I was going to start in on the many other
weak arguments here, but it would be longer than this excessively long post.
Your weak argument here suffers from what is called a staw - man argument.
Not exact matches
here's the
argument to your stupid hedge bet... which is a
weak reason to believe by the way... if there is a god, he is the all knowing, all loving, all accepting kind of god and he will recognize those that led good lives and those that led bad ones and regardless of their religious beliefs will judge them on their actions and be allowed into this heaven.
The
arguments posted thus far to leave that door open are
weak (being kind
here).
I have read many persuasive
arguments against spanking, especially in the Carnival if Gentle Discipline, but your
argument here is
weak.
Dr Rosedale seemed to feel that this was the
weakest point in my
argument, and directed his fire
here.
It was true that the studies proving the case for patent restoration — for laws that would give pharma additional compensatory patent time — were
weak and inconclusive, but the essence of the industry
argument struck a nerve with Engman:
here again was a case of overregulation hurting the economy of the nation and depriving the consumer of an improved product.
I probably have a certain amount of bias
here because at the time I was absorbing the contents of the debate / discussion raging at CA and tAV and it seemed pretty clear that the
arguments against the S09 method were strong and easily understood and the
arguments against were
weak misdirection.
I must say that what I find somewhat unfortunate in the interesting account provided
here (other than the already - noted focus on the
weakest arguments, such as name - calling, rather than trying to address the strongest ones — surely this is the very definition of the straw - man fallacy?)