Chronicles of a stable genius - all the biggliest stuff

[Lupi]

I'm better than you. Accept this and you will find peace.

^
beyond cooked, burned at this point

 

[TheSelectFew]

^
beyond cooked, burned at this point

I hope you didn't spend too long coming up with that one.

 

[melbcityguy]

Imagine if we used our energy helping each other instead of this politics stuff

 

[Muz]

Ol mate makes some pretty good points.

 

[Lupi]

...aaaaand nobody cares

 

[TheSelectFew]

...aaaaand nobody cares

Until TACO Tuesday rolls around and you'll be spitting WH talking points.

 

[Lupi]

Until TACO Tuesday rolls around and you'll be spitting WH talking points.

watch a lot of The View do you?

 

[TheSelectFew]

watch a lot of The View do you?

I have money. I don't watch free-to-air.

 

[Lupi]

I have money. I don't watch free-to-air.

and yet you sound exactly like them

 

[TheSelectFew]

and yet you sound exactly like them

That says more about you and how much you think about them. It might be time to leave that basement. Think about breaking free of that incel tag.

 

[Lupi]

That says more about you and how much you think about them. It might be time to leave that basement. Think about breaking free of that incel tag.

^
the 'I know you are but what am I' defense

 

[johnsmith]

Ol mate makes some pretty good points.

@Muz , as you know well about me, I study how people think and frame their arguments. Hence, if you, Muz, cannot see through this guy's deceptive rhetoric, if fully explains why you spend your days waffling the indoctrination you've swallowed uncritically.

The definition of a "straw man" argument is as follows:

"Definition: A straw man fallacy occurs when someone distorts, exaggerates, or misrepresents an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack or refute."​

​

"How it works: Instead of engaging with the original argument, the person creates a "straw man" version that is weaker or more extreme, then argues against that version."​

​

"Example 1:​

​

"Mother's says to her child: "You’re not getting dessert until you finish your vegetables.""​

​

"Exaggerated/distorted version: "You are a brute of a mother, depriving your child of the only thing that brings joy to her little life.""​

​

"The child exaggerates the mother’s reasonable request into an extreme, unfair characterization, then attacks that exaggeration."​

​

Example 2:​

​

Parents who have daughters, and those who care about biological-women, stand against transgenders participating in biological-womens sports.​

​

Strawman distortion: These people are bullying 1% of the population.​

This is what this Texas dude is doing. He characterises it as "bullying 1% of the population" --- and then, educated-highly-paid-albeit-fools like Muz swallow it, without any critical thinking. THIS IS HOW the bulk of the population is led by the nose, indoctrinated, and turned into an attack-mob against thinking-people who are led by facts and evidence.

@Muz , if you ever wonder why the world is going crazy, it's because the bulk of the population are people like you. Muz, I've said it many times - to me, you are a representative of Mr (or Ms) average. (For all I know, you might be female).

It's not wacko nut jobs who are making the world go crazy. No. It's the majority of people, who, like you, do their jobs, get paid, raise the families - but who do not have a heart for truth, and so are swayed by propaganda that sounds so alluring.

 

[TheSelectFew]

^
the 'I know you are but what am I' defense

Still not solid argument from your end. Vintage loopy.

 

[Lupi]

Still not solid argument from your end. Vintage loopy.

Why do you pretend you know me?

 

[TheSelectFew]

Why do you pretend you know me?

Sorry I never knew you were such a complex character.

 

[Muz]

@Muz , as you know well about me, I study how people think and frame their arguments. Hence, if you, Muz, cannot see through this guy's deceptive rhetoric, if fully explains why you spend your days waffling the indoctrination you've swallowed uncritically.

The definition of a "straw man" argument is as follows:

"Definition: A straw man fallacy occurs when someone distorts, exaggerates, or misrepresents an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack or refute."​

​

"How it works: Instead of engaging with the original argument, the person creates a "straw man" version that is weaker or more extreme, then argues against that version."​

​

"Example 1:​

​

"Mother's says to her child: "You’re not getting dessert until you finish your vegetables.""​

​

"Exaggerated/distorted version: "You are a brute of a mother, depriving your child of the only thing that brings joy to her little life.""​

​

"The child exaggerates the mother’s reasonable request into an extreme, unfair characterization, then attacks that exaggeration."​

​

Example 2:​

​

Parents who have daughters, and those who care about biological-women, stand against transgenders participating in biological-womens sports.​

​

Strawman distortion: These people are bullying 1% of the population.​

This is what this Texas dude is doing. He characterises it as "bullying 1% of the population" --- and then, educated-highly-paid-albeit-fools like Muz swallow it, without any critical thinking. THIS IS HOW the bulk of the population is led by the nose, indoctrinated, and turned into an attack-mob against thinking-people who are led by facts and evidence.

@Muz , if you ever wonder why the world is going crazy, it's because the bulk of the population are people like you. Muz, I've said it many times - to me, you are a representative of Mr (or Ms) average. (For all I know, you might be female).

It's not wacko nut jobs who are making the world go crazy. No. It's the majority of people, who, like you, do their jobs, get paid, raise the families - but who do not have a heart for truth, and so are swayed by propaganda that sounds so alluring.

'Deceptive rhetoric'. Talk about missing the point.

He directly addresses people like you.

You are exactly the type of person that would've ranted and raved against against women's suffrage, interracial marriage, non-segregation, equal pay, equal rights, gay marriage and a hundred other social issues as the beginning of the downfall of western civilisation.

Exactly the type of person.

I've said it before stop tagging me in to your garbage.

 

[johnsmith]

'Deceptive rhetoric'. Talk about missing the point.

He directly addresses people like you.

You are exactly the type of person that would've ranted and raved against against women's suffrage, interracial marriage, non-segregation, equal pay, equal rights, gay marriage and a hundred other social issues as the beginning of the downfall of western civilisation.

Exactly the type of person.

I've said it before stop tagging me in to your garbage.

@Muz , then based on what you've said, please confirm that you endorse and encourage non-biological females dominating and obliterating female-sporting records.

 

[Lupi]

they not non-biological females, they're men

Muz also endorses them using women's restrooms and other women's private spaces

I wonder why...

 

[Muz]

@Muz , then based on what you've said, please confirm that you endorse and encourage non-biological females dominating and obliterating female-sporting records.

No I don't. And I never said I have.

 

[johnsmith]

No I don't. And I never said I have.

So what you're saying is, you agree with a stance, but you belittle other people who hold the same stance. What does that make you? It makes you a hater, rather than a debater.

I suggest, Muz, that you focus on facts and evidence, rather than attacking the person (ad hominem).

If you do that, all the issues you attack me for will sort themselves out.

A pattern, in the way you think is: if you abhor the person saying something, you refuse to look at the evidence that that person is giving you. You're emotions-driven, rather than fact-driven. (Watch out for that, since you're likely to replicate that style of thinking in your disputes with other people in real life).