Beginner needs advice

[harrismh777]

Ian Kelly wrote:
> You have just misrepresented Steven's argument, which is rather ironic
> considering that you're the one who brought up straw-men.  Steven did
> not use one code snippet to demonstrate that Python 2 and Python 3 are
> fully compatible.  The code snippet merely demonstrated that Python 2
> and 3 are not "totally incompatible" as you had claimed.

    Ian gets the Christmas turkey for pinning the irony on me fair 'n 
square...  'demonstrating' the straw-man is intimately and infinitely 
more delicious than just defining it... besides, the tables must be 
turned me thinks...    :)

>
> I realize you are now asserting that compatibility is a boolean
> condition, and that "totally incompatible" is a redundant phrase that
> you tossed out as a joke.  I don't know whether you're sincere or
> backpedaling, but in any case this assertion is flatly ludicrous.
> Following your definition,*nothing*  is compatible with anything else.
>   If you disagree, then I invite you to list one example of two
> different things that are compatible.

    one man, and one woman....

>
> And finally, . . . you
> seem to view all analogies as false) regardless of what that person
> actually said

    ... all analogies are argumentative fallacy. Now, the analogy event 
(or ontological state of the analogy) may in fact be true... but that 
event or state can *never* be used to assert truth in 'different event' 
or fact of 'another state' as the 'same thing(s)'.

    The truth or fallacy of an argument should never be asserted by the 
use of an analogy regardless how well the analogy illustrates the point. 
Some folks believe that a good illustration of a point can be used to 
prove the point true (or false), when in fact the illustration (the 
analogy event) is often nothing more than entertaining explanation 
(Steven's are some of the best, I admit !)

-- even if that person does*sometimes*  actually commit
> those fallacies -- then you yourself are employing an ad hominem.


    ... oh ho ho... lol   yes...   again...     guilty as charged.



kind regards,
m harris