CHI BEEF: Lupe checking Yeezy

[Krucial]

Lupe says tired of hearing same thing but isnt this guy that just sampled T.R.O.Y?

 

[JasonSJackson]

I don't think the guy who put out 'Lazers' should be the one to critique someone elses music and direction.

 

[Aje]

y'all calling out Lupe for calling out Kanye = the epitome of Ad Hominem fallacy.

 

[OnlyInCalifornia]

y'all calling out Lupe for calling out Kanye = the epitome of Ad Hominem fallacy.

Not really.

He is critiqing his music and direction. Pointing out that he suffers from the same problem isn't exactly some ad hominem attack. That would be like 'Lupe is too corny to understand, look at how he dresses now' not pointing out that he put out mainstream trash on his last album just the same.

 

[beenz]

nikka... I'm just glad he said something.

I listen to Kanye shyt now like

Did you hear his verse on that song... :child please:



Props to Lupe.. That doesn't take the magnifying glass of his ass either but I can't hate a brother for keeping it G and speaking his mind.

Moving forward, nikkas like Q-Tip, Ryhmefest, Talib & Mos need to start checking his p*ssy ass too.



Look what happened when Nas got a wake up call in 2001

How are those dudes gonna check Kanye when hes most of their boss?

 

[Aje]

Ad Hominem

Also Known as: Ad Hominem Abusive, Personal Attack Description: Translated from Latin to English, “ad Hominem” means “against the man” or “against the person.” An ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of “argument” has the following form:
1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B makes an attack on person A.
3. Therefore A’s claim is false.

The reason why an ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made

OIC, you my dude but what you mean, "not really."

Of course, Lupe's assessment of Kanye's music is an opinion but I happen to agree with it. Just because Lupe has come out with trash doesn't mean that his argument isn't correct. That's what Ad Hominem is about, bruh.

 

[Rominati]

Even though I do feel what Lupe is saying.


He is DEF not the one to be talking. This mothafukka hasnt released a decent body of work since EOTS. Which was like 4 years ago

 

[OnlyInCalifornia]

OIC, you my dude but what you mean, "not really."

Of course, Lupe's assessment of Kanye's music is an opinion but I happen to agree with it. Just because Lupe has come out with trash doesn't mean that his argument isn't correct. That's what Ad Hominem is about, bruh.

I mean that its not really an ad hominem attack...

"An ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument"

An irrelevant fact that has nothing to do with the argument at hand (an Ad Hominem attack) would be that Lupe dresses like a corn ball with cargo shorts/chain wallets and is way too corny to understand the swag on 'Birthday' or 'Mercy' so he can't speak on it.

Saying that it is dumb for Lupe to make comments about making generic, poppy mainstream songs that lack soul, when he just put out LASERS, is not an ad hominem attack. Lasers is the very definition of formulate, generic mainstream Hip Hop that I can think of that came out in the last year. This isn't a fallacy nor is it false.

 

[Aje]

He (Lupe) may not be one to talk (since he's guilty of doing the same thing) but it doesn't make his claim (Ye is putting out crap) false.

 

[Yaboysix]

all i know is that Lupe needs to get back on his fahrenheit 1/15 shyt again..

is that so much to ask for?? is it so hard to rap that way?? lol

 

[Air Nikes N Hats]

SMH@ this coming from the same guy who with LASERS and some of his other recent stuff, tried to go in the same direction as Kanye....difference being its working for Ye, and not for him.

He hasnt gotten a placement from Kanye since F&L....he sounds bitter.

While it may/maybe not be true (I thought MBDTF & WTT were good albums but everyone has an opinion)....fact is the message isn't hitting because of the fact that Lupe is the one making the statement.

 

[OnlyInCalifornia]

He (Lupe) may not be one to talk (since he's guilty of doing the same thing) but it doesn't make his claim false.

I personally don't agree with his claims. I wouldn't say its 'true or false' tho.

 

[Clem]

It's hard to take Lupe seriously when he puts out garbage.

 

[Yaboysix]

and whoever that white lady interviewin lupe is ,she's cute.

 

[Aje]

I personally don't agree with his claims. I wouldn't say its 'true or false' tho.

perhaps this is a more appropriate fallacy for this situation:

Hominem Tu Quoque
Also Known as: “You Too Fallacy”
Description: This fallacy is committed when it is concluded that a person’s claim is false because 1) it is inconsistent with something else a person has said or 2) what a person says is inconsistent with her actions. This type of “argument” has the following form:

1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B asserts that A’s actions or past claims are inconsistent with the truth of claim X.
3. Therefore X is false.​

The fact that a person makes inconsistent claims does not make any particular claim he makes false (although of any pair of inconsistent claims only one can be true—but both can be false). Also, the fact that a person’s claims are not consistent with his actions might indicate that the person is a hypocrite but this does not prove his claims are false.

Example #1:
Bill: “Smoking is very unhealthy and leads to all sorts of problems. So take my advice and never start.”
Jill: “Well, I certainly don’t want to get cancer.”
Bill: “I’m going to get a smoke. Want to join me Dave?”
Jill: “Well, I guess smoking can’t be that bad. After all, Bill smokes.”

Example #2:
Jill: “I think the gun control bill shouldn’t be supported because it won’t be effective and will waste money.”
Bill: “Well, just last month you supported the bill. So I guess you’re wrong now.”

Example #3:
Peter: “Based on the arguments I have presented, it is evident that it is morally wrong to use animals for food or clothing.”
Bill: “But you are wearing a leather jacket and you have a roast beef sandwich in your hand! How can you say

LaBossiere, Michael (2010-11-04). 42 Fallacies (Kindle Locations 132-155). . Kindle Edition.