- Joined
- Dec 31, 2018
There can't be an infinite regression of victims because there isn't an infinite chain that relies on each prior step in the chain in his argument. Rick would actually himself provide the proof otherwise when he does what he will do (and has done before) and say they can be stopped by simply eliminating all guns from existence permanently. Pat will be saying there is only one cause of victims, not an infinite set of causes that all rely on the one that came before: guns. Fat would have to reject this to instead claim every individual mass shooting is the result of all of human history before it and he can't do that because it would imply there's no solution.Another cynical attempt at engagement, another massive failure. Also I think he used "infinite regression" wrong or at least in a weird way.
View attachment 4325729
Patirck simply does not know what a regression is or what regress means in the context he tried to use it in. (Any definition apparently since the more casual one would suggest the number of victims is shrinking back to zero the complete opposite of what he intends it to mean.) He seems to think regression means "more numbers" which itself would be theoretically infinite making the addition of "infinite" superfluous.
Professional writer who did not get a 1.7 GPA, atalker.