You accuse me of being “arrogant” because I am supposedly “dismissive” of a multiverse (though I didn’t “dismiss” it without giving reasons), but then you dismiss a point I made (with honest intellectual intentions) as “irrelevant.” Aren’t you, by your own standards, being “arrogant” for sweeping aside my point as “irrelevant,” when you could have said something more friendly, like: “Your point about tombs is correct as far as it goes, but does not affect my main contention.” Arrogance has to do with attitude toward other people, and I would say that when you reply to me, a certain arrogant attitude is present.
Gosh, this confidence is so uncharacteristic of you!
Again, arrogance in the tone. You’re losing all credibility as a moral advisor on how to converse.
So when you think an argument is poor, it’s OK to charge the person making the poor argument with arrogance? It’s not enough just to show the weakness; you have to layer on the emotively charged word?