It may well be that in 50 or so years, some of the views which you currently hold dear will be regarded as absurd. People may even resort to playground insults such as "stupid" to describe them.
I do not see any problem with that. I myself think some views or opinions I have held in the past were stupid or ignorant. And have modified them as I acquired greater knowledge or understanding. That's how progress works.
Saying something is stupid is hardly a playground insult if it is simply descriptive of what something is.
Quote from: jjj on 2012-02-09, 07:08:45
The ad is asserting men are better than women. Yet their maths is saying that women are in fact equal to men and that is why it is a bad use of maths. If when doubling the amount of voters [by adding women] it only doubles the irresponsibility, it means that men and women are equally irresponsible, thus contradicting their stance.
Which is precisely what I wrote in response to your original post. Are you sure you're not Jack Koerner in disguise? Look at what you wrote originally, quoted below, and try to justify it.
Quote from: jjj on 2012-02-07, 23:53:28
This is a fantastically stupid ad. As whilst it tries to demean women, it actually says all men are irresponsible.
incidentally, suggesting that your arithmetic is deficient is not an attack ad hominem. It's a rational deduction from your rather bizarre shifts of stance.
No justification needed as second post simply explains what the first one said, but in more detail.
You said'It doesn't say that all men are irresponsible. The sentence "Woman's suffrage would double the irresponsible vote" merely implies that the same proportion of women are irresponsible as of men (and that there would be equal numbers of enfranchised men and women).'
But what you forget is that the ad is attacking women, not some women, but women as a whole. Hence the doubling of irresponsibility therefore implies all men are irresponsible as the sexes are split 50/50, because one doesn't really take from this ad that they are asking for just the bright women to be allowed the vote. Either way it completely undermines their entire point, which is the very, very, very important and relevant part
, not the percentage of human irresponsibility
And the stupid maths is to repeat myself, is in the use of the maths [which scuppers the argument] not the actual arithmetic. So no shift in my view, as my stance was always that the poster undermines itself due to the poor logic. Hardly a 'bizarre' shift of stance.