Law School Discussion

Learning Disablilities

jgruber

Re: Learning Disablilities
« Reply #50 on: June 30, 2004, 12:27:22 PM »
I think you'll find as many doctors who will say depression is more often chemical.

Never claimed to be an authority...

Your statements had an obvious authoritative tone

but it is true that most depression is not based on a chemical imbalance that doctor can trace

do you have documentation to support this statement? Or should we accept it as true on the basis of your extensive knowledge in the medical field

Go look online at any medical site, or speak to any doctor.  It is a widely held opinion that is easy to back up...since i dont really care if you believe me or not, it isnt worth the time to produce a bibliography for you.

sarahz

  • ****
  • 127
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Learning Disablilities
« Reply #51 on: June 30, 2004, 12:30:56 PM »
which was sort of my point from the begining...because there is so much debate...you never know what school of thought the person looking at your application is going to have...so dont risk it.

no point in arguing the medical facts one way or the other, everyone has their own opinion based on experience or whatever...and none of us are doctors of medicine who specialize in depression.

superiorlobe

Re: Learning Disablilities
« Reply #52 on: June 30, 2004, 12:31:23 PM »
dont feed the troll

I'm sure you'll find it eventually.

Both of these responses are cop outs.

jgruber

Re: Learning Disablilities
« Reply #53 on: June 30, 2004, 12:32:27 PM »
Only if you can't see the logic in them.

dont feed the troll

I'm sure you'll find it eventually.

Both of these responses are cop outs.

superiorlobe

Re: Learning Disablilities
« Reply #54 on: June 30, 2004, 12:41:21 PM »
Only if you can't see the logic in them.

dont feed the troll

I'm sure you'll find it eventually.

Both of these responses are cop outs.

What is the logic in saying "don't feed the troll."  Are you aware that this is an ad hominem argument?  In case you don't know what an ad hominem is, let me include the following definition from http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ad+hominem&r=67

"Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason"

They give the following usage example:

"Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their opponents' motives."

As for your remark, let me announce that I sincerely don't see a flaw in my argument and I am sincerely interested in what you think the flaw is.

$ones

  • ****
  • 231
    • View Profile
Re: Learning Disablilities
« Reply #55 on: June 30, 2004, 12:45:13 PM »
Yes yes. I can tell you firsthand this is true.



just a side note.  to any of you young guys who want to impress the ladies.  SSRIs greatly increase sexual stamina in men.

guyutegirl (Jew-Lo)

  • ****
  • 1119
  • Donkey punch: It's not just for breakfast anymore
    • AOL Instant Messenger - Guyutegirl+JewLo
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Learning Disablilities
« Reply #56 on: June 30, 2004, 12:45:31 PM »
ad homi·nem adv.
Usage Note: As the principal meaning of the preposition ad suggests, the homo of ad hominem was originally the person to whom an argument was addressed, not its subject.


I think that sounds about right  :-*

nathanielmark

Re: Learning Disablilities
« Reply #57 on: June 30, 2004, 12:47:27 PM »
the flaw is that i was not making any statement that was based upon supposed medical expertise, the other poster was.  you dont need medical expertise to question someone else.

you are really slow lobes,  i am starting to think you are full of *&^% about those practice LSAT scores...



Only if you can't see the logic in them.

dont feed the troll

I'm sure you'll find it eventually.

Both of these responses are cop outs.

What is the logic in saying "don't feed the troll."  Are you aware that this is an ad hominem argument?  In case you don't know what an ad hominem is, let me include the following definition from http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ad+hominem&r=67

"Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason"

They give the following usage example:

"Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their opponents' motives."

As for your remark, let me announce that I sincerely don't see a flaw in my argument and I am sincerely interested in what you think the flaw is.

nathanielmark

Re: Learning Disablilities
« Reply #58 on: June 30, 2004, 12:48:46 PM »

youve been having some marathon beat-off sessions, huh sones?

Yes yes. I can tell you firsthand this is true.



just a side note.  to any of you young guys who want to impress the ladies.  SSRIs greatly increase sexual stamina in men.

guyutegirl (Jew-Lo)

  • ****
  • 1119
  • Donkey punch: It's not just for breakfast anymore
    • AOL Instant Messenger - Guyutegirl+JewLo
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Learning Disablilities
« Reply #59 on: June 30, 2004, 12:49:18 PM »
ad homi·nem adv.
Usage Note: As the principal meaning of the preposition ad suggests, the homo of ad hominem was originally the person to whom an argument was addressed, not its subject.


I think that sounds about right  :-*

And no offense to homos btw  :-*