Naruto 346

[SilentSnake]

Oh shit I just realized if Naruto goes 4 tails the kyubi might use the new jutsu naruto learned. Can you imagine how deadly it will be....... Also has naruto used the "Jutsu" jiraiya told him not to use I don't think he has

yeah, super duper mega hiper awesome 4-tailed-wind-shuriken-rasengan...:\

Honestly, I would prefer something a lil' bit more original instead of just making new rasengan variations and I bet I'm not the only one.

as for the jutsu Jiraiya told him not to use there's a possibility that it was going 4-tails and creating the black ball he then throws up at people :P

It would make sense because Oro is (ummm... was?) not just any ninja you could simply outsmart with kagebunshins.

But you never know.

[Munsu]

If not mistaken, it was simply going into 4+ tail mode was what was forbidden.

[mage]

It hasn't been said what the forbidden jutsu is.

[JaySee]

Let's breakdown everything that's wrong with Munsu's post even after the fact that he edited it afterwards to try to make it sound better.

That's irrelevant. Your reasoning behind making Sasuke the underdog was that he was unable to kill Orochimaru, which is wrong because you don't have any facts to prove that Sasuke was not capable of killing him.

My post IS relevant in that it points out that Sasuke was once the underdog.
As to the second part, here are the facts. Naruto beat the crap out of a standing and ready Orochimaru. Sasuke surprised attack a weakened Oro on his deathbed with what seems to be an intent to kill him and did not. Again, I'm using inductive reasoning, therefore I can't be "wrong." It can be a strong or weak arguement. In my opinion, it is strong.

For all we know, what he did with Orochimaru takes more skill. Also, you're assuming that Naruto was capable of killing Orochimaru back then, but then again he did not do it, so we don't know what Orochimaru might've been capable of if driven to desperation.

True. So what? This argument is much weaker than mine. You're assuming Sasuke failed on purpose. My assumption is more plausible.

That Naruto was capable of killing Orochimaru? Probably. Did he do it? No. Was Sasuke capable of killing Orochimaru? Probably. Did he do it? No.

The manga strongly points that Naruto could've killed Oro. It doesn't point at all that Sasuke could have. The fact that it looks like he attempted to and failed makes it more likely INPROBABLE than probable. It seems like you're using big words you don't know the definitions of. Probable means at least greater than 50% likely.
Also, let's not forget Orochimaru and Kabuto. They're no fools. They both believed Sasuke couldn't kill Orochimaru. Orochimaru said himself during their battle Sasuke couldn't kill him. Kabuto was shocked at the possibility that Sasuke killed Orochimaru. That and the fact he DIDN'T kill Orochimaru points VERY STRONGLY that he couldn't.

From these statements, you cannot conclude that Sasuke is the underdog, especially since you seem to have forgotten that Sasuke seemed to have the upper hand when last they met.

Wrong, I can and have concluded in my inductive argument that Sasuke is the likely underdog. Sasuke having the upper hand the last time they met is irrelevant. They've both had different training since then. Naruto theoretically having YEARS more.

And wasn't Sasuke the one who kicked Naruto's ass back in the end of the First Part of the manga? From my understanding that would make Naruto the underdog after Sasuke left the the city, again making your post above irrelevant.

Again, past meetings don't mean squat. They're irrelevant. Sasuke beating Naruto AFTER he left does not make Naruto the underdog WHEN he left. It's irrelevant. It's clearly implied Naruto is stronger and Sasuke knows and hates it when he leaves. Thus Sasuke was the underdog. None of your post makes mine irrelevant and nothing you post could make it irrelevant because it's relevant. Like I said, I don't think you know what relevance means. It means having relation to.

I like how you dismiss my attempts to use facts from the past, but think that your use of past facts are relevant to the discussion.

Because your facts are irrelevant.

Especially when my use of a past event was to disprove your use of a past event, not to prove something in the present.

You're trying to prove that Sasuke's not the underdog NOW and wasn't the underdog when he left. You're also trying to say my posts are irrelevant without understanding the word relevance.
You're using irrelevant past AND FUTURE events and forgetting about RELEVANT near past events.
Again, Sasuke beating Naruto AFTER he left is not relevant to Sasuke being the underdog WHEN he left.
Sasuke having the upper hand on Naruto before Naruto fought and nearly killed a standing, ready Oro is not relevant to Sasuke not killing a suprised weakened Oro.

