Rapper: I Wouldn't Help Police Catch A Serial Killer

Originally posted by Rasobasi420

Appeal to popularity

The Appeal to Popularity has the following form:

1. Most people approve of X (have favorable emotions towards X).
2. Therefore X is true.

The basic idea is that a claim is accepted as being true simply because most people are favorably inclined towards the claim. More formally, the fact that most people have favorable emotions associated with the claim is substituted in place of actual evidence for the claim. A person falls prey to this fallacy if he accepts a claim as being true simply because most other people approve of the claim.

Post a link to the source, how am I supposted to make anything out of it without seeing it in its full context. You do have a habit of doing that and kind of makes me wonder or suspect what you are getting at.

Originally posted by shots

Post a link to the source, how am I supposted to make anything out of it without seeing it in its full context. You do have a habit of doing that and kind of makes me wonder or suspect what you are getting at.

I don't see what citing a source does when dealing with logical fallacies. Please explain that to me when you can. Anyway, here's the source. You may find it useful when compiling a logical argument.

www.nizkor.org...

If you believe the site to be suspect, and have an agenda, I'd love to hear it.

Originally posted by Rasobasi420


If you believe the site to be suspect, and have an agenda, I'd love to hear it.

It is not the site it is the author of the project.

I see no relvance between hip hop/rap music and Holocaust denial the two are not related.

Okay shots, you have officially lost me. What are you talking about? When did Holocaust denial enter into this?

It's also a Red Herring

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:

1. Topic A is under discussion.
2. Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
3. Topic A is abandoned.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.

[edit on 30-4-2007 by Rasobasi420]

I think the biggest issue is that music's popularity is based on how much money their production company has. How can anyone with a decent message make it onto the radio when the radio is owned by the people that many are speaking out against?

All that leaves us (the listener) with is music that dulls us to life, and reality. Most mainstream music nowadays (including rap, rock, and country) is about nothing.

Mainstream rap is about money, bling, and girls
Mainstream rock is a bunch of brooding goth kids complaining about their girlfriend.
Mainstream country is about..... I actually have no idea what mainstream country is about.

Real Hip-Hop is banned, because it disses the corporation, instead of some predetermined opponent rapper

Real rock is banned because it speaks against the media, the government, and corporations.

Real country is banned because they talk about sleeping with their cousins, an act that is just weird, so not allowed on the air.

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Okay shots, you have officially lost me. What are you talking about? When did Holocaust denial enter into this?

You brought it by using your source that is arguing the fallacy of the holocaust and once again you are quoting ex sources surrounded by ex tags without links. :shk:

Important Note: Always remember to put where you got your quote from, and remember to include the url of the source, as this gives the proof that it is indeed a 'real' source and secondly it credits the owner of the source.
How to quote

[edit on 5/1/2007 by shots]

shots, the page I linked to was just a database of logical fallacies. It had nothing to do with the holocaust whatsoever. I could have linked to at least a dozen pages that define logical fallacies, this one just happened to be the one I was looking at. And I'll say now that any time I post the definition of a logical fallacy, it will be from the above link.

Still a red herring shots...... I think you're avoiding the topic because I showed that your points were fallacious in nature.

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
shots, the page I linked to was just a database of logical fallacies.

hum you seem to forget that logic has nothing to do with the way I think when it comes to my likes and dislikes of music. My ears tell me what I like, not logic so using it to argue is ridiculous on your part since I am not arguing logic I am arguing morals and bad music.

Originally posted by shots
hum you seem to forget that logic has nothing to do with the way I think when it comes to my likes and dislikes of music. My ears tell me what I like, not logic so using it to argue is ridiculous on your part since I am not arguing logic I am arguing morals and bad music.

shots, have you forgotten what you're arguing? You want music to be censored according to your moral standing. Your ears may tell you what you like, but they have nothing to do with me. If you don't like it, don't listen, and don't let your children listen.

You claimed that the music had a direct effect on society by embedding bad morals into it's listeners. Are you now saying that you were incorrect?

If your wife, mother and children were shot in the chest, bleeding and dying right before you and you could identify the perpetrators to the police --- wouldn't you?! I find it absurd to hear that any rapper or hip hopster would not assist in this situation.

CoS, I think it's more likely that someone would go after the perpetrator themselves than risk putting them into the already flawed justice system.

I know I would, but I guess some people trust the "authorities" more than I do.

Originally posted by Rasobasi420


You claimed that the music had a direct effect on society by embedding bad morals into it's listeners. Are you now saying that you were incorrect?

