Is Landis82 a racist?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Steelers Baby, Dec 21, 2009.

Is Landis82 a Racist?

  1. Yes, he attacked someone based on their ethnicity and is therefore a racist.

    5 vote(s)
    71.4%
  2. No, it is not, while you are not allowed to question anything a black president says or does it is o

    2 vote(s)
    28.6%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ricter

    Ricter

    They could be doing no more than merely supporting you, or your implication that liberals use "racism" unfairly. Like how people rate these threads: "I like this poster", vs. "I don't like this poster".
     
    #31     Dec 21, 2009


  2. Yeah well if you also take the context of the conversation which dr. jekyllus admitted to being from Malaysia you would also know it seems to be something where he is imlpying he is of another ethnicity.

    I would say when you put it into context he is calling Optional777 an idiot and saying he is from Malaysia when being accused of being klannish i would assume this to mean he is of a different race. Other than white.


     
    #32     Dec 21, 2009
  3. Ricter

    Ricter

    Please, let's not bring Z10 into this.

    Edit: for the love of all that is holy!
     
    #33     Dec 21, 2009
  4. How ironic that the person who holds the key to whether or not Landis82 will be labelled a racist is dr. Jekyllus. :D :D :D
     
    #34     Dec 21, 2009
  5. lol you are right now i just went to far....:D
     
    #35     Dec 21, 2009
  6. Ricter

    Ricter

    Lol
     
    #36     Dec 21, 2009
  7. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    Hmmm, so since most homosexuals are liberals. Demographically speaking, most ET member liberals are homosexuals?

    You may want to check my math on that Nik.
     
    #37     Dec 21, 2009
  8. Go fuck yourself........tradertwerp.

    My opinion is simply that you are a twerp, based upon your posts. And a gutless one at that.
     
    #38     Dec 21, 2009
  9. Ricter

    Ricter

    Actually, that needs a logic check.
     
    #39     Dec 21, 2009
  10. I'd hesitate to lecture you in philosophy, but are we not talking about two different things here? Seems like you're talking syllogism

    1. Major premise: Most homosexuals are liberals

    2. Minor premise: Some ET members are liberals

    3. Conclusion: Most liberal ET members are homosexuals

    The above is not rigorous, in that it contains certain elements which are inimical to true syllogism, but I think it's what you were getting at. In addition, it should be clear that there's a logical error between 2 and 3. If the major premise were changed to

    1. Most liberals are homosexuals

    it would be easier to defend, syllogistically speaking, although it would clearly be wrong due to bad premises.

    I was making a strictly statistical inference; simply, that if a large majority of ET members are white, a sampling of the most virulent racists will most likely include a majority of whites. Please note that this is a probabilistic statement, relevant before any analysis of the likelihood that a particular racial group contains within itself a higher proportion of racists than another group.

    To put it more clearly, there is no minor premise (like, for example, whites tend to be more racist than other racial groups) involved in my inference.

    Tread carefully when trying to nail me on a technicality.

    : )
     
    #40     Dec 21, 2009
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.