And I don't need to look up inductive reasoning, I'm well aware of what it is. And looking it up will further strengthen my points on how your reasoning is flawed.

I don't think you know what it means because it's a bigger word than RELEVANCE and OPINION which you mess up later on in this post. My reasoning is not flawed, it is quite strong. Yours however are quite flawed.

And I'm not dismissing that Sasuke may be an underdog at this point, I was just pointing out how your reasoning is flawed in thinking it was so. Still my facts hold and reasoning are stronger that what you've provided here, and that only leads me to believe that I'm in the right and you're in the wrong.

Looks like you are arguing that Sasuke isn't likely an underdog at this point. You haven't pointed out any flaws in my reasoning what so ever. Only flawed reasoning of your own using irrelevant facts. "I'm right, you're wrong." WOW! That right there speaks volumes of your mentality and intelligence.

And I didn't answer my questions with no backing, especially when I'm not stating facts just my opinions which should pretty much be universal for people that have been watching and reading Naruto. Clearly you're not reading what I posted. I never said that Sasuke was capable of killing Orochimaru, I said that he PROBABLY was, and you can see that as an opinion rather than a statement of fact.

You haven't backed that Sasuke could kill Orochimaru. There's no evidence that points to that. You can only assume he didn't on purpose. Where as Naruto full well would've killed Orochimaru, but was stopped by a third party.
Again, using big words you don't understand. Probably is not an opinion. It is a statement of fact. You need to look up the word opinion. You're confusing probably with "I think so." That's not what probably means.

And along the same lines you yourself have nothing that points that Naruto was capable of killing Orochimaru for that matter, so I have no idea why you bring this up.

I didn't bring it up. Raven did. He said Naruto will ALWAYS be the underdog. He hasn't always been, and it seems to me he isn't now. The manga strongly points that Naruto could've killed Oro.

Instead of nit-picking my post (unsuccessfully), why don't you show us a valid argument to prove your conclusion because you've yet to do that.

I haven't nit-picked your post until now, and I think I'm doing it QUITE successfully. Again, you use big words you seem not to understand. A valid arguement relates to DEDUCTIVE REASONING. I'm using INDUCTIVE REASONING. Go look them up.

So even if Sasuke is the underdog right now, the argument you've been using to support your conclusions of him not capable of killing Orochimaru can't be more flawed.

You've pointed out no flaws in my argument. You've just argued with irrelevant and... what's the word... mistaken statements of your own.

[Munsu]

My post IS relevant in that it points out that Sasuke was once the underdog.

That's fine, when you first posted that, it seemed that you were using it as a statement to prove that Sasuke was currently the underdog. You cleared that up in your next post explaining that you were talking to people that said that it's impossible for Sasuke to be an underdog.

True. So what? This argument is much weaker than mine. You're assuming Sasuke failed on purpose. My assumption is more plausible.

I didn't assume shit, I brought up a possibility. Guess someone else needs to start looking up the meaning of words.

The manga strongly points that Naruto could've killed Oro.

Never said that he wasn't capable.

That and the fact he DIDN'T kill Orochimaru points VERY STRONGLY that he couldn't.

You do realize that the curse seal placed in Sasuke actually handicaps him against Orochimaru, yet he manages to absorb Orochimaru himself? As I said, for all we know this takes more skill and serves a greater pupose than actually killing Orochimaru. As you can see, there isn't any assumption in that statement, it's simply a possibility that seems probable but you seem to neglect it completely.

In fact, that the seal specifically handicaps Sasuke against Orochimaru as an opponet, automatically should eliminate Orochimaru has a common element to measure the current dilemma of who is the underdog. So use any type of reasoning you like, this fact alone shouldn't let you make a reasonable conclusion.

The fact that he smirked and said something along the lines of "Actually, I absorbed him" suggests VERY STRONGLY that he did something superior to killing him. Plus, you could see that Orochimaru was crying like a little girl, and Sasuke looked like he took care of him pretty much effortlessly... heck, he infered that none of Orochimaru's jutsus were effective against him.

