|
Post by jeradjones on Jun 14, 2010 12:33:41 GMT -5
This isn't a matter of opinion. You're getting that confused. You're claiming that anyone, even unintelligent, without learning disabilities CAN learn as well as an intelligent person as long as they put in the effort. That is a statement of fact. CrrackTheSkye has provided antithetical evidence to the contrary of your hypothesis. Therefore, if your rule does not apply in all cases, it is in fact, not a rule at all. So, in order to still believe in it, you either practice some magical form of doublethink, or you are practicing poor debate procedure in not being able to concede a flaw in your argument. Wow, I'm done arguing here. You guys can't accept my opinion, and you're now flaming me because apparently "my opinion is wrong". This is a matter of opinion, and I say people who claim they can't learn are just being lazy and unwilling to put in effort to learn the subject. You may have given me examples, and I gave you examples. Now you tell me my examples are invalid, and I don't want to argue with somebody who is telling me I'm incorrect. It's an opinion, and opinions can't be incorrect.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2010 15:47:45 GMT -5
no, you see the difference is this:
You say "How intelligent someone is has nothing to do with what they can learn, because through hard work anyone can learn anything as well as a more intelligent person." I gave you an example of how my friend, CĂ©line, who works her ass off, but still doesn't get the results someone else who's more intelligent yet studies the same amount of time gets.
I have not said that I think no one who's less intelligent can get as far as someone more intelligent, they just have to work harder, but for some people it's impossible. I learned this through personal experience.
We believe and respect your personal experience with people who are less intelligent, but your personal experience doesn't make for a rule.
Personal experience does counter a rule, like my personal experience counters your rule that anyone who works hard can learn as much as a more intelligent person.
Also: we're not trying to insult you, we're just trying to show you where's you're incorrect.
|
|
|
Post by KipEnyan on Jun 14, 2010 19:08:22 GMT -5
This isn't a matter of opinion. You're getting that confused. You're claiming that anyone, even unintelligent, without learning disabilities CAN learn as well as an intelligent person as long as they put in the effort. That is a statement of fact. CrrackTheSkye has provided antithetical evidence to the contrary of your hypothesis. Therefore, if your rule does not apply in all cases, it is in fact, not a rule at all. So, in order to still believe in it, you either practice some magical form of doublethink, or you are practicing poor debate procedure in not being able to concede a flaw in your argument. Wow, I'm done arguing here. You guys can't accept my opinion, and you're now flaming me because apparently "my opinion is wrong". This is a matter of opinion, and I say people who claim they can't learn are just being lazy and unwilling to put in effort to learn the subject. You may have given me examples, and I gave you examples. Now you tell me my examples are invalid, and I don't want to argue with somebody who is telling me I'm incorrect. It's an opinion, and opinions can't be incorrect. Yeah, you're the one starting the angry ragequit flamewar here. Where did I say "your opinion is wrong?" After all, you put that in quotes, so I'm assuming you're quoting me. Like I explained in the last post that you seemed to peruse at most, YOU ARE NOT ARGUING OPINION, YOU ARE ARGUING FACT. If you say "People who claim they can't learn are just being lazy and unwilling to put in effort to learn the subject.", that's not an OPINION, that's a statement of FACT. You are establishing a rule, and by nature, a rule is a fact. Your fact is erroneous though, because CrrackTheSkye has provided evidence to the contrary. Therefore your OPINION is not wrong, but your FACT is. Hence, I repeat for the umpteenth time, your argument is invalid:not valid; without force or foundation; indefensible.
|
|