not registered as industrial producers of bleach. — StreetlightX

:rofl:

Yes, I honestly didnt know that any significant number of people claimed it was some kind if medical term. Is the description I gave not what people generally mean by TDS? — DingoJones

It's only use on this forum, up until now, was rather frequently by someone called Nobeernolife. He was banned last month I believe. Check that thread for any reasons.

You don’t understand what an Ad Hom is. You can address someones argument AND mock them. An Ad Hom is when you mock (or attack) the person rather than the argument.
You didn't answer my question. — DingoJones

Of course you can address someone's argument AND mock them, but they are two separate statements, separate claims. You can't make up some hybrid argument that contains any number of fallacies and then tack on some rational statement at the end that gets them all through the door.

Please stop saying I don't understand something without cleaning up your argument first.

Your question was about having a singular definition of of TBS?

a term of mockery — DingoJones

Which means it is an Ad Hom.

I think Baden said it better than I did.

No its not — DingoJones

When you ascribe TDS to someone or some group, you are dismissing their argument about Trump as the result of a accepted medical condition that their critical judgement cannot resist. Thus you don't have to address it and they are wrong before being considered. Calling someone deranged without proof is attacking the man.

"Sniffles and a cough", is a false parallel and affirming the consequent, so again, wrong before being considered. I was not throwing shade since I was giving you a chance to reference it to a medical authority. We are on a philosophy forum. If we cannot provide a source for a claim then we shed light on a logical fallacy.

TDS is not mythical. — DingoJones

Unless you can quote an authority it's another adhom

You two are talking teleology now. I don't think Darwin or Spenser could support that.

Okay. Wrong spot in the conversation.

Right, and it was repeated and exaggerated. Thats an example of spreading falsehoods in my books. — DingoJones

Right. So when there is smoke there is not necessarily fire. It could be something else. Or perhaps there is no smoke that you can see. Or maybe there is not enough smoke . Any consideration of there being a fire should be rejected as rash speculation because other possibilities exist.

Also, you two know, you obviously know, that the majority of people here do not believe that he was remotely qualified to even be the president from the very beginning. And whatever right and good that comes out of this White House is not fundamentally because Trump actually cares about anything other that his own experience. It is not difficult to find apodictic reasons for this belief. This is your audience here. And you know it.

your recent post history — csalisbury

:rofl:

I do not know what your name-calling is about — Nobeernolife

He may have learned it from our president.

Dont know who "we" is but, confirmation bias and virtue signalling are human conditions.You are right, I should not waste time on social media, but by the same token, why do you continue to parrot the crap you hear on CNN on this site? It is not like you are going to convince a dissident, all you do is get browny points from your fellow echo chamber residents. So, same question. — Nobeernolife

I have been on this forum for four years and have only 135 posts. That means I read. Nobody knows me, I don't parrot, I don't watch CNN. And the only thing I continue to do is read. And this is a philosophy forum not Twitter. The goal is not to be smugly indefeasible. I won't bother you with it again.

the TDS crowd — Nobeernolife

If we are all sick, and ignorant of it, then why engage with us? It can't be the challenge because we are all so stupid, it's too easy. Neither side is getting anywhere with the other. There has got to be a personal motivation. Are you like NOS and just enjoy stirring the pot? You continually end with the same sweeping generalization that discounts any response. Do you just like feeling self-satisfied?

You believe news emanating from the CCP?? — Nobeernolife

We depend on you to tell us what to believe in. Or Scott
Adams.

The European "mainstrteam" media is every bit on the Trump hating — Nobeernolife

I have never understood this automatic presupposition, that the default position, the null hypothesis, on anything Trump does has to be without regarding any of his history whatsoever. The world has had 4 years to watch what he has done and said and it is well documented; but according to the right he awakes each morning with a clean slate, to be judged only on the allowable spin that the public will bear on that day.

They’re playing with people’s livelihood to include provisions such as diversity hiring, aviation climate change studies, minimum wage, and other piffle. — NOS4A2

I know, it's so selfish.

Yeah, I have been talking about TDS, which I see as real medical situation. (Scott Adams says the same.) That is not meant as name-calling, but I can see that some take it as such. — Nobeernolife

But it is not a real medical situation and you know it. And who cares what Scott Adams says? Is he your authority? What it is, is your go-to rebuttal for every occasion. How helpful and convenient that anyone who has a different point of view is rendered unable to think on your level because they are sick. Do you imagine that every time you type that someone is going to thank you for the diagnosis and run to the doctor. No you don't. You type it because it makes you feel better. Safe and secure that you don't have to think. Why are you even here? Are you angry? Scared?

How do you know that? Right now, it seems to be toilet paper. — Nobeernolife

That was weak.

Ahh, well yes. Not something I know a lot about. But is there a historical example of people behaving differently?

Corona-virus doesn't scare me. It's the insane reaction towards it that worries me. — Shawn

What exactly are you referring too? There was going to be some form of nervous behavior. Buying toilet paper in bulk is harmless enough. I see social cooperation where I'm at.

A month or two from now we might have something to worry about.

I know some hopes are dashed, but Trump tested negative for coronavirus. — NOS4A2

Maybe it's fake news.

What I'd love to see, for once, is a list of truths. — NOS4A2

Start typing.

Not exactly a secret. — Nobeernolife

Interesting publication.

TDS is not name-calling. If you think the Trump Derangement Syndrome is not a real psychological phonemenon, you are probably caught in it. — Nobeernolife

I can not find any evidence of that. It's not in the DSM. But this is not the thread for that conversation. But thanks for the assumption that I'm deranged. Of course, that's not name calling either is it?

However, our politicians want to change that by massively importing high-fertility populations from the 3rd world, in order to reverse that trend. — Nobeernolife

Are you sure that is the motive?

Why the content-less name-calling? — Nobeernolife

Like TDS?

Take a look at the top two statistics (comparing deaths this year from Covid-19 and seasonal influenza) on this site — Janus

Thanks, that is a very useful site. Of course, then that asks how many of the seasonal influenza deaths were preventable with the proper care which would not stop Covid-19. Data we will never have.

I don't know what is so hard to understand about "two percent". — god must be atheist

Nothing hard about it. But you were talking about panic. Two percent or twenty can be the same deaths depending on sample size of those infected. It's the total deaths that people might panic about.

This may be scary, but the fatality rate is only two percent. That is very low. We are panicking for no known reason. — god must be atheist

But there are far more cases than with SARS and MERS. The Corona death toll is now more than those two combined.

Bernie will crush Trump in national debates. — creativesoul

I don't think Trump will agree to debate. He has said as much. Why would he risk it?

Michael Avenatti is facing forty some years in prison. Will Barr or Trump have a more lenient sentencing guideline to offer?:grin:

Cannot wait for the national debates between Bernie and Trump. — creativesoul

I don't think Trump will debate. He can't possibly look competent. He might just say they are rigged and be done with it.

The combination of NOS4A2 and your profession was too satisfying a conclusion. I apologizes.

Sorry, wrong person

Oh Shit! Are you a lawyer? Okay, never mind. Goodnight.

I did not. — NOS4A2

I was just bored and felt like typing something. You are indefeasible. Go on reading your rebuttals.

You made the claim.

According to the DOJ it had no contact with the White House, and that the decision to change the sentencing recommendation was made before the Trump tweet. — NOS4A2

What makes this true? The media?

DOJ is accepting evidence from Giuliani while Giuliani is being investigated by the DOJ?