My philosophical pet peeves

T Clark

This is just a start:

Having to start a new discussion because all the current ones are lame.

People who accuse me of an ad hominem attack because I’m mean to their ideas or a bit rough with my language. Hey you, yes you… asshole - an ad hominem attack is an attack directly on your person – your intelligence or personal hygiene. If I say “this is the stupidest idea I’ve ever heard,” it may be uncivil, it may be bad philosophy, but it’s not an ad hominem attack. If I say “why should I even consider the stupid ideas of someone as butt ugly as you are,” that is.

More generally, people who respond to an argument by saying it represents a logical fallacy rather than being explicit about what’s wrong with it. First of all, they’re usually wrong. Second, they’re lazy. Calling something a logical fallacy is a way to avoid thinking about what has been said. It short-circuits the process of reasoning. It’s gamesmanship, not philosophy.

Justified True Belief and the Gettier problems. These are the stupidest ideas I’ve ever heard. Why should I even discuss such stupid ideas with someone as butt ugly as you are? Gettier was also very ugly. Here's an actual picture:

Students who come on the forum to try to get us to do their homework for them.

Failure to understand that words are not reality. Example – you’re going to hell because you ate a cucumber. Reference – John 5, 14. “Merchant says ‘getch your cucumbers here.’ Jesus says ‘God, I really hate cucumbers.” Example – I read about a guy who thought workers who were about to lose their jobs because their factory was shutting down shouldn’t be allowed to get together, buy the factory, and run it themselves because it was “communism.”

More specifically, pretending that paradoxes actually mean something and getting all excited that you’ve figured out something important about the nature of reality. Hey, Zeno. Look at me. I’m walking through the fucking door you butt ugly son of a bitch.

People who toss out their turd of an idea and then don’t participate in the discussion after that.

People who disrupt discussions about science with conspiracy theories about how they understand the scientific basis of reality better than thousands of scientists and philosophers working for thousands of years. Einstein was a fraud. Light doesn’t act as both a wave and a particle, Schrodinger just needed new glasses. Pepsi is better than Coke.

Speaking of Schrodinger, people who don't know that whole cat thing was a joke.

I'll see if I can think of others.

The Devils Disciple

When you absolutly destroy someone with strong reasoning and fact, and then at the end of the debate they just say "well i believe im right even though I can't prove it." That said ive been on the loosing sides many times, i like to think that most of the time i might say "hmm ill need to think about that" or "i think you might be right"

T Clark

When you absolutly destroy someone with strong reasoning and fact, and then at the end of the debate they just say "well i believe im right even though I can't prove it." That said ive been on the loosing sides many times, i like to think that most of the time i might say "hmm ill need to think about that" or "i think you might be right" — The Devils Disciple

You've got it backwards. One of my pet peeves is when someone says "hmm ill need to think about that" or "i think you might be right," because then I don't get to feel superior to them. I have to pretend I "respect" them!

BC

have to pretend I "respect" them! — T Clark

Intolerably inconvenient.

Moliere

I wish i knew how to import the pictures from this comic onto our threads... alas, I am a failure.

BUT

http://existentialcomics.com/comic/9

seems apropos

fdrake

↪Moliere

People who say "x fallacy" in response to something you said without explaining why it's 'x fallacy' is annoying.

I think my biggest pet peeve is responding to the letter of someone's argument rather than its spirit.

charleton

People who accuse me of an ad hominem attack because I’m mean to their ideas or a bit rough with my language. Hey you, yes you… asshole - an ad hominem attack is an attack directly on your person – your intelligence or personal hygiene. If I say “this is the stupidest idea I’ve ever heard,” it may be uncivil, it may be bad philosophy, but it’s not an ad hominem attack. If I say “why should I even consider the stupid ideas of someone as butt ugly as you are,” that is. — T Clark

This is total bullshit. And one of my pet peeves.

What they, and you are talking about is INSULTS.
An ad hominem is something entirely different.

Allow me to explain.
A makes an argument
B says that argument cannot be rightbecause you are not qualified, are inadequate, are always wrong,,, etc....

For example.
"The chemical symbol for salt is NaCl."
"Rubbish. That can't be correct because you are not a chemist, but a road sweeper"

charleton

Students who come on the forum to try to get us to do their homework for them. — T Clark

If you hate this one tale a look at https://www.quora.com
If you want some fun answer their questions with a set of common misconceptions.

charleton

I read about a guy who thought workers who were about to lose their jobs because their factory was shutting down shouldn’t be allowed to get together, buy the factory, and run it themselves because it was “communism. — T Clark

Sadly Americans exist whether you believe in them or not. They stand as a warning against stupidity for the rest of the world. Now they have their God. Trump is without a shadow of doubt the single most stupid leader of any country since the dawn of history. He can't read, he can barely write. He's a narcissistic fantasist. ... sorry went off on one there.

CuddlyHedgehog

because all the current ones are lame. — T Clark

That’s not arrogant at all!

People who toss out their turd of an idea and then don’t participate in the discussion after that. — T Clark

There, there, who upset little Clarkie?

T Clark

What they, and you are talking about is INSULTS.
An ad hominem is something entirely different. — charleton

Hmm... I'll need to think about that.

