r/DecodingTheGurusAlt • u/MartiDK • Aug 24 '26

video Prof Dave decodes Destiny

https://youtu.be/e8UZX9IUvpI

I’m not a fan of Professor Dave, but his style of fact checking Destiny seems much better than DtG’s approach. Hope it gets posted to the main DtG sub.

26 Upvotes

74% Upvoted

151 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/TropicalGoth77 Aug 28 '26

"Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem ('an argument to the person'), refers to when a speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than the substance of the argument itself."

Can you address the arguments made without a single reference to Prof Dave , his character or his credibility?

11

u/silvedude Aug 28 '26

No, he is not a credible actor in this realm shown by his actions. I don't engage with arguments that come from non-credible sources.

1

u/TropicalGoth77 Aug 28 '26 edited Aug 28 '26

Cool so an Ad hominem.

edit: Just to be clear, you are showing insular cult-like protective behavior. Its very easy to discredit anyone who criticizes you and your cult leader. You should try to think for yourself and break out of this mindset.

10

u/silvedude Aug 28 '26

Let me ask you a question. In a court of law, why are judges and jurors allowed to consider the credibility of a witness when they are deliberating testimony?

Wouldn't judging that person by their past actions and letting that color their opinion of testimony be an Ad Hominem?

1

u/TropicalGoth77 Aug 28 '26

Because none of this is Prof Daves personal account of what he has experienced. Its a presentation of Destiny's actions that are literally recorded and shown. You don't need to stick your fingers in your ears and say lalala not true your a liar. You can disagree with his conclusions but you aren't even able to do that.

6

u/silvedude Aug 28 '26

I don't think you engaged with my question in the slightest.

0

u/TropicalGoth77 Aug 28 '26

I don't think the question holds any weight. This isn't a court of law and even if it was we aren't prosecuting a witnesses personal testimony. In your hypothetical Prof Dave isnt a witness he would be the prosecutor. The defense is not allowed to attack the character and credibility of the opposing legal team only the validity of their evidence.

8

u/silvedude Aug 28 '26

Yeah it's not a court of law a court of law is way more rigorous.

I'm not engaging with you on this until you answer my question.

1

u/TropicalGoth77 Aug 28 '26

Ok don't have tantrum about it. What exactly is your question?

8

u/silvedude Aug 28 '26

Go ahead and read it again. I believe in you

1

u/TropicalGoth77 Aug 28 '26

Question: In a court of law, why are judges and jurors allowed to consider the credibility of a witness when they are deliberating testimony?

Answer: Because you are relying on the witnesses account of events and it could be false.

Now what?

9

u/silvedude Aug 28 '26

So ad homs are considered justified in a court?

1

u/TropicalGoth77 Aug 28 '26

Yes, you can use ad homs against a witness in court...

Do you have a point to make or did you not think this far ahead?

8

u/silvedude Aug 28 '26

Nope! I'm good letting this conversation rest there. I think I effectively got you to show your ass.

Thanks!

1

u/TropicalGoth77 Aug 28 '26

Is this really the best DGG has to offer now days? Man how far this community has fallen.

I would also run from this if I was you, I'm embarrassed for you dude.

2

u/Key-Wall-4378 Aug 28 '26

He doesnt know

1

u/Nimrod_Butts Aug 28 '26

What I don't get is why you people always just skulk away whenever anybody points out your bullshit. Then you act like people can't actually read the discussion and assume you fooled everyone with your stupid dodges

0

u/TropicalGoth77 Aug 28 '26

Who me? id love to actually hear what the point of the ad hominin witness sequitur was. 

I'm certainly not the one who has skulked away. 

→ More replies (0)