Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill8
it's not circular reasoning. I am using specific rhetorical techniques, but they are not circular reasoning, which has a specific meaning.
I am circling him, as one does in a fight, yes - prompting him to take a strike, which he wisely declined to do.
as for the ball, I am discussing the "ball" in several other conversations at the same time as I was circling PG.
if you care to pick up the ball, i'd be just as happy to debate it with you.
|
It's circular reasoning, the most common fallacy in debate.
Him giving his stance, granted without citation, was his "strike".
You took his statement, and instead of trying to refute an extremely clear statement, and asked him to prove you wrong that his claim is from an entity other than from the grasp of Murdoch.
Burden of proof was to be on you, and instead you twisted it into leading assumptions which then lead to a leading request all while cloaking your point.
Your intentions were clear, and it was circular reasoning.