Sentences with phrase «valid argument you would»

If you had a valid argument you wouldn't need to lie about it.

LVG has had 18 months, and whilst anyone can argue we have improved, another valid argument would be that pretty much any manager in the Premier League working with this squad would have United where they are or higher, and playing better football.

Not exact matches

* But there is also a valid policy argument that companies that own both cable channels and cable wires have excessive power over pricing, and that blocking such a merger is a good use of anti-trust power — even if it's an argument you'd usually hear from the left side of the aisle.

«There would be valid accounting arguments for the costs of relinquishing that «right» as well.

Now, in the past, some of these arguments might have been valid.

I've seen some valid arguments made for holding a large percentage of bonds.

After about a year or so of his loud and passionate arguing many of us would just avoid him as we did not feel that the arguments were valid nor important enough to listen to.

Taken as a whole they've made a very compelling argument that the explanations of the universe provided by both science and religion are incomplete and always evolving, and that one perspective is no more or less valid than another.

and the ad hominem attacks continue... boo hoo... I don't have a valid argument to counter his claims... I'll just call him names to make myself feel better...

@Liz — It seems like the argument you are making is valid but only from the perspective of either creating a high risk of complication / retardation which science has proven when children are born to closely related people, and the «Ick» factor of not wanting to imagine two siblings getting it on.

To go along with this, you have to believe three things, all controversial: (1) that authenticity is a valid idea; (2) that you can argue in reason about ideals and about the conformity of practices to these ideals; and (3) that these arguments can make a difference.

You know I have a valid point here, but to avoid acknowledging it you resort to a straw man argument, and straw man arguments are intellectually dishonest.

If you actually had any valid counter arguments to what I'm saying you would offer them.

Fortunately, crack pots on either side of the extreme make it easy to shoot down their arguments, because they don't have many valid arguments.

(that's a valid argument to make) Did you have concerns about their methodologies?

Now this would be a valid argument if one understood the self in terms of individual autonomy, so that one's understanding of one's self as subject would be quite distinct from ones understanding of the cosmic or historical situation one confronted as object.

I've never come across any valid argument that it's a different Christ we worship.»

I will agree that an argument from majority is not always valid, but in this case I think it would be analogous to the fact that there is a small percentage of individuals who don't believe we went to the moon.

(If the ontological argument were shown to be valid, the may be true» would in both cases imply «is true.»)

ddeevviinn, you said; «It is in this land of reality that 90 % (in actuality a little less, but for sake of argument we'll use this figure) of the population has determined that the Judeo - Christian God revealed in the biblical literature is valid.»

Hartshorne notoriously has spent much time and energy in advancing what he regards as valid forms of the ontological argument.

It is in this land of reality that 90 % (in actuality a little less, but for sake of argument we'll use this figure) of the population has determined that the Judeo - Christian God revealed in the biblical literature is valid.

You would need to admit that if your argument is valid and that in order to reject belief in something, we would need to be omniscient, than you'd have to admit that they should also believe in Thor because to NOT believe would mean that YOU are omniscient and see that Thor is not in that set of knowledge you possess.

@NAH, can rebut each of Colin's points in a reasonable manner, specifically let me call out two (both sort of related)-- the Christianity refers to only 600 years of history, and only refers to a small geography (not even the entire earth)-- why «leap of faith» argument is valid for Christianity and not for other independent faiths, which have many contradictory beliefs compared to Christianity, and if they are equally valid, how can they all be equally valid

I am sure you have understood that I think this argument is not valid.

I would posit that an argument could be made for the existance of Christianity if Paul had not been invovled as equally valid, therfore this being a moot point.

He shows that this is similar to Chesterton's approach and W.V.O. Quine's argument that «the only valid test of a belief is whether it fits into a web of connected beliefs that accords with our experience of the whole» (p. 63 - I would think that Newman's concept of the «Illative Sense» would dovetail with this.)

Anscombe had responded that, however our rational nature came into existence, reasoned argument might be valid even if our reason was the product of nonrational causes.

Basing your arguments on quotes from books you yourself don't seem to understand is as valid as me quoting the back of the cereal box except the back of the cereal box usually has nuggets of truth!

By the way, that was me pretending to be you Red Dwarf because I have no valid argument and can only act like a 3rd grade child when faced with actual logic and reason.

A valid and reasonable argument has been made for both positions.

Tom Tom makes too many as sumptions about others.No wonder it can't make a valid argument and why does it have to think that it is only one that lives in a good neighborhood and that everyone else lives in a trailor?

No one will respond to that OOO because they have no valid argument, except to agree that using Daniel's logic 98 percent of people that attend Catholic church are not really Catholic (so they will just ignore your post instead).

So unless you can provide evidence backed by the scientific method, you have no valid argument.

Because EVERY valid argument that folks have make for redefining marriage for Gays, can equally be used for the legalization of Polygamy (think Sharia Law), and even group marriages.

Unbelievable that fred and Robert thinks the same arguments that have been refuted before are still valid.

«Historically, opinion on the appeal to authority has been divided — it has been held to be a valid argument about as often as it has been considered an outright fallacy.»

Andrew, for your argument to be valid, all knowing has to mean something other than all knowing.

By moving the dates back a bit earlier, you could substi.tute Christianity for Islam and have an equally valid argument.

I have yet to actually hear a valid argument, just a «you are stupid».

Both sides have a valid argument.

There are valid arguments for and against running Silver Spoon (who, unlike Regret, would have to carry 121 pounds against the colts» 126 pounds) in the Derby, and Whitney intends to weigh all of them with the meticulous care of a Cape Canaveral supervisor before he orders the button pushed.

Truth is a teleological argument for the existence of a supreme intelligent entity is more valid than any argument based on random chance that I have ever heard.

I'm sorry my friend... your arguments may be valid if arsene has been the coach for a year or two.

I do believe that Gazidis was weak and done very little to convince Silent Stan that the issues was the managers fault, Wenger has been able to turn around and point to poor transfer activity from the board to result in a poor team for him to manage, for someone who isn't deeply understanding about football then Wengers arguments could sound equally valid.

Given he achieved that in less than half the amount of time Wenger has been in charge, it is a valid argument to say that Graham was more successful in terms of both winning the domestic league, and in European football.

While Alexis Sanchez has received criticism this season too for his moaning attitude at times, Ozil can be particularly frustrating as if he isn't being creative and decisive in the final third, then there is a valid argument that he becomes a liability for the team as a whole.

It's clearly obvious to the entire world that Arsenal is not a healthy club, and does not have a successful team, so this article's argument for increased aggression and ruthlessness is valid and long overdue.

Defencivly Coq has performed better than Schneiderlin, more tackles per 90 mins and less fouls given, more headers and winning a higher %... so yeah, we could have a valid argument that Coq is the better holding CM so far this season then the # 25 + million man Schniderlin

Both sides have valid arguments and each option has pros and cons.