"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Dutch" >
> wrote:
[..]

>> >> > Agreement with X because it is popular amounts to a logical fallacy.
>> >>
>> >> I know that. Disagreement with X because it is popular also amounts to
>> >> a
>> >> logical fallacy.
>> >
>> > That is either/or thinking -- more of the false dilemma.
>>
>> Wake up Ron!!!! I presented no dilemma.
>
> Of course you did. I just stopped commenting on when it was happening.

Of course I did not. You presented the opinion that "Agreement with X
because it is popular amounts to a logical fallacy", which is true, to which
I replied, "Disagreement with X because it is popular amounts to a logical
fallacy" which is also true. I did not suggest that you must select one or
the other, in fact my point is that YOU appear to reject fallacy "A" and put
"B" in it's place. Why would I suggest that you must select one of two
responses both of which I have just finished identifying as logical
fallacies?

>> > You are offering me two choices, agree or believe the information
>> > versus
>> > disagree or disbelieve the information.
>>
>> I didn't offer you ANY choices, I stated a fact that you need to get a
>> grip
>> on, "Disagreement with X because it is popular amounts to a logical
>> fallacy"
>
> You have consistently presented two choices or two interpretations --
> this OR that. A false dilemma.

You are seeing something that isn't there. You are creating it.

>> > I consider a third option, it is
>> > information that can be believed or disbelieved and still be held as
>> > information.
>>
>> You're wrong, information should not be believed OR disbelieved until you
>> assess it for yourself, it should be taken in and held provisionally.
>
> Which is what I've been saying all along -- this includes what you have
> loosely termed "conventional wisdom".

Exactly right. I have never advocated accepting "conventional wisdom"
uncritically, what I have been saying is that you should not *reject*
"conventional wisdom" uncritically as you seem to do.

>> > this goes back week's Dutch. I clearly pointed out to you that I found
>> > many, many of your statement to be black and white, either/or, or false
>> > dilemmas.
>>
>> You're out to lunch.
>
> I can eat a sandwich and recognize it for what it is -- I think my
> sanity is very much intact. People with perceptual problems and no
> control aren't likely to be able to manage that reality very well.

You live in a world of your own design, you see false dilemmas where none
exist.