• PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    So, based on your anecdotal evidence of completely unrelated person you will discredit just Hersh or every other human writing anything too?

      • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        How the hell it is even extrapolating? The guy said that one woman he know went into some rabbit hole and this is somehow EVIDENCE that completely different person who just happens to be the person that guy wanted to discredit is the same case?

        Thats not even anecdotal evidence that’s complete non seqitur (and bizarre tier of slander).

        • Chuymatt@artemis.camp
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Idon’t necessarily agree with him, but I can follow his point and the example that was provided.

          This is feeling like an argument in bad faith. 

          • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            This is feeling like an argument in bad faith.

            Yes, from him. If he want to discredit Hersh, he should provide an argument against Hersh. Instead he wrote anecdote of how completely unrelated person got “corrupted” and on a basis of that single anecdote he probably wanted to prove everyone can be “corruptible”, so Hersh too.

            I hope you can see how that are not one but two galaxy wide leaps. From specific person to generalisation for entire humanity, to another specific and unrelated person. I could as well “prove” that since some guy i know in Poland started doing drugs and alcohol, it’s a proof that you personally did the same.