its something mama raven probably taught him but its painfully obviously he's just being contrarian. You can reject the soundness of any argument by just using a proprietary definition of words. Its the same stupid technicality thing he does all the time. Its what children do, because he's a child.
"No running in the house"
"I'm not running i'm jogging"
As a syllogism:
- socrates is a man
- all men are mortal
- soctrates is mortal
Socrates isn't a man, i'm sorry you're so stupid plato child. If you just redefine a term in a premise to something else every argument . This is the reason to "formalize" arguments in this way. You can show exactly how someone is being dishonest in their terms. Pat thinks he's cracked the code of winning every argument by just being dishonest. Like a toddler would.
He works backwards from the conclusion to redefine the premises. I disagree with the conclusion to stop interacting with the trolls, so the only way out of that is to say they are not trolls.
- Rick's "stalkers" are trolls
- trolls respond when you respond
- if you stop responding they will trolling
- if you want trolls to stop trolling then you stop responding
ps: don't @ me about using faggot philosophy