Board Thread:General Grimm Discussion/@comment-25875828-20150512091124/@comment-184.147.197.242-20150523184032

Alright Mac, let us tear apart your counter arguments piece by piece.

1. You commit the act of gadrii nombor shulen jongu (tibetan for "giving a green answer to a blue question") with your attack on my statement regarding wealth and argumentative merit. Basically you didn't like the statement I posed and twisted it into a form you could more easily argue against (even if you still don't argue against it particularly well or sensically). In this case you took me stating "My personal wealth has no bearing on the validity of my argument" and turned it into "Rich people are far more moral than the unwashed masses could ever be". This is bad argumentative for and would lose you a lot of points in any kind of competitive debate.

And we both live in a free country, so I am going to stay on this horse for as long as I please. :)

2. Another example of gadrii nombor shulen jongu. You take "the opinions of experts, in general, is worth more because of countless hours of training, study and experimentation in the one area they focus on" and turn it into "Educated people are better than other people". Think about it like this; would you want a garbage collector to perform open heart surgery, or would you prefer a specialist who actually knew what the hell they were doing?

And discussion on morality is actually more practical than it seems, given that the laws by which we govern ourselves are based on our own perceptions of right, wrong and the consequences of actions (all of which are dealt with in any moral discussion worth anything).

3. No solution with regards to saving Kelly that you propose would have helped, because you are operating off of the assumption that Juliette going to the Royals should have been obvious to all when it was not. Nick assumed at the time (as you would have as well, given the available information) that Juliette was doing things on her own and was wreaking havoc for the fun of it. Even Adalind, who was in a position to know more than the others, was shocked to learn that Juliette was working with Kenneth (so Nick going to her would not have helped). Juliette left no evidence suggesting she was anything more than someone going off the rails alone.

And what is this "Second Card" you speak of? it does not help your argument if you do mention something and do not explain what the signifiance is.

4. You would be suprised to know that many things can be said to be more valuable than a life. It is actually rather easy to calculate; Just think of how many people will suffer and die should the object cease to be. A pacemaker is worth one life because one person will die if it is destroyed. The worth of a Plane in flight is equal to the passangers onboard (plus anyone on the ground who it could concievably be crushed upon crashing). A shipment of food is exactly as valuable as the people who will starve should it fail to get where it is needed. We do not know how many lives the information in the trailer could have saved, but it probably was more than 1, which makes it far more valuable than Juliettes life (which is worth far less than an average person on account of how many people she was likly to endanger on account of her violent and erratic behaviour).

5. Ok, very little of what you say here is correct, makes sense or has any evidence supporting it. the closest you come to truth is with regards to Monroe, and even then it is more a matter of how you percieve the event that determines the truth of the matter (the shot came way too close to killing him for her to be bluffing, with any dely the result of the writers adding dramatic effect).

Juliette gave the Royals detailed information on her neighbours identities, numbers and routines. Without this info, it is concievable that some of them might have escaped by virtue of the fact that the royals either struck in the wrong place (wrong entry point to the homes) or at the wrong time (when they were out). Juliettes information got them killed, regardless of what you say.

There is no evidence, none at all, that suggests that Juliette secretly tried to warn Kelly in any way, shape or form (besides what you decide to invent, of course). Moreover, if she was on Kellys side the whole time, why didn't she stop the ambush? She had the power, why stand at the top of the stairs and do nothing unless everything was going to plan?

In a similar vein, there is no evidence that Diana did anything to manipulate Kelly, is the devil, or has Frau Pech (not "Madame Pesch") as part of her soul. Please stop staing your groundless musing as fact please; it is trivial to argue against.

6.

The writers, producers and actors all refer to Juliettes actions as "falling to the dark side". They are not my words alone.

It depends on the fairy tale.

What is all this nonsence about commanding, Religions and "Red Nightmare Queen"? Please stick to relevent lines of dialogue please.

That should cover everything. Please sent a reply once you can put together a halfway decent arguement. If I presented something similar to your previous arguments to one of my professors, they would have insta-failed me. Try to do better in the future.

PS. '''Randomly bolding sentances does not confer argumentative strength! Try writing a better argument instead!'''