cut along the way, to save both the readers [and] myself
the circular and [*]ad hominem[*] arguments of Mr. [Cohen].)
*Only if you were ignorant, as you apparently are
*It would be useless. You are uneducable.
*you are only displaying your ignorance again.
*Gawd, Cohen! How did you get a PhD with that level of reading
*I'm sure groans of disappointment were illicited by this statement
*You have finally got something right
*As far as "cluttering the list" is concerned, don't feel bad: Matthew D.
Joanis, alias "Deus Ex Machina" and Gary D. Goodman, alias "sap", do it all
*Call me back after you graduate--if you graduate. As it is you're just
being what you are--sophmorish.
*What a joke. As usual, you jumped in with both feet at the beginning
wihtout knowing what you are talking about. For you to have stayed out
altogether would not have been long enough.
*Oh, you are so smart! You can read!
*Oh, oh--not so smart after all. You can't read
*Very juvenile; but, then, not surprising in an undergraduate
*I say it is--want to make something of it?
*Juvenile as usual
*Are you contradicting *The Cambridge Encylopedia of Language*? On what basis?
*I won't dignify this shit with a reply on list
*How often, dummy?
Every since I resubscribed to this list serve I have been confronted with
the daily posts from Mr. Jesse Cook, engages in debating almost everyone on
this list. From what I gather just about anyone who has posted a response
to a thread has at least once been called ignorant or wrong. Most of the
time there is never an explanation why. He consistently references
philosophy, debate, and types of fallacious arguments. He accuses others of
fallacies yet he never concedes that he too is quilty of them. Above I have
compiled but a few of his statements, in no particular order, from postings
both on and off the list. I surely am guilty of making remarks that I
shouldn't have -- I admit it (granted they were in response to some less
than proper remarks made to me.) I am curious as to whether Mr. Cook will
admit to it as well. As near as I can tell many of his defenses of his
comments have been made up entirely of these remarks as above. That tells
me that his arguments are indefensible im most cases. At one point in a
post Mr. Cook says "Your logic is in disarray here." As evidenced from the
above remarks I don't think it would be too much of a stretch to say that
it is Mr. Cook's logic that is in disarray for he continually makes ad
hominem, ad verecundiam, and other sorts of fallacious arguments. And
occasionally as I think is quite evident through a read of his posts he
commits the gravest of all logic sins-- he contradicts himself. I put it to
the members of Anthro-L what do you think?
Matthew D. Joanis '98
St. Lawrence University
"Ipsa scientia potestas est"