I suppose that would be true if you think arguments are soldiers in favor of women or against them. You think I believe I raised a +1 for men, while you think I raised a +1 for women by mentioning a time they were victims.
In fact, I believe arguments are attempts to converge to truth. The fact that women were victims in 1631 has no bearing on this discussion.
RoderickDay made an argument that happened to be flawed (here's a more formal argument illustrating the flaws: http://lesswrong.com/lw/ii/conservation_of_expected_evidence... ), and his argument paralleled the Inquisition's arguments which were flawed for the same reason. Now that his incorrect argument is rejected, we can make better arguments and approach the truth.
In fact, I believe arguments are attempts to converge to truth. The fact that women were victims in 1631 has no bearing on this discussion.
RoderickDay made an argument that happened to be flawed (here's a more formal argument illustrating the flaws: http://lesswrong.com/lw/ii/conservation_of_expected_evidence... ), and his argument paralleled the Inquisition's arguments which were flawed for the same reason. Now that his incorrect argument is rejected, we can make better arguments and approach the truth.