Wrong, I can and have concluded in my inductive argument that Sasuke is the likely underdog. Sasuke having the upper hand the last time they met is irrelevant. They've both had different training since then. Naruto theoretically having YEARS more.

I agree it's irrelevant, I was merely showing how your previous statement of Sasuke leaving Konoha was irrelevant in detertermining that the current Sasuke is the underdog. Which once again, you cleared up what you were using the statement for in a following post.

You're trying to prove that Sasuke's not the underdog NOW and wasn't the underdog when he left. You're also trying to say my posts are irrelevant without understanding the word relevance.

I've never tried to prove that Sasuke's not an underdog NOW and I'm not trying to prove that he was an underdog when he left, in fact I agree that he was an underdog when he left right up to the point when he last fought Naruto in the end of part 1. What I'm TRYING to prove is that your reasoning is flawed and hence your conlusion is flawed, that's all.

That I don't know what relevance is? Laughable.

You're also trying to say my posts are irrelevant without understanding the word relevance.
You're using irrelevant past AND FUTURE events and forgetting about RELEVANT near past events.
Again, Sasuke beating Naruto AFTER he left is not relevant to Sasuke being the underdog WHEN he left.
Sasuke having the upper hand on Naruto before Naruto fought and nearly killed a standing, ready Oro is not relevant to Sasuke not killing a suprised weakened Oro.

You're taking everything out of context. This all started because you made a statement of fact that seemed to be to support your previous conclusion, while it was in fact an attempt to show that it is possible for Sasuke to become an underdog. I had thought that the statement was used to prove that Sasuke is currently the underdog, and as your post above you have to agree that it is irrelevant if that was indeed used for that reason. You made clear your reason for using that statement in a post that followed, so I don't know why you keep bringing this shit up.

Looks like you are arguing that Sasuke isn't likely an underdog at this point. You haven't pointed out any flaws in my reasoning what so ever. Only flawed reasoning of your own using irrelevant facts. "I'm right, you're wrong." WOW! That right there speaks volumes of your mentality and intelligence.

Once again, you're assuming and putting words in my mouth. I'm not dismissing the possibility that Sasuke could be the underdog, I'm discrediting your reasoning. And I never said that I was right and you were wrong... What I said was that my facts hold and the reasoning provided up to that point, mine was stronger. Why is it stronger? Because not until your last post, you didn't provide any thought process, argument, or reasoning that supported the premise of Sasuke not being capable of killing Orochimaru, to me that premise is flawed and that's what I've been trying to show you but you fail to notice.

And since you like to look up terms and definitions and what not, what is a conclusion with a flawed premise? An inaccurate conclusion.

You haven't backed that Sasuke could kill Orochimaru.

I think I did a pretty good job at it above, and showed you why there's a posibility that he could.

I didn't bring it up. Raven did. He said Naruto will ALWAYS be the underdog. He hasn't always been, and it seems to me he isn't now. The manga strongly points that Naruto could've killed Oro.

Then I'd have to disagree with Raven too. And once again, I myself believe that Naruto could've killed Oro, but I also believe that Sasuke could've killed Oro. So, if those two possibilites are true, then there's no reason to believe that Sasuke is the underdog. We can't tell period.

A valid arguement relates to DEDUCTIVE REASONING. I'm using INDUCTIVE REASONING. Go look them up.

I used valid loosely. I meant that I didn't see any argument or reasoning, up to that point, by you that supported the accuracy of Sasuke not being capable of killing Orochimaru.

You've pointed out no flaws in my argument. You've just argued with irrelevant and... what's the word... mistaken statements of your own.

I think I did. The mere fact that the premise "Sasuke couln't kill Orochimaru" is flawed, makes your conclusion flawed and inaccurate.

[JaySee]

I love how you try to avoid the fact that you used the term "irrelevant" incorrectly TWICE, but continue to say you understand the word relevance.

You do realize that the curse seal placed in Sasuke actually handicaps him against Orochimaru, yet he manages to absorb Orochimaru himself? As I said, for all we know this takes more skill and serves a greater pupose than actually killing Orochimaru. As you can see, there isn't any assumption in that statement, it's simply a possibility that seems probable but you seem to neglect it completely.You do realize that the curse seal placed in Sasuke actually handicaps him against Orochimaru, yet he manages to absorb Orochimaru himself? As I said, for all we know this takes more skill and serves a greater pupose than actually killing Orochimaru. As you can see, there isn't any assumption in that statement, it's simply a possibility that seems probable but you seem to neglect it completely.

It's not neglected. I'm simply stating my case. That's not part of it. Why would I put the counter-argument into mine?

In fact, that the seal specifically handicaps Sasuke against Orochimaru as an opponet, automatically should eliminate Orochimaru has a common element to measure the current dilemma of who is the underdog. So use any type of reasoning you like, this fact alone shouldn't let you make a reasonable conclusion.

It's not a fact. It's your opinion that it should eliminate it. It doesn't. It's simply another factor. A factor that is very weak. Oro's other desciple, I forget her name, has already been shown to be able to go against the seal.

The fact that he smirked and said something along the lines of "Actually, I absorbed him" suggests VERY STRONGLY that he did something superior to killing him. Plus, you could see that Orochimaru was crying like a little girl, and Sasuke looked like he took care of him pretty much effortlessly... heck, he infered that none of Orochimaru's jutsus were effective against him.

It can also be chalked up to arrogance after the fact. It's already been established that Sasuke's an arrogant jerk. It didn't look as easy as you claim to me.

I've never tried to prove that Sasuke's not an underdog NOW and I'm not trying to prove that he was an underdog when he left, in fact I agree that he was an underdog when he left right up to the point when he last fought Naruto in the end of part 1. What I'm TRYING to prove is that your reasoning is flawed and hence your conlusion is flawed, that's all.

That I don't know what relevance is? Laughable.

You STILL haven't pointed out ANY errors in my reasoning. You're simply trying, unsuccessfully, to discount my premesis. You're also trying to calling my argument weak by saying your, in opinion far weaker, argument is better. And by it being better, mine is "wrong."

It's obviously you don't know what relevance is because you misused irrelevant in calling my post irrelevant and by saying your post makes my post irrelevant. 2 incorrect usages of the word. I'm glad you find your ignorance funny.

Then I'd have to disagree with Raven too. And once again, I myself believe that Naruto could've killed Oro, but I also believe that Sasuke could've killed Oro. So, if those two possibilites are true, then there's no reason to believe that Sasuke is the underdog. We can't tell period.

You're forgetting Naruto faught a ready and willing Oro. Sasuke faught a surprised and weakened Oro. Naruto killed an Akatsuki. Kabuto and Orochimaru both believed Sasuke could not kill Orochimaru and were not proven wrong. Even with your belief that Sasuke could've killed Oro, those point to Sasuke being the underdog.

I think I did. The mere fact that the premise "Sasuke couln't kill Orochimaru" is flawed, makes your conclusion flawed and inaccurate.

OK, fine. I'll reword it. Sasuke didn't and seemingly couldn't kill Orochimaru. I won't use the word PROBABLY incorrectly as you did.

[Munsu]

Man, you really have to be some sort of jackass. When the fuck did I use the word irrelevant incorrectly? Not once, so I don't know why you keep bringing that shit up. LEARN TO FUCKING READ.

You stated a reason why Sasuke left Konoha. I interpreted that as your attempt to prove that Sasuke is the underdog NOW, and that's why I called that post irrelevant to the matter you were trying to prove. After that you cleared up that the post was meant for something else, so that matter ends there as a misunderstanding. But fuck, I've explained the same shit numerous times already and you can't get it into that thick head of yours. Damn, you yourself said that those the staments from the past are irrelevant to the current matter.

That's all I'll say in the matter, you clearly can't read and are too close minded to read other people's arguments and opinion, and when you do read them you take them all out of context. It's impossible to comunicate with you, so go enjoy your life in ignorance.

[Raven]

I didn't bring it up. Raven did.

Then I'd have to disagree with Raven too.

Well obviously you're both incorrect. Disagreeing with me, tsk tsk. I don't even know how to be wrong!

[Assertn]

Here's my inductive reasoning: JaySee hasn't read this chapter yet.

[TwisT]

Here's my inductive reasoning: JaySee hasn't read this chapter yet.

QFT

And on why Sasuke is the Underdog. How can you think that? If the would match up against each other Sasuke would clearly win. We already know that he can supress Kyubi and all the power he brings. So what? Is Naruto gonna beat Sasuke with his rasengan and Kagebunshin?

Also we already know that the Sharingan is really overpowered. He can antisipate (yeye my spelling suck) and see throu attacks, copy jutsus, and even supress Kyubi and enter the realm that Oro created for his soultransfer and beat him.

And Sasuke have become alot stronger so even if Naruto have grown stronger Sasuke haven't fallen to long behind (if not even gained even more strenght) then Naruto.

So i dont see how you come to the conclusion that Sasuke would be the underdog.

[Assassin]

You're 'inductively' deducing that sasuke is or isn't the underdog based on how him and naruto fared against oro. But you can't compare 2 characters by comparing them to a 3rd. The only way to compare 2 peoples strenghts is for them to actually fight each other. Last time they fought, naruto was the underdog. 3 years have passed since then, both characters have trained. However, amount of training, number of jutsu's or strength of jutsu's have nothing to do with who can beat who. At age 6 kakashi was a jounin, ergo stronger then any chuunin ranked ninja, majority of who would've been in thier mid teens atleast. The chuuins have more training, but kakashi is still stronger. So just cuz naruto has had 'years' of traning doesn't mean he's necessarily stronger.

Until we see another sasuke vs naruto fight, there is no way to tell for sure who is the underdog. Remember, unlike DBZ, you dont have powerlevels in naruto. The underdog can change from fight to fight depending on strategy and terrain.

[Deadfire]

I love how you try to avoid the fact that you used the term "irrelevant" incorrectly TWICE, but continue to say you understand the word relevance.

Ir·rel·e·vant [i-rel-uh-vuhnt] –adjective
1. not relevant; not applicable or pertinent:
2. Law. (of evidence) having no probative value upon any issue in the case.

I'm sorry he did get his terms down. Your posts are not relevant to a case due to poor evidence because it had no value in the case in which you discuss

It's not neglected. I'm simply stating my case. That's not part of it. Why would I put the counter-argument into mine?

Because it would help you figure out how idiotic you look right now

It's not a fact. It's your opinion that it should eliminate it. It doesn't. It's simply another factor. A factor that is very weak. Oro's other desciple, I forget her name, has already been shown to be able to go against the seal.

It also showed the amount of pain see had to go against it, with also in that same part disabled her to have him surpass her defence

It can also be chalked up to arrogance after the fact. It's already been established that Sasuke's an arrogant jerk. It didn't look as easy as you claim to me.

Ya the manga which the facts of the entire matter lie sure don't show anything right...

You STILL haven't pointed out ANY errors in my reasoning. You're simply trying, unsuccessfully, to discount my premesis. You're also trying to calling my argument weak by saying your, in opinion far weaker, argument is better. And by it being better, mine is "wrong."

Well I have seen many errors in your reasoning, however if we pointed them out it would be such a waste of time since Bud has already done it...multiple times

It's obviously you don't know what relevance is because you misused irrelevant in calling my post irrelevant and by saying your post makes my post irrelevant. 2 incorrect usages of the word. I'm glad you find your ignorance funny.

ig·no·rance[ig-ner-uhns] –noun

1. the state or fact of being ignorant; lack of knowledge, learning, information, etc.

Sounds like you used the wrong term too I think you are looking for is "Arrogance"

You're forgetting Naruto faught a ready and willing Oro. Sasuke faught a surprised and weakened Oro. Naruto killed an Akatsuki. Kabuto and Orochimaru both believed Sasuke could not kill Orochimaru and were not proven wrong. Even with your belief that Sasuke could've killed Oro, those point to Sasuke being the underdog.

With bud's posts he has been trying to tell you that we can't possibly know what would happen, because it simply didn't happen.

OK, fine. I'll reword it. Sasuke didn't and seemingly couldn't kill Orochimaru. I won't use the word PROBABLY incorrectly as you did.

I will not bother defining that word for you too, simply because you wouldn't understand it anyway.

Jaysee,You are so far beyond being able to understand anything anyone here says that this is just converging on uselessness. The really sad part is that you really believe that you're winning. You are a shocking waste of natural resources — kindly re-integrate yourself into the food-chain.

