[lit-ideas] Re: Text of bin Laden Tape

  • From: "Phil Enns" <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 01:21:35 -0500

Lawrence Helm wrote:

"No it isn't a non-sequitur."

Yes it is.


Lawrence goes on:

"Yes, I have assumptions as everyone does who speaks or argues and you
can't divest me of my assumptions for the sake of your hypothetical
non-sequitur."

Not interested in divesting anyone of any assumptions.  Just pointing
them out, and noting that they don't contribute much to an argument.
After all, if someone else doesn't share those assumptions, one can
hardly claim that this proves anything.  And yet, that is precisely what
you do, hence the non sequitur.  Why not allow that there are reasonable
arguments for pulling troops out of Iraq, but that you disagree with
them?  Why must people who disagree with you be necessarily either
lacking in understanding or stupid?

I am still curious as to why it matters what spin bin Laden puts on
events in Iraq.  Is the reality of Iraq so tenuous that if bin Laden
were to claim victory, a victory it would be?


Sincerely,

Phil Enns
Toronto, ON

------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: