re: IVF clinic bomber was a leftist, wanted to attack pro life movement and left a manifesto

quote:

---

"I really care about clarity, but I'll use arbitrary to describe both choices... For clarity's sake."

---

And for the sake of clarity, I explained what I meant by this. I said one was arbitrary on its face, and one utilized an arbitrary standard.

It seems you were hoping to win this argument based on a technicality rather than discussing the merits of the philosophical nature of ultimate's and moral standards.

quote:

---

You already played your hand agreeing with the first arbitrary definition I provided.

---

I explained that, as well. I even granted that I should not have gone along with it because I was focusing on the 2nd half of the definition rather than the first, and it muddied the waters of what I was trying to communicate in doing so. I explained this to you already.

quote:

---

Your agreement there showed exactly my point, people do not think the choice of round wheels for cars is "arbitrary".

---

Like I said, I explained this already. My agreement with the definition you provided actually didn't help with the clarity of what I was already attempting to explain, so I abandoned it when it was clear to me that you were trying to score points rather than have a discussion on the merits of my position.

I also granted that people aren't arbitrarily choosing round wheels vs. square wheels. I made the distinction between an arbitrary choice and an arbitrary framework for making choices.

quote:

---

You quickly sniffed out what was happening when I asked you about the definition of whim, and have been crawfishing ever since I refused to engage with your typical objective/subjective discussion and instead focused on your framing.

---

The framing is a shallow thing to focus on and doesn't approach what I was getting at initially when saying that atheism is arbitrary and irrational. The objective/subjective discussion is at the heart of my comment, not the focus on the word "whim", which is where you wanted to steer the conversation.

quote:

---

I was right. You're not interested in being precise, you're like a progressive calling everything they don't like racist. It's not about clarity, it's about poisoning the well. Don't venture from my God's objective moral framework, society will be legalizing rape before you know it Sure that makes as much sense as a square wheel but it's all arbitrary!!!

---

I am interested in being precise, which is why after eventually rejecting your definition, I provided more detail about what I was actually saying, for the sake of clarity and precision. I even provided you another dictionary definition that I could stand behind fully. Would you like to engage with that definition, or are you stuck on the word "whim" from the first definition?

It seems that you're the one not interested in clarity and precision, because you're not willing to move on and work with the clarifying remarks I've provided.