[fahoumh]

At age 6 kakashi was a jounin

Sorry, to go OT...but from what I've read, I understood that Kakashi was a Chuunin at age 6 and a Jounin at age 13...or am I mistaken?

[JaySee]

Damn, you yourself said that those the staments from the past are irrelevant to the current matter.

I said your examples of the past are irrelevant. Mine were to point out that Sasuke WAS an underdog and to show a pattern of switching the underdog.

You're 'inductively' deducing that sasuke is or isn't the underdog based on how him and naruto fared against oro. But you can't compare 2 characters by comparing them to a 3rd. The only way to compare 2 peoples strenghts is for them to actually fight each other.

You can't inductively deduce. That's an oxymoron. You can inductively reason how 2 people would fair against each other by an opponent in common.

I'm sorry he did get his terms down. Your posts are not relevant to a case due to poor evidence because it had no value in the case in which you discuss

Nope, wrong. You can't make something irrelevant. It either is or isn't. He may counter his first misuse with a misunderstanding, but his use of the word in the 2nd error is undeniable. You're idiotic 2nd sentence is just a "Begging the question" fallacy.

It also showed the amount of pain see had to go against it, with also in that same part disabled her to have him surpass her defence

Irrelevant. This does nothing against the fact that the seal can be defied.

Well I have seen many errors in your reasoning, however if we pointed them out it would be such a waste of time since Bud has already done it...multiple times

I still haven't been shown a single one.

ig·no·rance[ig-ner-uhns] –noun

1. the state or fact of being ignorant; lack of knowledge, learning, information, etc.

Sounds like you used the wrong term too I think you are looking for is "Arrogance"

Arrogance - offensive display of superiority or self-importance; overbearing pride. offensive display of superiority or self-importance; overbearing pride.

Nope, I used the correct term. Take an English comprehension course.

With bud's posts he has been trying to tell you that we can't possibly know what would happen, because it simply didn't happen.

That's fine. That has nothing to do with what I've been saying. So you're saying his posts have been irrelevant.

I will not bother defining that word for you too, simply because you wouldn't understand it anyway.

I'll define it for you for Munsu's sake. I'll help relieve him of his ignorance and misunderstanding that PROBABLY is an opinion.

Probably - Most likely; presumably.
in all likelihood; very likely
with considerable certainty; without much doubt
easy to believe on the basis of available evidence

Jaysee,You are so far beyond being able to understand anything anyone here says that this is just converging on uselessness. The really sad part is that you really believe that you're winning. You are a shocking waste of natural resources — kindly re-integrate yourself into the food-chain.

Aah... I see you have the same mind set of if I'm right, you're wrong as Munsu. Grow up.

[Munsu]

I said your examples of the past are irrelevant. Mine were to point out that Sasuke WAS an underdog and to show a pattern of switching the underdog.

but his use of the word in the 2nd error is undeniable

How many times do I have to tell you that I KNOW why you used it because you cleared it up in your post after the post in question.

You clearly are not reading carefully. My post and statements from the past were relevant when I thought you were trying to prove that Sasuke is the underdog NOW, but once you cleared up the misunderstanding of course my statements will become irrelevant to that particular discussion. Once again, stop taking things I'm saying out of context. I think you need some classes of listening for understanding or some shit.

Irrelevant. This does nothing against the fact that the seal can be defied.

The problem is not defying the seal, the problem is that the seal itself handicaps the person against Orochimaru. So it IS relevant.

You can inductively reason how 2 people would fair against each other by an opponent in common.

Yep that's true, but in my opinion and I bet that in people's with some intelligence also, that this should only be true when the opponent and conditions are similar in the examples being compared.

There's simply too many unmeasurable factors to take into account, including the difference of the conditions of the opponent, setting, etc. to actually make a reasonable comparison that would lead you to conclude something as to who is currently the underdog.

[Assassin]

Sorry, to go OT...but from what I've read, I understood that Kakashi was a Chuunin at age 6 and a Jounin at age 13...or am I mistaken?

My mistake. But the argument still stands.

[JaySee]

How many times do I have to tell you that I KNOW why you used it because you cleared it up in your post after the post in question.

