Skeptic Project

And now you're attacking me ad hominem. I do not deserve this. I was merely pointing out that I thought it was strange that the quote, unedited, made it into his memoir and that with my anxiety disorder, I have unfortunate thoughts about it. I did not say that I believed it. I find your behaviour quite immature; calling me a nutbar when I did nothing to deserve such ridicule.

1) That's not an ad hominem.
2) Stop blaming everything on an anxiety disorder.
3) Get some meds.
4) I wasn't referring to you.

Sorry, I thought the nutbar comment was about me. Also, I realize now that it's not ad hominem. I'm sorry I was so distracted. My mistake. And I'm not blaming "everything" on an anxiety disorder...just my irrational fear of conspiracy theories.

Anyway, I think I might see a possible alternate way of interpreting the quote...but how to the rest of you interpret it?

@Questionmark please refrain from using the word "ad hominem" it's a word that in use in itself is broad. When people do use it they often say "U r ad hominem attack me!" as to appear as a intellectual. People who use this word do not appear as a intellectual they appear to me as a person who uses a word that in it's own meaning is a broad generalization of vagueness.

What you should do is say "I feel so and so has dissed me on this purposefully", or "I feel when you said this you were trying to attack me". Then that person can explain what they meant by that or maybe he was attacking you to make a point but most of the time you'll get your answer if you just come out and say what your problem is with it. no one is going to understand you if you use such vague terminology such as "ad hominem", so stick with english and be direct.

The thing about Hazmatt and Muertos is I've seen these two use big words or are very technical in their terminology but it's not to the extent of where no one can understand as to what they are talking about, but just enough to be more descriptive in their answers to give a better understanding of a particular subject.

@Hazmatt I agree with that it seems to be in my opinion people use "Ad hominem" for just about everything not really understanding it.

I've seen people say that they've been "Ad hominem" and go into details of different Latin terminology as to the specif "Ad hominem" so called attack that had occurred.

It's easier and more effective to just say what your problem is than to call it a "Ad hominem". I do not recognize the term "Ad hominem" because people should be more descriptive in what their problem exactly is and not just say it's a "logical fallacy". Simply say what your problem is.

OT:

Ad hominem has a very specific meaning. I don't really understand why so many people confuse it with the meaning of "insult."

Especially annoying: Zeitgeisters who claim Ad Hominem on insults, but consistently make AH-arguments themselves. Happened multiple times in debates with economists and some banking guy.

I'm doing well, but a bit worse than in my expectations. I'm considering teaming up with two more guys to speed things up a little, first impression was good, second meeting is tomorrow. A friend keeps telling me to join him at some elite business seminar that's supposedly gonna solve my problems, but I have less trust in the seminar industry than in the future careers of TZM supporters.

I don't really like meetings or seminars, and think their a waist of time unless their is a plan of action involved in them and not just a bunch of people yapping. I'm making substantial profits myself can't say I'm doing bad here though.

"ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon"

This should be a clue to the context of Rockefeller's quote.

Seriously skeptics are the only people I've seen use the term ad hominem correctly, no hyperbole.

Rockefeller is clearly talking about 'one world' as in one world with equal rights (like the UN was meant to do) where trade has no borders and basically everyone gets along, obviously this hasn't been achieved yet though.

(Pretty Please), your criticism strikes me as more than a little hypocritical. You've been brainwashed by the Zeitgeist cult, so your mental capacities are obviously deficient. Plus the fact that you're slightly to the left of Lenin and yet at the same time you said you hoped Sarah Palin is elected US President because she's "honest."

Forgive me, but I remain unconvinced that your opinion on anything is even slightly coherent, much less rises to the level of being considered rational.

So, Pan imagery and all the other nonsense posted - yep, truly evil agenda. I hope Mr. Question Mark lives through it all.

I've been thinking it over, and I'm looking at that quote in a different light now. I suppose the, "characterizing us as" part was a new idea and he was responding to those allegations and not the ones before it, even if it was in the same sentence.

Sorry I've been irrational. It's just that I saw some things lately that made my OCD mind very uneasy.

One example was when someone even claimed that hundreds of heads of state have been involved in the new age, and even though it seems absurd and they didn't cite any evidence for the claim, my mind was going, "what if, what if" like, what if the New Age stuff is some sort of conspiracy to mislead people from the true religion? Even when deep down I seem to know better, my mind won't stop repeating those thoughts

Questionmark, it's actually a somewhat similar thing that eventually led me here to CS. I had anxiety/depression and CT stuff (in my case, a lot of economic collapse stuff) made my brain keep going "what if, what if" even though I knew it was totally irrational. I'm doing MUCH better now - I started seeing a counselor, taking anti-depressants prescribed by my doctor, strengthening my critical thinking skills, listening to skeptics podcasts, posting here, and generally researching all this stuff from credible sources. I've learned a lot, and it's really helped me get over those "what if" thoughts, though they still crop up every now and then. So you know, don't apologize - you're in good company. Send me a message if you want to know more, as I sort of know where you're coming from with all that stuff. I might be able to help you. :)

"my mind was going, "what if, what if" like, what if the New Age stuff is some sort of conspiracy to mislead people from the true religion?"

If you think that there is a true religion, you'll probably have difficulty with evidence, because that's something you're simply unable to find real evidence for.

I've once dated a girl who was literally afraid of the devil. Like she couldn't sleep. We got her to voluntarily enter therapy and it's still haunting her at times, but at least she knows that it's bull.

I don't know whether that's relevant to you, but I've met several people who have experienced extraordinary pain and anxiety through their religious indoctrination as a kid, be it the belief in hell, the devil, god's rage or whatever. It's one of the reasons I'm the kind of antitheistic ass I am. Not trying to sound mean and all, but "truth" and metaphysical belief is just something that does not match, and to those it does, it sometimes does so at a cost.

edit: Finally got the "First post on new site error", yay. Somebody write something.