Three Rights Make a Left

Here a thought: the name of God given in the bible is "Yahweh". I understand that the exact meaning of that word is unknown, but I've read that it can be interpreted as "that which is." If "is" means what I think it does, then it would be hard to deny the existence of "that which exists". Sort of a "cogito ergo sum" for theology -- "That which is, IS!!!" If you suitably define your terms, anything is possible! Good is bad, recession is boom, mediocre sophistry is philosophy. <= (warning... this is sarcasm.) Given this definition, I suppose I'm a believer, though I'm not sure we can know what "that which is" IS, relative to anything else. On the other hand, it's not difficult to be "atheist" with regard to an anthropomorphic god -- the one on a throne in the clouds with white robes and all -- or any variation of that, regardless of whatever philosophical accessories are attached. Bu...

I. (A) If Republicans block President Obama's economic plans, then (B) the economy will not improve. II. (B) if the economy doesn't improve, then (C) the people will blame President Obama. III. (C) If people blame President Obama, then (D) they will vote for his opponent in the election. IV. (D) If people vote for President Obama's opponent, then (E) Republicans will take the White House. Obviously... Republicans want to block any plan that might improve the economy. If you really want to know who to blame for the continued malaise of the economy, look no further than the GOP.

I didn't write this... it was posted on an AOL music forum in 1992. Lots of flame wars were breaking out in early days of social networking. This is a really good synopsis of rules of debate and logical fallacy. If this were a disease and could become an epidemic, we could all be well again! ---------------------- THE ORIGINAL POST ------------------------- When arguing a case or examining the arguments of another, look for these common fallacies. Avoiding these problems makes a case stronger. Further, finding these fallacies in other's statements can make your rebuttal easier. Argue the point, but don't belittle the person. The " Straw Man " fallacy is committed when an arguer distorts an opponent's argument for the purpose of more easily attacking it. This often happens when someone quotes another member out of context. " Circular Reasoning " occurs when stating in one's proof that which one is supposed to be proving. The ...