You clearly are not reading carefully. My post and statements from the past were relevant when I thought you were trying to prove that Sasuke is the underdog NOW, but once you cleared up the misunderstanding of course my statements will become irrelevant to that particular discussion. Once again, stop taking things I'm saying out of context. I think you need some classes of listening for understanding or some shit.

Umm... OK? I got that already. You've posted this a million times already. You still used irrelevant incorrectly the 2nd time stating your statement/opinion/post whatever you want to call it made mine irrelevant. That's impossible.

The problem is not defying the seal, the problem is that the seal itself handicaps the person against Orochimaru. So it IS relevant.

Relevant to a different arguement. Not mine.

Yep that's true, but in my opinion and I bet that in people's with some intelligence also, that this should only be true when the opponent and conditions are similar in the examples being compared.

There's simply too many unmeasurable factors to take into account, including the difference of the conditions of the opponent, setting, etc. to actually make a reasonable comparison that would lead you to conclude something as to who is currently the underdog.

Here's the problem with yours and others posts against mine. They were all DEDUCTIVE. "I'm right, so you're wrong." I told you multiple times to look up INDUCTIVE and you just fire back with faulty deductive reasoning. That doesn't work. I really don't give a shit if my arguement is right or wrong because it can't be either. It's strong or weak, and you can argue it's weak. I have no problem with that. You guys take it all personal that someone has a different opinion. "WAAH WAAH! You're wrong! I'm right!" All this blather you've guys been putting has been completely irrelevant. I stated multiple times that I'm arguing inductively. That means no right or wrong. That means there can be multiple arguements and possibilities. One does not necessarily have to negate the other. You guys are just hell-bent on making someone wrong. Which to me was quite amusing. I enjoyed your ignorant arrogance, but your next victims probably wouldn't, so I'm enlightening you. Hopefully next time you guys will actually look up words you try to use and do some enjoyable INDUCTIVE reasoning. Deducing is fine, but it's boring.

By the way... I hope Assassin warned himself, or one of you other moderators warned him about his referrence to that other manga/anime you're not supposed to referrence.

[Yukimura]

Why is this shit still going on? Nothing in the last few posts has anything to do with Naruto chapter 346 and seems to have everything to do with JaySee and Bud disagreeing, with random people (including myself now) chiming in. You two will NEVER convince each other of your points.

On the other hand Bud thinks that his points are valid and correct and has defended them. Too bad, JaySee disagrees and has evidence that makes sense to him, so no matter what Bud (or anyone) says JaySee will not agree that his points are wrong, since he appears to have thought them out to himself and they make sense to him. EDIT: Removed hearsay at request of heard party

Though it's not particularly important I want to clarify that I am not taking sides at all and don't care about what either of your arguments are. My point is that this is a just a cold flame war. It seems everyone is trying to be civil and use 'reason' to convince the opposition that they are correct. Guess what, no matter how civil you try to be, a flame war is a flame war, no one can win, and no one will admit having changed their mind once the war has begun. The only good thing that can come out of a flame war is the entertainment value of reading the personal attacks tossed between the combatants. Unfortunately none of these posts are very entertaining since they are too long and I can't find the personal attacks if they exist at all. If you aren't going to be entertaining while arguing then for the love of god please just stop. It's never going to solve anything because there doesn't appear to be a mutual respect between the two of you that would allow you to learn from each other.

[Munsu]

Umm... OK? I got that already. You've posted this a million times already. You still used irrelevant incorrectly the 2nd time stating your statement/opinion/post whatever you want to call it made mine irrelevant. That's impossible.

Again, you're not reading carefully and taking everything out of context. I won't argue about this shit anymore.

Relevant to a different arguement. Not mine.

I actually was the first one to bring the curse seal's effect on Sasuke and you used your statement to counter it, so it is relevant the whole argument.

