- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: WSJ piece about Jill Biden gets author cancelled from Northwestern
Posted on 12/14/20 at 8:34 am to BorrisMart
Posted on 12/14/20 at 8:34 am to BorrisMart
quote:
Baw I am not putting opinions anywhere near the realm of fact/logic.
But the "I'm entitled to my opinions" line of reasoning is a fallacy.
quote:
You are trying to correlate opinion
You don't seem to be able to make a distinction between claims of preference and claims of experience. Moe specifically, the claim we could "prove" in a sense, is the claim he makes about relaxation of standards. That is a very specific claim to make, and the author doesn't seem to understand the gravity of it, or the scale of what he is proposing.
quote:
As far as logical fallacy, wouldn't you say the MSM is guilty of equivocation
In general the media does do this a lot.
quote:
how about these false attribution's you're throwing at me clearly based on your own empirical observations.
Read your first post you made in this thread. You literally invented something out of nothing.
quote:
when all of your circular language is premised upon "im getting a masters, I'm involved, so I know more than this author." Which is a fallacy in of itself.
I'm getting two doctorates, and I've said specifically, with regards to only the relaxation of standards, that I don’t see this relaxation from my own perspective. Epstein doesn't explain what he means there, instead continuing his logorrhea with an idiotic aside about honorary doctorates, which is highly ironic. Maybe I would agree that doctorates are less prestigious, but I'm not taking issue with that specific part of the argument. Epstein's claim of a relaxation of standards is my specific issue, and it is a claim repeated often in different circles, without any clarity on what these people mean, or if there is any introspection on whether the claim is even possibly true. He doesn't offer evidence for the claim, instead relying on the reader's own experience, which I am.
3
Posted on 12/14/20 at 8:50 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
I'm getting two doctorates
In what? Where?
Posted on 12/14/20 at 9:06 am to crazy4lsu
Well, as to the claim of "relaxation of standards;" that is the author's opinion. Sure, you might could prove from an admissions standpoint as schools that there has been a shift in the rigidity of the admissions criteria, so a more forgiving and inclusive admission threshold for applicants. However, it appears that he is saying that in his perception there has been a relaxation of standards, which in many cases is hardly debatable. Higher learning institutions are definitely letting as many people as they can in, in order to make more money. This is coupled with the fact that a much larger population percentage now has undergraduate, and accordingly, doctorates than days of old. This is all field specific though, as there are always going to be a few specific fields that are unattainable to an average person; however, a doctorate of education is not one of them.
Also, if you are putting everything down based off of a perceived fallacy I have put forth ("entitled to my own opinions fallacy"), I would suggest that presupposing that an assertion is false merely because of the presence, or perceived presence, of a fallacy, is in fact a fallacy. This is the problem with analyzing fallacies, there is more than often than not a never ending pattern of showing a fallacy. It doesn't disprove anything. But I return to my initial assertion, which that there is really nothing to "prove" when opinions are involved.
Ahh the basis of your posts are becoming more apparent. Don't you got some finals baw.
Also, if you are putting everything down based off of a perceived fallacy I have put forth ("entitled to my own opinions fallacy"), I would suggest that presupposing that an assertion is false merely because of the presence, or perceived presence, of a fallacy, is in fact a fallacy. This is the problem with analyzing fallacies, there is more than often than not a never ending pattern of showing a fallacy. It doesn't disprove anything. But I return to my initial assertion, which that there is really nothing to "prove" when opinions are involved.
quote:
at a large east coast university
Ahh the basis of your posts are becoming more apparent. Don't you got some finals baw.
This post was edited on 12/14/20 at 9:07 am
Posted on 12/15/20 at 9:08 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
I'm getting two doctorates, and I've said specifically, with regards to only the relaxation of standards, that I don’t see this relaxation from my own perspective. Epstein doesn't explain what he means there, instead continuing his logorrhea with an idiotic aside about honorary doctorates, which is highly ironic. Maybe I would agree that doctorates are less prestigious, but I'm not taking issue with that specific part of the argument. Epstein's claim of a relaxation of standards is my specific issue, and it is a claim repeated often in different circles, without any clarity on what these people mean, or if there is any introspection on whether the claim is even possibly true. He doesn't offer evidence for the claim, instead relying on the reader's own experience, which I am.
Could he mean that people can get PhDs/Doctorates from "questionable" online and foreign universities?
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News