On 23-6-2013 14:23, Warp wrote:
> andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> This is my last time trying to explain it friendly: it is not a false
>> dichotomy and your arguments are bullshit.
>
>> For most people alcohol slowly impairs their judgement, when they start
>> drinking it becomes harder to not take the next one. So it is not a
>> dichotomy between none and too much but, excuse the phrase, a slippery
>> slope. And one whose slipperyness suffers from positive feedback. I am
>> not saying that everybody all the time gets drunk whenever they take one
>> beer. Just that for most people there are certain circumstances where
>> they take one too many. Even if they knew that they should not have done
>> that when they still had a few less.
>
> You say it's not a false dichotomy, yet you keep repeating the false
> dichotomy over and over.
>
> The argument you are preseting is: "Many people choose to avoid alcohol
> completely because most people can't control their drinking."

No, they do because they know or fear that it may put them in a position 
where they might not control themselves. There is a huge gap between 
their uncertainty and your statement that it is a certainty. Technically 
this is known as a straw-man's argument.

>  In other
> words, they seem to think that there are only two options: Either you
> avoid alcohol completely, or you risk going out of control.

Some people know or assume for themselves that they are prone to this 
risk, yes. Others don't want to take changes. Still others think that 
they should not do what they would advise others not to. But it is all 
their decision, not mine or yours. And as you correctly state below, 
many people take another decision.

> However, there is a third option, and one that's practiced by millions
> of people worldwide (especially in those cultures where wine is a very
> common meal drink): Just drink a very small amount of it, and that's it.
> It doesn't even have to have any kind of effect on your senses.

I know, but it is irrelevant to this discussion. Perhaps except for the 
fact that the friends that my boss lost were by alcohol-induced talking 
by people who were sure they were practising your third option. But that 
was in WWII.

> Many people just appreciate the taste of fine wine or other beverages,
> and they do not feel any temptation to drink it in excess. And small
> amounts of alcohol from time to time has actually been shown to have
> health benefits (not to talk about the beneficial nutrients found in
> drinks like red wine, which contain things like antioxidants and
> flavonoids.)

True, but irrelevant.

> I find your argument to be quite insulting to people who appreciate
> these beverages yet never drink it to an excess.

Well, perhaps you should read what I wrote, not what you think I wrote.

> You are, when we go
> to the bottom of it,

Raising another straw-man ...

> calling them drunkards.

... (yes, there we go)

> If anything, I call that bullshit.

... and there we have the straw-man's argument.
Good on you, very mature.

> As said, if you don't want to drink any alcohol, that's completely fine.
> But don't go around making bullshit claims about people who are not like
> you.

You keep missing the fact that none of this is why I don't drink. I am 
not making claims about people who are not like me. That is you, 
remember? You are the one that claims that everybody that does not drink 
does that because they can't think straight.

> (And I'm not saying this because I drink regularly, because I don't.
> In my case it's a question of taste, not a question of principles or
> unfounded fear. But I'm not a 100% absolutist either. And I most certainly
> don't go around misrepresenting the issue.)


>> You started this whole issue by stating
>> it is a logical discussion and everybody with an opinion different from
>> yours is wrong.
>
> Ah, there we go putting words in other people's mouths.

May I quote you? "What I have found is that most people who have made 
the choice and avoid it as a matter of principle do not have all their 
facts straight." Ok, I admit I exaggerated, you are not claiming that 
everybody is wrong, just most.

>  Of course.
> What a mature conversational tactic.

Then why are you putting words in my mouth?
Matthew 7:3

> "You disagree with me, therefore you think that everybody with an opinion
> different from yours is wrong."

I can't even parse that. From the quotes I assume you are setting up yet 
another straw-man, but that is as far as I can make it.


-- 
Everytime the IT department forbids something that a researcher deems
necessary for her work there will be another hole in the firewall.

Post a reply to this message