Go back to the original statement and see what it started from. (It started from pure failing of logic, when you supported a case against individual court by the example, in which the problem clearly was not due to the court's failings. There is no sense to move from that point, until you start agreeing that one must support his argument by the cases which are appropriate to the situation. And if you don't plan to agree that if argument is inadequate, it can't be used as evidence for or against the case.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2015-08-02 04:00 pm (UTC)And if you don't plan to agree that if argument is inadequate, it can't be used as evidence for or against the case.