I suppose you're going to start repeating imperialist maxims to obfuscate from the fact that your allegiance to orthodox dogma has been uncovered.
Predicting your debate opponent's next "move" is fair, but using that prediction as an attack is not.
Your closed mind is preventing you from approaching this reality in a manner consistent with enlightened, anti-authoritarian thought.
This is a personal attack, which is unfair.
you're only making yourself appear foolish.
Subjective observations are fair, but usually only when the subjective observation adds to your argument in a non-fallacious way. So I think this is unfair.
All the word salad in the world can't help you if you insist on making imperialist bullying moves to conceal your hatred for open-mindedness. I'm trying to discuss the epiphenomenon of quantum faith and would appreciate it if you would keep your snide authoritarianism out of it. A wholistic view to the relation between religion, mind, body, and spirit can't be pigeonholed into the existing reductionist philosophies that you dogmatically adhere to.
More personal attacks, and some mind reading (underlined). Mind reading is a very unfair tactic, but it is also very common, especially between quarreling lovers. Additionally, even though I agree with your "word salad" accusation, the fair thing to say is, "I don't understand what you are trying to say," since that is more true than the metaphor.
All of this is simply based on college debates, which doesn't always work well for internet debates.
= new reply since forum marked as read
