• Aceticon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 months ago

    None of that makes sense.

    You’re literally not using Logic (for example “we are improving” does not logically follow from “we make mistakes”), arguing against the very opposite of what I said, constructing straw-men from things I did not say so that you tear them down and trying to support your claims on one thing by making unsupported claims on a different thing.

    That shit is political speech, not analysis.

    • StopJoiningWars@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Learning from mistakes is an improvement. That you’re mad about it doesn’t make it any less true. And clearly you don’t know what straw-men are given I’ve quoted you in my reply.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        The claim “they learned from their mistakes” does not follow from “they made mistakes” and hence is not supported by it - for example, it’s quite common for people to make a mistake and then derive the wrong conclusion for why, hence not learning from it. You’re literally ignoring the part I disputed in your original statement (that making mistakes does not always lead to learning from them) and instead addressing something I did not dispute at all (that learning is an improvement) - absolutely, learning is an improvement, shame that “learning from one’s mistakes” is a stated desire on how things should be from Pop Culture (i.e. “you should learn from your mistakes”), rather than an observed and confirmed causal relation that’s always true.

        Again, shit that isn’t Logic. You adding a claim of madness for my personality really just drives down the point on that.

        As for the straw-man, selective picking of what somebody else wrote (with or without the inclusion of selective quoting) “enriched” by affirmations of your own that go beyond what the other person wrote and are not supported or even implied by it, is literally the most common way to build straw-men.