A Philosophy TA Reads Ray

This was a humorous thread someone had over at Ray's blog recently. He had basically said that Ray's blog was entertaining to read for "virtually every fallacious mode of reasoning," to which Ray replies with a fallacy that Alex can't explain his purpose in this universe, and Alex responds, in part:

Ray,

I don't know what the purpose for mankind's existence is. I don't know that it has a purpose, (though I'm sure many different purposes are possible, i.e. defensible). I don't even know what or whether my purpose is. It's a question that must be asked, but has far more than one correct answer.

I do know this, however.

If your arguments are bad, then their conclusions, if any, are not justified. So believing your conclusions becomes more like playing roulette than making a rational inquiry about the nature of reality.

If your arguments are bad, then they don't offer any reason(s) for your conclusions. But other than reason to connect premises to conclusions, all we have is chance, so if your arguments are bad, then believing their conclusions is like picking beliefs at random, by chance.

[...]