There are also a few WC defenders who are able to remain objective and do not for the most part tend to fall into using fallacies to bolster their position. They also do not demonize the opponent.
If I were to think that there are WC defenders who really believe the WCR, these would be the ones. From your posts, I consider you to be one of them. I also have spoken with others, such as Ken Rahn, who are able to debate issues with respect for the differences in position.
Nonetheless, the more rabid WC defenders who attack and demonize CTs irrationally using fallacy and propaganda are, ironically, those whom I think keep the need for an alternative to the WCR going strong. They are of even more help to the CT movement than the CTs themselves.
Pamela Brown
http://inbroaddaylightjfk.blogspot.com/
If I were to think that there are WC defenders who really believe the WCR, these would be the ones. From your posts, I consider you to be one of them. I also have spoken with others, such as Ken Rahn, who are able to debate issues with respect for the differences in position.
Nonetheless, the more rabid WC defenders who attack and demonize CTs irrationally using fallacy and propaganda are, ironically, those whom I think keep the need for an alternative to the WCR going strong. They are of even more help to the CT movement than the CTs themselves.
Pamela Brown
http://inbroaddaylightjfk.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment