This pisses me off something fierce and makes me want to find the nearest woodchipper and copulate with it ASAP.
All too often I find myself in a debate with someone who almost appears too dumb to function. Someone whose brain has been pierced by a mountain of hyperchodes. A mind running on pure butterscotch and/or molasses.
When it comes to debates where I know what the hell I’m talking about, the opponent will bring up points and I’ll be able to refute them with counterclaims wrapped in evidence backed up by multiple, reputable sources. But these cuntwaffles don’t care: Once their claims have been exposed as inaccurate misconception or outright lunacy, they just ignore the point and move on. No further comment whatsoever. They’re just launching a volley of shit with their slingshot in hopes that something will stick eventually.
Not only do people choose to ignore counterclaims, but they tend to skew the truth just so they can win. What’s a little fact-finagling if it means your point becomes stronger? It’s disingenuous fucking bullshit, is what it is. It’s also a huge pain in the ass when your position gets mischaracterized because they attach all this extra baggage to your argument and make a huge-ass strawman because they’re too much of a pussy to stick to the goddamn issue. Holy shit now I want to punch someone in the mouth.
Next, some people just feel the need to repeat their retarded idea over and over again. Apparently if something’s wrong the first 12 times, it could be right the 13th. Appeal to authority/argument from ignorance is also equally infuriating.
I don’t understand why there’s this need to hold onto an argument no matter how drenched in fecalsplat it may be. If I make an argument and someone completely tears it apart, I don’t feel the need to keep digging my own grave. I stop, re-evaluate what I’m saying, take into account what the opponent is saying, do a quick verification of some facts, and concede the fucking point because I would rather hold a right view than a wrong one.
But no, in America we seem to live in this society where nobody backs down from their stance no matter what. Nobody really cares if they’re wrong as long as they “feel” it’s correct (which is usually done through obvious confirmation bias. Cover your ears and la-la-la away, jackass). There’s like this ridiculous social cost to backing down, and it’s so fucking stupid that I sometimes think it’d be less stressful to just stab myself in the duodenum.
I can honestly say that I’ve never had the slightest inking to do that. But let us know how it works out, and how the little woodchipperettes do in kindergarten!
Civil discourse doesn’t matter anymore, anyway. Money is the only speech that cuts any ice, and probably 80% of that 80% of the internet you mention has been motivated by speech fueled by money. The other 20% is mostly posting kitty videos, with a thin sliver of a minority protesting futilely against the current state of affairs (except perhaps the kitty videos - who doesn’t like kitty videos?).
While I agree with you that it can be frustrating, this is sort of part of human nature. There’s an article I’ve seen posted on here and a few other places, I’m too lazy to look it up right now since I don’t feel the need to specifically site it, but it basically outlined that humans aren’t logical beings and facts counter to our opinions will often get people to dig in their heels and fight harder rather than consider that they’re wrong.
To this end, I’ve found it’s generally just easier to try to gauge what kind of debater someone is. If they’re someone who can debate objectively, I’ll continue to to engage them. If not, I’ll find a way to bring the discussion to a close and avoid that sort of discussion with them in the future. Interestingly, though, most people aren’t strictly one type or the other, but they’ll be one way for some types of topics and another way for other topics. I’ve met plenty of people who can’t have an objective discussion about politics or religion or whatever but are perfectly fine having an objective discussion about philosophy or science or music. So, I try to figure out what different people’s particular hot button topics are instead of just completely avoiding them.
If only this worked on message boards. Unfortunately, there’s always someone who will engage them. I’ve found the just doing it back works better–let them be the ones who get so frustrated that they stop engaging.
I worked with a woman, from Canada, who told me that AI,Freedom House, Reporters with out borders, and the Nobel Comittee could not be trusted to give honest, informed opinions on human rights and journalistic freedom in the world.
-She trusted CCTV9.
-I still want to kill her just thinkg about it.