Classic symptoms of narcissistic personality disorder.
Or perhaps its just someone telling you a truth you can't handle, so you have to try to find some way to pass it off as something else.
- It’s your truth, not mine. As I said before, I don’t believe the “truth” you preach to be true.
You've chosen the ever-popular "you must have a psychological issue so I'll pretend to be Dr. Freud and do an internet diagnosis" route.
- People are just trying to figure out why you act the way you do. They’re just speculating.
Seriously, when you're desperately trying to deny the truth in what I'm saying, at least try to be more original.
- As I said, it’s your truth, not mine.
He doesn't even get that his arguments are illogical and full of the same fallacies he accuses everyone else of making
If this were true, you'd be able to point out the fallacies, as I have done when others commit them. Yet you haven't been able to do that, because all you want is to make wild accusations with nothing to back them up.
- I have made this argument already, you’ve chosen to dismiss them.
In this case, his argument is based on a cornerstone assumption that homosexuality is a choice, determined by who one chooses as sexual partners.
I established this as fact based on logical reasoning a long time ago, therefore it isn't an assumption. Try again.
- As stated earlier, what is “logical” to you doesn’t necessary mean it’s correct.
Homosexuality is not a choice, it's a biological fact.
Not only have you NOT established this through any reasonable argument, as I already pointed out, a reasonable argument to the contrary HAS been established (by me).
- I have established an argument on why I believe this to be true, as I said earlier.
So if you want to argue this position, you've got a lot of work to do.
- I’ve already done the work.
Then again, who are we kidding, both of us already know you won't even try.
Once again, all you want is to argue a position with nothing to establish it.
- I’ve already established it.
Michael Jackson may have been able to make himself appear to be a weird-looking white guy to someone who had no idea who he was, but it doesn't mean he was white. He was still genetically black.
And we've also already debunked the idea that race and sexuality are comparable. You're many pages behind in this thread. Might want to go back and read for a while.
- You haven’t debunked anything, as I believe sexuality is based on attraction. As I stated many pages ago. You might want to go back and read for a while.
In addition to being a horribly fallacious argument, it demonstrates a massive lack of empathy.
First, let's clear up the idea that it's fallacious.
You haven't made a single step to show it as such other than you stating you believe it to be true, which means nothing.
When you want to come into a topic and make declarations against already established positions, you'd better be prepared to make your own arguments.
You haven't done anything of the sort,
so until you do,
nothing you say regarding my argument can be taken seriously in even the most remote way.
- Whether you take my argument seriously is up to you, I suppose.
Second, empathy isn't part of the argument, and people are entitled to feel however they wish.
- I’m making it part of the argument.
If you want to create a thread to discuss empathy, or empathy and sexuality, feel free to do so.
Otherwise, stop trying to distract from the fact that you have what amounts to a lot of posturing and a non-argument and no real challenge to my position.
- I’ve made an argument against your position.
Sure, now you can "choose" to be homosexual by picking male sexual and civil partners. But that wouldn't make you gay. We know for a fact you are VERY opposed to being mistaken for a homosexual.
Actually, choosing to pick male partners WOULD make me gay. It doesn't matter if I'm opposed to being mistaken for a homosexual.
- That’s your opinion. I’ve argued that’s not true.
Here's a logical way to disprove what you're saying:
I'm also opposed to being mistaken for a criminal. However, if I choose to commit a series of crimes, I would be a criminal regardless of my opposition to being classified as one.
- The counterpoint to the analogy has already been discussed.
By the same reasoning, it also doesn't matter how opposed I am to being considering homosexual - if I take homosexual action, I am one regardless of how I feel.
- You’ve said this a few times. I’ve argued that’s not true.
BTW, I started mentioning Narcissistic personality disorders or gradiose-type personality disorders many months ago now..
Yes, it's a classic defense mechanism when someone with better debate skills completely lays waste to what you thought was a well-reasoned argument.
- You don’t have better defense skills. I actually think you may have a Narcissistic personality disorder.
"Well, uh, you must be crazy and here is my personal diagnosis since I'm infinitely qualified to do that over the internet even though people with real qualifications sometimes can't do it in person."
- I’m happy you find it funny.
Keep it coming.
Next you'll respond by repeating the fallacy that since people posting here agree with you, then you must be right.
The same predictable defense mechanisms all the time.
- Yes, you’ve mentioned this.
Somehow it never gets old knowing my skills can reduce people to these pathetic tactics.
- False. People are making fun of you because it’s fun and they don’t feel like arguing anymore.
Bistiza, have you even considered the possibility that the reason we're considering what psychiatric disorders are most likely afflicting you is not, as you are so convinced, because we don't like having our beliefs challenged by your irrefutable logic?
No, because that's EXACTLY what it is.
- You say it, so it must be true. Right?
As I just said, it's a classic defense mechanism used by those who realize they can't argue effectively in any legitimate manner.