Posted: May 18, 2012 2:00 am
by Thommo
jamest wrote:How can an individual who lacks the capacity to know what the fuck they're talking about, be in a position to know someone who does?

(my emphasis)

Whilst I don't think Amkerman does have a solid grasp of most of what he's talked about here, Like Spearthrower, and I'd hazard a guess Shrunk too (though please correct me if this is a misrepresentation Shrunk), I certainly don't think he lacks the capacity to do so. I very much think that if he spent some time studying this material he could learn to be highly competent in this area.

It seems highly rude and personal to suggest that he is completely devoid of the ability to learn. :scratch:

ETA: For what it's worth I find Shrunk's grasp of the basics pretty reasonable, and I don't think he's overreached his knowledge.

Oh wait, were you talking about Shrunk here? :shock:

Well, I'm just bemused by that. He certainly doesn't lack the capacity to learn. He's also correctly identified valid and invalid arguments, whereas Amkerman has repeatedly failed to do so, even after his claim to have read the link to the pages on validity which clearly explain the concept.