Here's the problem with yours and others posts against mine. They were all DEDUCTIVE. "I'm right, so you're wrong." I told you multiple times to look up INDUCTIVE and you just fire back with faulty deductive reasoning. That doesn't work. I really don't give a shit if my arguement is right or wrong because it can't be either. It's strong or weak, and you can argue it's weak. I have no problem with that. You guys take it all personal that someone has a different opinion. "WAAH WAAH! You're wrong! I'm right!" All this blather you've guys been putting has been completely irrelevant. I stated multiple times that I'm arguing inductively. That means no right or wrong. That means there can be multiple arguements and possibilities. One does not necessarily have to negate the other. You guys are just hell-bent on making someone wrong. Which to me was quite amusing. I enjoyed your ignorant arrogance, but your next victims probably wouldn't, so I'm enlightening you. Hopefully next time you guys will actually look up words you try to use and do some enjoyable INDUCTIVE reasoning. Deducing is fine, but it's boring.

You using inductive reasoning is fine. Whatever type of argument and/or reasoning process you're using, the strength and accuracy of your conclusion will be just as accurate as the premises used. The premises you used are very weak and THAT'S ALL I'VE BEEN SAYING, so your conclusion is weak. And yes, I've proven or made a VERY STRONG CASE as to why your premise is flawed and everyone here agrees, but you because you're incapable of understanding. You using INDUCTIVE reasoning doesn't excuse you from using crappy flawed premises to prove your conclusion. The major difference between detuctive and inductive is that the reasoning behind inductive the premises used may support the conclusion, but not necessarily making that conclusion true, while in deductive reasoning if the premises are true then the conclusion should be true. I've never attacked your type of reasoning, but I did attack your premise and I pretty much showed how it's flawed hence making your conclusion flawed. Once again, using inductive reasoning doesn't excuse you for using bad premises to support your conclusion. So, if the premises used are bad then your conclusion is bad.

[JaySee]

Unfortunately none of these posts are very entertaining since they are too long and I can't find the personal attacks if they exist at all. If you aren't going to be entertaining while arguing then for the love of god please just stop. It's never going to solve anything because there doesn't appear to be a mutual respect between the two of you that would allow you to learn from each other.

Well, it's been entertaining to me. I think if you read and understand the terms we've been using and know how logic works you'll find it quite amusing.

I actually was the first one to bring the curse seal's effect on Sasuke and you used your statement to counter it, so it is relevant the whole argument.

Relevant to your argument, not mine. So again, irrelevant.

The premises you used are very weak and THAT'S ALL I'VE BEEN SAYING, so your conclusion is weak.

I disagree. You've stated multiple times that I'm wrong and my reasoning is poor. Having a, in your opinion, weak premises does not make for bad reasoning. My reasoning based on my premesis is perfectly fine.

yes, I've proven or made a VERY STRONG CASE as to why your premise is flawed and everyone here agrees, but you because you're incapable of understanding.

You can't prove anything. The reason I'm using inductive reasoning is because there can be no definitive answer. Proving and making a strong case are not the same. Also, inductive reasoning by definition does not include all possible premesis and proves nothing. I understand perfectly. You do not seem to understand. Have I once disagreed with your argument? Think about it. Go back and read. NOPE! So you see, you're the one with the misunderstanding. I'm arguing MY ARGUEMENT. You're getting all pissed off because you think I don't understand or am attacking yours. I'm not, and I haven't been.

You using INDUCTIVE reasoning doesn't excuse you from using crappy flawed premises to prove your conclusion.

There's nothing wrong with my premesis. They are what they are. They are what I picked for my arguement. The conclusion naturally comes from the premesis I've chosen.

The major difference between detuctive and inductive is that the reasoning behind inductive the premises used may support the conclusion, but not necessarily making that conclusion true, while in deductive reasoning if the premises are true then the conclusion should be true.

Wrong. The difference is that deductive must lay all premesis down and have a definitive answer. In deductive reasoning if the premesis are true and the reasoning is VALID, then the conclusion MUST be true. There's no room for should, IT MUST. You're "should be true" only applies to invalid deduction. Inductive is used to strongly suggest an answer to unanswerable questions. This is why using deductive reasoning in relation to this arguement is completely idiotic. You'll never get an answer. The only one who can give an answer is the author.

I've never attacked your type of reasoning, but I did attack your premise and I pretty much showed how it's flawed hence making your conclusion flawed.

My premesis aren't flawed. For them to be flawed, they must be false. They are not false. There will always be counter arguement to inductive reasoning.

You can go on trying to make me wrong, but you can't. It's not possible. I'm not saying that out of arrogance, I'm saying it from logic and definition.