I Wish I Could Like Phil Mickelson, But I Can’t

[B.A.]

The problem with that article is it blatantly flunks truthfulness in the opening headline. Ben has never wished he could like Phil Mickelson. Exactly the opposite. He's exactly where he's always thrilled to be, in terms of opinion of Mickelson. That article is like a cheap and gleeful no-risk reaching out, to others with shared viewpoint.

No shit. It's called a rhetorical device. Pretending I wanted to like the guy but there are a few things standing in the way was a narrative choice I made. Obviously, as any ape capable of sign language could tell you, I've always hated that grinning man-boobed playboy.

Additionally, I assume you're alluding to top down vs. bottom up processing/ holistic v. partial thinking, or some nonsense (yeah, I spent 3 years as a psych major). I think you should employ your incredible powers of amateur psychological analysis elsewhere.

[B.A.]

Also, those seeking to attack me personally should probably familiarize themselves with the notion of a "fallacy of relevance" more specifically, everyone's favorite, the ad homimum.

[mirv]

B.A. pities the fool who don't familiarize themselves with the ad homimum.

[uttexas]

B.A. pities the fool who don't familiarize themselves with the ad homimum.

Good one Mirv. My first laugh of the day.

[beachbreak]

I like Phil. He is fun to watch because he is a total "feel" player. He can go from great to trainwreck in one hole. This is excellent theater. Alot of the others are boring robots to watch. Phil is this generation's Seve.

On a side note, who is dressing him?

He needs to ditch the white belt and body hugging clothes.

May I suggest a pair of loose-fit, pleated khakis, and roomy shirt not made of clingy silk?

[uttexas]

He's wearing the silk to show off his t!ts.

[MrKadash]

IMO, this article, while entertaining, begged for a myriad of reactions from the pro-Phil supporters. I don't think B.A. would or should be surprised at this. Regardless, it doesn't warrant personal attacks.

Phil is Phil, and there are going to be people who dislike him. That's just the way it is. People dislike me, you, Tiger, Jack, and Bambi. Big deal.

[uttexas]

IMO, this article, while entertaining, begged for a myriad of reactions from the pro-Phil supporters. I don't think

As Faldo would say, "you are spot on". exactly

[iacas]

IMO, this article, while entertaining, begged for a myriad of reactions from the pro-Phil supporters. I don't think

In fact, it's kind of Ben's goal - he's the op-ed columnist.

[Jay-Bird]

In fact, it's kind of Ben's goal - he's the op-ed columnist.

Duz hee reelie onn tha copie editer to ficks hiz mispelings?

"ad homimum" - really? Iacas, I thought you had a problem with misspellings... (THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK, It's an admission of guilt.) (I foresee some penalty box time )

[Chas]

The problem with that article is it blatantly flunks truthfulness in the opening headline. Ben has never wished he could like Phil Mickelson. Exactly the opposite. He's exactly where he's always thrilled to be, in terms of opinion of Mickelson. That article is like a cheap and gleeful no-risk reaching out, to others with shared viewpoint.

This is precisely how Ben came across to me in the article, and this is why I dealt roughly with him. But I will agree with your implication Erik, I don't know Ben other than from those words and I was simply giving my own reaction. Now you should use your imagination for a moment: how might YOU have reacted if this piece was the first thing you'd come across from your pal Ben?

Please substitute "idiotic-poster-in-this-instance" for "idiot" (mutas mutandis - I know some Latin as well ... ), since I don't wish to generalize further than that and assumed this was understood. As another has implied, it was a trolling sort of piece, seemingly designed to stimulate counter-attack: very nicely done in that case, bravo! That's par for the course on internet forums (and not so uncommon in the MSM either), but don't go crying about ad hominem attacks when someone's just delivered a very low one indeed. I don't need to be told what an "ad hominem" attack is by the way, not after five years of Latin in prep+boarding school in the Old Country. [can you decline the noun now without looking it up anywhere?]. What relevance? When I'm criticizing someone's work product I am indeed going after the hominem , not the rem . Of course Phil is open to criticism, and who isn't in sports? - I just don't think Ben did a particularly astute job, to put it mildly. I don't know Phil, never met the fellow, although he does hold the absurdly low course record at the private club in our development (I'm not a member, much too pricey ....) and I think he's a decent guy from what I see him doing away from the game of golf. I'm just defending him against some cheap shots is all - not that he needs it. here's a hanky for you guys ........

[iacas]

Duz hee reelie onn tha copie editer to ficks hiz mispelings?

There's something wrong with you.