Submitted by Hyolobrika in meta (edited )
[deleted] wrote
GaldraChevaliere wrote
Rational is anything they agree with, irrational is anything they don't. Duh.
[deleted] wrote (edited )
Hyolobrika OP wrote (edited )
| I've only heard X associated with Y therefore you can't believe X without being Y in some way
If you had only heard the language of virtue ethics used by sexists such as Aristotle would you consider virtue ethics and feminism incompatible? Just untill Simone de Beauvoir came along? What was she supposed to think?
I've heard this kind of argument far too often and I find it laughably ridiculous and kind of irritating.
Also if you feel oppressed by reason then you need to seek some kind of help. And if that doesn't work then there's always that rope :|)
[deleted] wrote
Hyolobrika OP wrote
| [Did you] not understand the idiom I used?
Huh, I must have forgot about that idiom. My bad.
I thought I was being attacked, so I attacked. But now that we all realise that it was all a misunderstanding we can calm down now.
|You are arguing in bad faith
Yes I was and I'm sorry, see above. But also so are you by continuing the aggression after discovering that I misunderstood and thought I was being attacked.
[deleted] wrote
Hyolobrika OP wrote (edited )
You said "Are you young enough to not understand the idiom I used?" in the selfsame post. Therefore you knew it didn't have to be malice but you assumed it was anyway. I wasn't referring to the other post.
[deleted] wrote
Hyolobrika OP wrote
By arguing I don't mean fighting you understand, I mean debate and discussion.
| Please understand, the other comments were in response to other things you said.
What other comments? The comments other than what?
| I hate when people feel entitled to an argument.
Does this mean you don't feel that everyone is responsible for considering other's points and has the right to have their points considered?
| Also, you said I feel oppressed by reason
I actually already admitted that was wrong, so why are you bringing that up again?
| Like when a cop shoots a black person for acting scared while a gun is waved in their face will say they were behaving irrationally.
Has that really happened? Jeez. Can you post a link pls?
| Pulling in philosophers to a simple ask of "what do you mean when you ask for x" is a red flag to me that just want to argue
I don't understand your syntax. Please explain.
| attacks based on the false belief you were attacked
Yes, this is another thing that I already said
[deleted] wrote
Hyolobrika OP wrote
| So I addressed what you called "continuing the aggression" which were the other comments in which I used expletives. Now you are coming and asking "what other comments?" The other comments you labeled aggression. Actually it's your fucking self who was incapable of understanding what I wrote. I didn't label any other comments aggression, I labeled the comment I replied to aggression.
| Seriously? Can you not read your own fucking writing
| How do you not understand what you fucking wrote?
I smell an ableist undertone here.
Hyolobrika OP wrote (edited )
| I said when I see people use rational/irrational, it's usually people who are oppressing others.
Right I see, on that note, my experience of irrationality is in often-racist bullies who attack and insult people to get them to agree with them instead of pointing out why they should agree. People like ziq, people like Neo-nazi chantards and if you don't call them out for arguing in bad faith but those who only respond like that in defense you will be enabling them.
[deleted] wrote
Hyolobrika OP wrote
Fine. But seriously do you think you can talk?
ziq wrote
go back to voat now.
Hyolobrika OP wrote
Not an argument. Go back to being split between your parents. Also, do you realise that the best way a person can convince their opponents is through reason?
GaldraChevaliere wrote
Pretty funny that you've been flailing around playing the reasoned scholar and then you go for the throat of someone like that. Holy shit, that's some level of cowardice.
Hyolobrika OP wrote
As much as I believe that reason is a good thing, non-reason is still neccesary for use with people who don't believe in reason.
Also, how on earth is it cowardice?
GaldraChevaliere wrote
I dunno about 'rational skeptics', but in most circles that have emotional and social depth exceeding a teacup, talking shit about someone's past and traumas when it's not relevant to the conversation is what in the jargon we call 'a low fucking blow'. If your 'reasoned' argument can't stand on its own and you have to resort to something like that, maybe you're just a craven who needs to try to hurt people to feel big.
Also, like, that's my other point I wanted to get to but didn't have time for. You've got this cultish devotion to Reason as an ideal, one that necessarily requires leaps of faith and proselytism to maintain. I don't believe in Reason, because anyone with a familiarity with game theory knows there's no such thing as a rational actor, one who will take the most beneficial known action every time or accept the most functional argument. People are flawed and their experiences are subjective, and the majority of things you've likely come to view as ineffable truth are in fact social constructs with no material reality. That, friend, is called being Spooked.
You can't escape ideology and you can't escape your subjective experiences, only modify them with new experiences applied, and there's no way to be an impartial and objective observer of any phenomena, whether social or material. What most people do is learn to live with that and just run off of what they've experienced and collaborate with others for mutual understanding. What people like you do is force, usually violently, your beliefs on others and insist yours is the one true way of viewing things and all else is irrational, as if a world where we toil for 12-16 hours a day for not enough food to pay rent and eat at the same time is a rational one in the first place.
Hyolobrika OP wrote (edited )
| I dunno about 'rational skeptics', but in most circles that have emotional and social depth exceeding a teacup, talking shit about someone's past and traumas when it's not relevant to the conversation is what in the jargon we call 'a low fucking blow'. If your 'reasoned' argument can't stand on its own and you have to resort to something like that, maybe you're just a craven who needs to try to hurt people to feel big.
ziq wrote (edited )
Actually, the best way to convince opponents white supremacists like you to go away doesn't require any words at all.
https://i.imgur.com/Wj0NeVD.gif
see?
zzuum wrote
Yeah Hitler was defeated by rational debate
Hyolobrika OP wrote
Well, ok, yeah it woudn't have worked. I admit it. Hitler had the wrong premises. Reason is the connection between premise and conclusion not a property of opinions. Also, the point is not always to try to convince people (you can't do that with reason if their views are already consistant) but to make sure that people's viewpoints are coherent. You can however use these principles to convince people by reasoning from opinions they already hold to one's you want them to hold.
Hyolobrika OP wrote
https://rationalwiki.org/ has some good examples IIRC
[deleted] wrote
Hyolobrika OP wrote
But it IS what I meant. What I meant is there. I don't understand why I need to write something new when there is already something written about it. Why reinvent the wheel?
[deleted] wrote
Hyolobrika OP wrote
But there are examples (which is another thing you asked for)
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments