AL Teen Missing in Aruba

[Alumiyum]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

I'm not trying to be rude, I'm just surprised by how you're advancing your argument here.

In fact - restate it for me. Because earlier, you claimed that people are "too self-absorbed" to think that smart white blond girls have more value than other people ... then you moved the goalposts, and said that "value" does not equal "value" in any sense of valuation I provided (and I provided multiple types of valuation). Now "value" means "better person" . . . which seems like an essentially meaningless term, at least for our purposes, because it's impossible to define.

So . . . is it some sort of intrinsic value in people? How can you say it's a different sort of "value" than the commonly-accepted definition of "value" as something that can be counted or expressed in comparison with other things?

Apparently, you can't measure "better person" because it's something different than the actual, value-driven differentiations that I provided.

How did we get here? That's not rhetorical - look back at your posts in this thread. It's kind of bizarre - you're attempting to separate yourself from your own arguments. It's sort of duplicitous (in the literal sense of the term) - you're both arguing that your "inside knowledge" of the situation makes it unique, and that the knowledge is globally or universally applicable. Can it really be both?

I'm so confused. What are you really trying to do here?

First, there is no argument. There are only my posts on how I see things. Opinion. Second, I "claimed" nothing. I did say that I think people do not deep down believe that someone like Natalee is a more worthy person than someone who was more average at that age, since most people are in fact "average", and they would essentially be believing people like Natalee are better than THEY are. And yes, I think most people are too self absorbed to really believe that.

I also do not think that measuring a person's worth based on fame and money even works in relation to this case, as we're talking about an 18 year old girl. I think her story is more "interesting" to the public and therefore more sellable for several reasons, including the fact that she was pretty, blond, smart, white, and disappeared in a tropical location under suspicious circumstances.

It's not that complicated, nor is it an argument, and as I've said, this is not something I can or do look at objectively. I absolutely do not claim that my "inside knowledge" makes my viewpoint unique. I do not have "inside knowledge", I simply knew Natalee and her friends. This only matters in relation to this thread because it means I am not an objective observer, and is certainly not "unique".

I'm not trying to do anything. You are making this 547389574839578349 more complicated than it actually is, because what this boils down to is my posting my opinions. I am not trying to make an argument, look at this objectively, make an informed point, or find some sort of great truth. I am simply saying that I do not believe almost everyone genuinely thinks at their core that it is less of a loss of life when the missing person isn't blond, pretty, or smart. That's all there is to it.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

First, there is no argument. There are only my posts on how I see things. Opinion.

"Argument" does not mean "fighting over who is right."

Your opinions are making a point - you are arguing in favor of your opinions. Your process of reasoning is an argument by definition.

We are clearly having language difficulties.

Second, I "claimed" nothing. I did say that I think people do not deep down believe that someone like Natalee is a more worthy person than someone who was more average at that age, since most people are in fact "average", and they would essentially be believing people like Natalee are better than THEY are. And yes, I think most people are too self absorbed to really believe that.

Why? Support this, because all available information points the other way (information which you seem to be ignoring).

I think her story is more "interesting" to the public and therefore more sellable for several reasons, including the fact that she was pretty, blond, smart, white, and disappeared in a tropical location under suspicious circumstances.

Why is the case more "sellable" than others? Go a level deeper than you are now - why are those factors sellable?

It's not that complicated, nor is it an argument, and as I've said, this is not something I can or do look at objectively. I absolutely do not claim that my "inside knowledge" makes my viewpoint unique. I do not have "inside knowledge", I simply knew Natalee and her friends. This only matters in relation to this thread because it means I am not an objective observer, and is certainly not "unique".

You took "insider knowledge" as a bad thing. It isn't. And it's likely more unique than universally applicable - again, running away from it.

I'm not trying to do anything. You are making this 547389574839578349 more complicated than it actually is, because what this boils down to is my posting my opinions.

So your opinions are so simple that they don't apply to the argument?

The "IT'S JUST MY OPINION!" defense is, and always will be, assailable and (frankly) wrong. There are no exceptions for opinions - they still have to make sense, still have to be logical, still have to be rooted in fact.

I am not trying to make an argument, look at this objectively, make an informed point, or find some sort of great truth.

That's good (because we're not approaching any of those things). But my confusion comes in because it seems like you are - or were, at least. That could well be my bad, or not.

I am simply saying that I do not believe almost everyone genuinely thinks at their core that it is less of a loss of life when the missing person isn't blond, pretty, or smart. That's all there is to it.

Then defend this point, because heck, it sure appears we've provided a mountain of evidence to the contrary.

You can't just say "I believe ______ to be true" then just smile, wave and we'll go "that's an interesting opinion!" Your point doesn't seem to pass the smell test. Now, my nose is well-shaped and generally effective, but it's been wrong before - colossally wrong on rare occasions. I'm genuinely interested in hearing other viewpoints, but you don't seem interested in providing them.

In fact, you're arguing over the definition of "argument" instead, and telling more about what you're NOT saying than what you ARE.