When do you admit to being wrong?

[Funkyterrance]

I hate to mar the serenity of that last post but can we please lock this thread right here and witness "the perfect ending"? I will gladly delete this post if my wish is granted.

[fadedpsychosis]

I hate to mar the serenity of that last post but can we please lock this thread right here and witness "the perfect ending"? I will gladly delete this post if my wish is granted.

ah, if only I could do that in real life, freeze time before I stick my foot in my mouth... alas, for I was seemingly born with foot-in-mouth disease...

aaanyway, I'm not quite sure how my name got drug into this but ok, I'm game
for starters: funky, you're being a little too broad with the term 'ad hominem'.
from dictionary.com
1. appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.
2. attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.
basically my problem with your usage is this: attacks on ones character are not ad hominem when they are not used in lieu of a proper response to an argument... it's just mudslinging at that point

again as to hypocracy: about half the times in this thread (rounding down because I'm attempting to be neutral) you accuse woodruff of ad hominem (not a few times incorrectly) you then deride his character instead of countering his claim: the very definition of ad hominem

lastly

For the record, I've never heard Woodruff admit he was wrong. If cornered, he resorts to either redirecting the conversation or lashing out.

Eat it, bitch (this isn't even close to an exhaustive search):
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=128387&p=2815913&hilit=mistake#p2815913
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=88440&p=2056340&hilit=mistake#p2056340
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=174761&p=3820159&hilit=mistake#p3820159
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=174431&p=3812408&hilit=mistake#p3812408
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=177416&p=3908986&hilit=mistake#p3908986
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=634&t=82967&p=1969467&hilit=mistake#p1969467
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=121462&p=2678383&hilit=mistake#p2678383
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=114367&p=2545658&hilit=mistake#p2545658
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=114332&p=2539502&hilit=mistake#p2539502
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=108610&p=2518471&hilit=mistake#p2518471
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=495&t=89466&p=2071208&hilit=mistake#p2071208
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=82952&p=1982737&hilit=mistaken#p1982737
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=116246&p=2570874&hilit=mistake#p2570874

Why woodruff, I should wash your filthy mouth out with soap!

To be accurate the links provided seem to be examples of you admitting to making mistakes, not being wrong. Being one who delights in arguing semantics you should be able to appreciate this distinction. Looks like its you who gets to "eat it" this time.

Show me some examples of you admitting that you were seeing an issue solely from your own side, talking out of your ass and were proven wrong, end of discussion. If you can do this,you may find me admitting to being wrong about you. Until then, I stand by my judgement.

this isn't semantics, it's sophistry... he specifically went out of his way to prove he was mistaken... I challenge you to do the same

[Gillipig]

this isn't semantics, it's sophistry... he specifically went out of his way to prove he was mistaken... I challenge you to do the same

Let me get this right....He went out of his way to prove that he was wrong, in order to show that funky was wrong about him never admitting to be wrong ...................................................................It's too early in the day for this kind of shit!

[Phatscotty]

I hate to mar the serenity of that last post but can we please lock this thread right here and witness "the perfect ending"? I will gladly delete this post if my wish is granted.

ah, if only I could do that in real life, freeze time before I stick my foot in my mouth... alas, for I was seemingly born with foot-in-mouth disease...

aaanyway, I'm not quite sure how my name got drug into this but ok, I'm game
for starters: funky, you're being a little too broad with the term 'ad hominem'.
from dictionary.com
1. appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.
2. attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.
basically my problem with your usage is this: attacks on ones character are not ad hominem when they are not used in lieu of a proper response to an argument... it's just mudslinging at that point

again as to hypocracy: about half the times in this thread (rounding down because I'm attempting to be neutral) you accuse woodruff of ad hominem (not a few times incorrectly) you then deride his character instead of countering his claim: the very definition of ad hominem

lastly

For the record, I've never heard Woodruff admit he was wrong. If cornered, he resorts to either redirecting the conversation or lashing out.

Eat it, bitch (this isn't even close to an exhaustive search):
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=128387&p=2815913&hilit=mistake#p2815913
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=88440&p=2056340&hilit=mistake#p2056340
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=174761&p=3820159&hilit=mistake#p3820159
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=174431&p=3812408&hilit=mistake#p3812408
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=177416&p=3908986&hilit=mistake#p3908986
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=634&t=82967&p=1969467&hilit=mistake#p1969467
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=121462&p=2678383&hilit=mistake#p2678383
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=114367&p=2545658&hilit=mistake#p2545658
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=114332&p=2539502&hilit=mistake#p2539502
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=108610&p=2518471&hilit=mistake#p2518471
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=495&t=89466&p=2071208&hilit=mistake#p2071208
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=82952&p=1982737&hilit=mistaken#p1982737
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=116246&p=2570874&hilit=mistake#p2570874

Why woodruff, I should wash your filthy mouth out with soap!

To be accurate the links provided seem to be examples of you admitting to making mistakes, not being wrong. Being one who delights in arguing semantics you should be able to appreciate this distinction. Looks like its you who gets to "eat it" this time.

