Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces
A polemic is always strictly adversarial, an argument does not have to be. Perhaps you don't know this, but again, I can only respond to what you actually write.
When an argument takes an adverse position in response to another position or conclusion, it is necessarily adversarial. That much is clear from my response to Zeno above. Therefore, in this circumstance, the argument I am making is undoubtedly a polemic, and the two words are contextually synonymous. Even without this equivalence, 'polemic' and 'argument' are very often used interchangeably, even when there is no direct adversity (we'll get to that in bit).
Moreover, this has little to do with the crux of the matter: Zeno made a general declaration regarding consistency in spelling, and I responded to that general declaration. You retorted with mention of how text has a "wide variety of purposes", "James Joyce", and "poetry", all points that had nothing to do with context or my post. In essence, you started an argument over a rather absurd misinterpretation of my response to Zeno because you refused to admit said misinterpretation, and have now commenced deflecting with fallacious semantics arguments and ad hominem (we'll get to that in a bit also).
Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces
The word polemic describes a very specific type of rhetoric amd derives from the greek "polemos", which means "war". Argument derives from the latin "argumentum", which means "support" and it is a very broad term. They can be synonyms which is why it is listed like so in dictionaries, but so can "love" and "appreciate".
Copy/pasting from Google is fun and all, but when you're using it as filler to save face over your original mistake, it's hardly worth the time saved over forming your own thoughts. Not only did you err in failing to realize that a responsive argument taking a contrary position is a polemic, which is what my reply to Zeno is, but you now admit the more general fact that 'polemic' and 'argument' can be synonymous. This much I already mentioned: 'polemic' and 'argument' are often used interchangeably, regardless of adversity. In your attempt to deflect from the primary contention, you've managed to err in an entirely new dispute.
I still fail to see how this relates to your misinterpretation of my reply to Zeno, or to presenting a justification for starting a captious argument that now has you copy/pasting word origins from a basic Google search. The really hilarious part is that, despite the effort, my original statement regarding 'polemic' and 'argument' being synonymous is correct, especially in the context of an argument that takes the adverse position.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces
You seem to enjoy using big words, there is a bit more to that than knowing how to spell them.
Lovely ad hominem, though entirely without merit. First off, I'm not sure what "big words" you're referring to. If it is "polemic", then your linguistic faculties are in a far more serious predicament than I originally thought. Secondly, as explained above, my use of the word was correct: it is synonymous with 'argument', especially when referring to an adverse position in response.
It seems you're developing a bit of a pattern here as far as reading comprehension goes: if I recall correctly, you posted about how I was ignoring another poster's (Original_Position) calls to "back up and source" my claims, though after I explained to you that I never made such claims, you failed to respond (most likely because you realized your mistake).
I guess you had enough of having your intellectual failures pointed out to you, so you decided to derail and deny your misinterpretation by copy/pasting an irrelevant summary of the origins of the words 'polemic' and 'argument' to give your mostly senseless reply a veneer of acumen and insight. Adorable. You do realize that a word's origin and how it is used, including what it is synonymous to, often have little in common? Let me know if you have questions about that- I know a good site on philology that breaks this down neatly and succinctly.
Pro tip for the future: when you make a mistake, just admit it and move on. Don't make a big psychotic spectacle of yourself by denying it and launching sophistic salvos about semantics. I'm not here to placate your intellectual insecurities: when you post something unreasonable on a public forum, you should not be surprised to get called out on it. If you want someone to pat you on the head and tell you you're right when you're clearly not, I suggest calling up your kin.
More, please. This is getting kind of fun now.
Last edited by Lychon; 03-11-2017 at 09:10 AM.