T Clark

Sadly Americans exist whether you believe in them or not. They stand as a warning against stupidity for the rest of the world. Now they have their God. Trump is without a shadow of doubt the single most stupid leader of any country since the dawn of history. He can't read, he can barely write. He's a narcissistic fantasist. ... sorry went off on one there. — charleton

Following up on our earlier discussion, is this or is it not an argument ad hominem? And not on me, but on me and everyone like me.

CuddlyHedgehog

↪T Clark

It's just a fact, Clarkie.

BC

What they, and you are talking about is INSULTS. — charleton

subject/verb agreement error: ...are insults. Pet peeve #20942.
unnecessary punctuation error ...they and you. Pet peeve 20943.

Trump is without a shadow of doubt the single most stupid leader of any country since the dawn of history. He can't read, he can barely write. He's a narcissistic fantasist. ... sorry went off on one there. — charleton

All true, but then you have your Brexit geniuses. Colossal stupidity.

I wish i knew how to import the pictures from this comic onto our threads... alas, I am a failure. — Moliere

You may very well be a failure, but we require more evidence.

Pet peeve #20944: Unsubstantiated claims.

What else don't you know?

In Safari on a Mac, mouse over the image desired, holding the control key, click and select from the options... "copy image address". Then, back in TPF, click on the image button at the top of the text box, and paste the image address. Press GO and presto

There are other ways of doing this.

CuddlyHedgehog

subject/verb agreement error: ...are insults. Pet peeve #20942.
unnecessary punctuation error ...they and you. Pet peeve 20943. — Bitter Crank

Here's the grammar police again:roll:

you have your Brexit geniuses. Colossal stupidity — Bitter Crank

very true..

BC

↪Moliere

Pasting images from this comic series could get out of hand in no time at all!

Moliere

↪Bitter Crank

:D

It is a deliciously fun comic. (thanks for the tip btw)

charleton

↪T Clark

not really.

If anything it would be an ad gentum, or ad populem.
For it to be a fallacy type, I'd have to be reacting against a specific argument. The full phrase of ad hom is fallacies argumentum ad hominem.
But basically it's just an out an out insult of a nation.

charleton

All true, but then you have your Brexit geniuses. Colossal stupidity. — Bitter Crank

Time will tell about Brexit. But I can't think what this has to do with me, or my observations about Trump.
But any nation who elects a president who got fewer votes than his competitor needs it's fucking head examined.

Sam26

My pet peeve is to all who think they know something, including myself. We don't know shit!! I'm still wondering why I'm not a skeptic.

Sam26

Another pet peeve, people who make up their own definitions.

Abdul

A couple of mine:

Using big words and concepts that you don't understand to prove a totally irrelevant point
Having a flawed argument, realizing it, and not admitting it
Someone proving you wrong but you still continue to believe in your wrong assumptions

T Clark

Using big words and concepts that you don't understand to prove a totally irrelevant point — Abdul

Look in the dictionary - This is the actual definition of "philosophy." You're just trying to take the fun out of it.

I was just responding to your A Look into the Mind of God discussion and I thought of something else that bothers me - classifying the question of God's existence as metaphysics.

PossibleAaran

Failure to understand that words are not reality. — T Clark

It seems to me that this is one of the greatest flaws of large swathes of philosophy, academic and otherwise.

T Clark

It seems to me that this is one of the greatest flaws of large swathes of philosophy, academic and otherwise. — PossibleAaran

Agreed. I'm going to put it on my list for a future discussion of it's own.

charleton

Failure to understand that words are not reality. — T Clark

The dubious legacy of Plato.

fdrake

↪T Clark

↪charleton

I'd be really interested in that discussion.

charleton

↪fdrake

Theory of Forms. The notion that objects more or less conform to an ideal. It places the logos above the world of appearances.

CuddlyHedgehog

Failure to understand that words are not reality — T Clark

Not sure what you mean by that. Do you mean words are not facts? Words, as soon as they are spoken, written or typed, no longer exist in one’s mind but become part of the shared reality.

Ilyosha

Edit: This was meant as a sarcastic quip in line with the nature of the thread (flaunting all of my pet peeves in the form of my pet peeves...), but I guess it came across as unhinged. Sorry about that.

T Clark

Hey could you guys help me out with my philosophy homework? The question is: “If Nietzsche were a dentist, what tune would he hum to himself while needlessly extracting patients’ teeth?” The multiple-choice answers are: (a) Wagner; (b) Beethoven; (c) One of his own lame compositions; (d) Trick question: he’d actually be engaging in a wee bit of furious onanism.

Now, I know this seems like an odd assignment, but it’ll make a lot more sense when you realize it’s the final exam question at St. John’s Annapolis, the university that teaches you valuable life lessons like what it’s like to take a lot of speed and read Euclid instead of doing real math. — Ilyosha

This is a philosophical pet peeves discussion. It is generally expected that posts follow the stated theme, although sometimes things drift. One of the pet peeves identified is people asking for help with their homework. If you know that and are being ironic, welcome to the forum. If not, I at least appreciate that you are being out in the open about it.

Whatever, it would make sense to put this in another location.

My philosophical pet peeves

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions