Lucem Ferre

I doubt that you do but...

So he is making commentary on the looks of women in an environment where sex appeal is not a qualifying factor. It's not just a quick compliment or something like that. It's a full on emphasis on the sex appeal of the female contestants. He did not give that same attention to the males. In that context it does imply that women are nothing more than sex appeal. It is ridiculous that it had to be explained to you.

Terrapin_Station

What's ridiculous is that you think your conclusion there has anything whatsoever to do with deductive logic. It doesn't.

Unfortunately I doubt you even have any idea how deductive validity is conventionally defined. You could look it up, of course, but I'd bet anything you not be able to explain it or relay the conventional implications of it with respect to something like the impetus for developing relevance logics.

Chula Vista

Interesting debate. He probably stopped the bleeding and fired up his base but there's no way he won over any of the undecided. He was very rude and not only kept interrupting her but also sparred with the female moderator pretty aggressively a number of times. The way he stalked the stage while she was talking was downright creepy and he wouldn't look any of the people on stage in their eyes. She was very engaging on a personal level when asked a question by one of them.

Him saying that if elected he's going to work to put Clinton in jail is not going to go over well in the coming days. The post debate commentators are already all over it. First, there has to be a complete division between the White House and any Federal Prosecutions. Secondly, a newly elected official who jails their opponent sound pretty damn dictator like.

Terrapin, do you have a wife or daughter(s)? If yes, how do they feel about that Trump tape?

__________________

“The fact that we live at the bottom of a deep gravity well,
on the surface of a gas covered planet going around a nuclear fireball 90 million miles away
and think this to be normal is obviously some indication of how skewed our perspective tends to be.”

Terrapin_Station

Yes, both.That it's ridiculous that people were making such a big deal out of it. They feel the same way, as I do, about things like harping on Hillary's emails, historical stuff with Bill, etc.

Like me, they see all of that stuff as a stupid distraction from what matters: candidates talking about what they're going to attempt to do if they're elected; what their goals are, at least some rough ideas how they plan to achieve those goals (with the understanding that they do not have absolute power, might have to compromise, change plans, etc.), how they will attempt to impact our daily lives for the better, and so on.

All the scandal-type crap that people constantly focus on is a complete waste of time. But that's a lot easier on all ends--the politicians', public's, and the media's--than focusing on issues that matter, that make a difference, etc. It's as if people want to be outraged, offended, etc. rather than trying to do anything positive, rather than trying to make any changes, etc. And it's not just in politics "proper" that this happens. Look at reactions to something like Colin Kaepernick's refusing to say the Pledge of Allegiance. Yeah, let's just get upset about that instead of giving two $h|ts about the impetus behind it, instead of figuring out what we can do to change the situation between the police and the citizenry.

If people, including the media, want to get outraged, how about getting outraged that candidates do not have any sort of specific/detailed plans regarding how to make sure that everyone has shelter, food, health care, education, employment, etc.? I'd like to see debates moderated so that when they ask candidates a question, as soon as the candidate starts to go off-topic, as soon as they start to bring up scandal crap, personal attacks, etc. instead, their mics are cut off.

Lucem Ferre

You can make mendacious claims all day about the validity and understanding of logic, but at this point I understand it's not worth my time arguing with your self contradicting try hard attempt at proving a point.

Terrapin_Station

It's not worth it on your end because you don't know what the fnck you're talking about (re bringing up deductive logic for example). You wouldn't know a simple modus ponens if it bent you over and sodomized you.