No I am not. I stand by what I said if you clean up the lyrics it will affect the mindset of the younger generations. You can argue hip rap is great wonderful from the top of a mountain but that will not make it better, that can only be done by cleaning up the lyrics and you do not need your logic to write at least I don't.

I gave one example to that yoi disagreed, but I will repeat it anyhow perhaps this time it will sink in. Act and treat people in a decent manor, talk nice no profanities and chances are you will get along fine however walk up to someone and start swearing at them gets them mad every or almost every time which leads to fights. See how easy it is. You could stop stereotyping all cops as being bad and start talking nice to them and I think you will find that when you treat them nice they respond the same way to you.

Just watch some of the reality series cop shows when people are nice the cops are nice when the people are angry the cops get angry.

Are you using "Cops" as an example of how the police act? There's a camera on them!! do you think they're going to act the way they normally act? C'mon shots, I said they didn't care about the neighborhood, not that they were stupid.

And I said before, but you disregarded, poetry and music is about expressing feelings, not about making people like you. Profanity is a way of expressing anger. It's also a way of expressing joy.

Originally posted by carnival_of_souls2047
If your wife, mother and children were shot in the chest, bleeding and dying right before you and you could identify the perpetrators to the police --- wouldn't you?! I find it absurd to hear that any rapper or hip hopster would not assist in this situation.

If that happened to me I doubt the police would put as much effort into the case as they would if it were someone else. Meaning I would have better luck finding out myself who did it then relying on the police

---> To all of you posters calling this absurd How many of you live in an area where the police are know for there brutality and corruption? How many of you are black or another minority and live in the same sort of area? If you were coming from such a Perspective I highly doubt you would think the idea of not trusting the cops was so absurd

[edit on 5/1/2007 by ImpliedChaos]

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Are you using "Cops" as an example of how the police act? There's a camera on them!! do you think they're going to act the way they normally act? C'mon shots, I said they didn't care about the neighborhood, not that they were stupid.

Well one could use cops as an example but I was not referring to them alone. Most if not all squad cars now carry cameras and you can see the individuals that are stopped how they interact with police and how police react to them and you have to remember that even on cops many a time the individuals have no idea they are on camera even though the police do. I also have heard some stories from our local police who stop by from time to time regarding the neighborhood watch program.

Profanity is a way of expressing anger. It's also a way of expressing joy.

100 times over that's a hoot. Not in my book it is not; profanity is a sign if ignorance.

There in lies the problem with today's children and individuals they have stooped to a new low by communicating using profanity. I can communicate just fine without it why can't otters?

40 years ago for sure and possibly as few as 20 using it on the streets got you arrested, it was illegal back then and still is now if you use it in the wrong places. You cannot walk into a bar, restaurant, night club, store, the list is endless and if the owner asks you to stop you have to stop or they can have you arrested.







[edit on 5/1/2007 by shots]

Shots you keep talking about back in the day...hate to tell you this but we are in a new century sorry if you dont like the way people express themselves You can turn the channel or walk away. Its not that hard.

Well this makes me happy but I am sure some around here will be sad


About time people did something about it.

[edit on 5/1/2007 by shots]

Originally posted by ImpliedChaos
Shots you keep talking about back in the day...hate to tell you this but we are in a new century sorry if you dont like the way people express themselves You can turn the channel or walk away. Its not that hard.

New Century Old century really makes no difference if the people of the world would prohibit the use of profanity in every building, home anyone using it could be arrested or if at work you could be fired. I already gave several examples look at them that is a fact of life you do not have free speech everywhere you go so live with it.

Some would love to limit speech. You can use some words, but not others. You can use the more subdued way of expression; "I am angry" but you can't say "F*CK" and really get your point across.

And this is art, and expression. You may not like the art, but to deny the expression is more destructive and disgusting than anything that could be said in any poem. It's burning books

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
And this is art, and expression.

No it is not. I have said it twice perhaps three times it is showing ones ignorance and lack of comprehension when it comes to the use of the English language.

I know you may not like it but the article I posted earlier is perhaps a sign of things to come. I do not care who you are there is absolutely no need to refer to the police as pigs let alone make threats of violence.

BTW I hope you do know that circumventing ATS censors as yu did above is a violation of terms and Conditions.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

HOWEVER: Members attempting to bypass the censors with "Cu#se" style words or "Cvrse" style alternate spellings will receive a warning and ATS points deduction.

[edit on 5/1/2007 by shots]