Show me some examples of you admitting that you were seeing an issue solely from your own side, talking out of your ass and were proven wrong, end of discussion. If you can do this,you may find me admitting to being wrong about you. Until then, I stand by my judgement.

this isn't semantics, it's sophistry... he specifically went out of his way to prove he was mistaken... I challenge you to do the same

I think it possible the hominem accusations might have been coming partially from his posts to other people.

Look at his responses to my posts. Pick one at random, and you have a 100% chance of seeing what I am talking about within the first 2 seconds of reading it.

If I only had a dime for every time I had to repeat this, well, I would easily be a 1%'er.

Abusive ad hominem (also called personal abuse or personal attacks) usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponents in order to attack their claims or invalidate their arguments, but can also involve pointing out character flaws or actions that are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This is logically fallacious because it relates to the opponent's personal character, which has nothing to do with the logical merit of the opponent's argument

Oh yeah, if I only had another dime for every time I had to chide someone for name calling, then the 1% would be licking my boots. On the other hand, if you were to get a dime for every time I called someone a name, you would have a grand total of about 70 cents.

[Woodruff]

More Ad Hominem attacks added to the stack aren't going to strengthen your position bro, they decidedly weaken it. If anyone wants to see what I wrote its right there, I don't need to hide it. I just don't nest tons of quotes for consideration of the reader. Even the accusation of calling me a hypocrite is an Ad Hominem attack if you provide no evidence lol.

I don't need to provide the evidence, when you're doing it yourself.

Is comparing me to Phatscotty(another Ad Hominem attack) supposed to make me feel a certain way? It doesn't. You've managed to cram an amazing number of these hollow assaults into quite a few of your posts. If you continue to use such weak tactics I may do just what Phatscotty did. Can you blame me?

Blame you for being Phatscotty? Why would I blame you for that?

[Woodruff]

the results you provided represented about 1% of the total amount of times that you've been wrong on this forum.

And of COURSE you can provide these multitudes of quotes, right?

this thread is about the percentage of the time that people admit to being wrong.

It is? The poll certainly doesn't reflect that, nor does the OP. Do ANY posts in the thread reflect that?

even a great number of admissions doesn't mean much when one is wrong as frequently as you are, oftentimes undebatably.

And of COURSE you can provide these multitudes of quotes, right?

why would i waste my time providing evidence for you? most people on this forum already have their own opinion about how honest and humble you are. i was just sharing mine.

Yeah, I didn't think you had any evidence for your bullshit either.

[Woodruff]

I hate to mar the serenity of that last post but can we please lock this thread right here and witness "the perfect ending"? I will gladly delete this post if my wish is granted.

Do you always run and hide when you're wrong, Phatscotty?

[Phatscotty]

Whatever people decide, just remember that most of the time when you admit you are wrong to someone, the other person is usually unable to handle it responsibly. Sure, they might take it in stride at first, but the next time an issue arises, there they will be, holding the time you admitted you were wrong over your head, using it to bash you at other times, using it to try to prove they are right about something completely unrelated....etc etc

[fadedpsychosis]

I hate to mar the serenity of that last post but can we please lock this thread right here and witness "the perfect ending"? I will gladly delete this post if my wish is granted.

Do you always run and hide when you're wrong, Phatscotty?

now now, no need to be insulting... I'm not quite sure which of them you're insulting but I'm sure it has to be one of them

[fadedpsychosis]

Whatever people decide, just remember that most of the time when you admit you are wrong to someone, the other person is usually unable to handle it responsibly. Sure, they might take it in stride at first, but the next time an issue arises, there they will be, holding the time you admitted you were wrong over your head, using it to bash you at other times, using it to try to prove they are right about something completely unrelated....etc etc

I actually have to agree with this

[Falkomagno]

Whatever people decide, just remember that most of the time when you admit you are wrong to someone, the other person is usually unable to handle it responsibly. Sure, they might take it in stride at first, but the next time an issue arises, there they will be, holding the time you admitted you were wrong over your head, using it to bash you at other times, using it to try to prove they are right about something completely unrelated....etc etc

I disagree with this statment. I don't think is about if is convenientt for yourself to admit if you are wrong, but more a part of the personal proccess of knoledge, which is truncated if you never admit the times you were wrong.

Saying that you are not willing to admit yourself wrong, arguing that "others can not handle well" that admision, gives the impression that in general your ideas and opinions are not supported by facts or reality or truth, but rather by your fear of being proved wrong and therefore, according to your own words, prone to be "bashed" for it.

Of course, it depends of the context and the contender in the discussion, but at personal level, I find myself willing to admit myself wrong. I think is kind of pathetic to attach yourself with a wrong position, when is already refuted by facts.

[Haggis_McMutton]

Ad Hominem

[jay_a2j]

I admit to being wrong when the evidence leads to no other conclusion.

[Woodruff]

Whatever people decide, just remember that most of the time when you admit you are wrong to someone, the other person is usually unable to handle it responsibly. Sure, they might take it in stride at first, but the next time an issue arises, there they will be, holding the time you admitted you were wrong over your head, using it to bash you at other times, using it to try to prove they are right about something completely unrelated....etc etc

I actually have to agree with this

I don't really remember this happening in this forum, to be honest.

[fadedpsychosis]

Ad Hominem

OMFG LOL!!!!




now I'm both cleaning food off the keyboard, and kicking myself for not thinking of that one first