Idiotic Debating Tactics

Started by botankus75 pages

Originally posted by Ranger Smith
Interesting

🙂


After Cindy Bear, Boo Boo, & Yogi have all been banned, it's good to see Ranger Smith has hidden sufficiently from the mods and is still going strong.

Originally posted by miss_swann
Debating tactic: Ignore the point of the debate and rap up quickly (imagine you're team 2.)

Team 1: We believe abortion is wrong.
Team 2: We believe, we know abortion is OK, because it's legal.

yeah, but that would fall under 'circular argument'

abortion is ok because its legal.
it wouldnt be legal if it wasnt ok.

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Generally speaking, if you need someone to give you evidence in order for you form an educated opinion, then you probably aren't qualified to post in this thread.

duhhhhhh.

"its probably not what it seems"

"lets wait to hear the rest of the story"

this tactic is being used very often lately. while every bit of information certainly brings us closer to the truth, there is a threshold of fact where one must accept that events may not have transpired according to their wishes.

member 1: "so this guy tied up and threw his victims in a trunk, drove them 300 miles to the docks, lined them up and shot them at point blank range through the back of the head, execution style. clearly this is coldblooded and premeditated murder. the cops even found him cutting the bodies up.

member 2: well, we dont know the whole story. lets just wait and see how the story unfolds.

member 1: but...that IS the story

member 2: nonesense. there are so many factors which could be left out (lists far reaching hypothetical justififications for their actions) rape? molestation? perhaps they wrote him bad checks?

member 1: but its still MURDER

member 2: we dont know that (repeat process)

of course this tactic rears its stupid head when one refuses to believe something about someone they hold in high esteem.

Originally posted by Schecter

member 1: "so this guy tied up and threw his victims in a trunk, drove them 300 miles to the docks, lined them up and shot them at point blank range through the back of the head, execution style. clearly this is coldblooded and premeditated murder. the cops even found him cutting the bodies up.

member 2: well, we dont know the whole story. lets just wait and see how the story unfolds.

member 1: but...that IS the story

exactly. like him having a rough upbringing or not being breast fed as a child has any bearing on him being a psycho.

Originally posted by Schecter
yeah, but that would fall under 'circular argument'

abortion is ok because its legal.
it wouldnt be legal if it wasnt ok.

There's a flaw in that argument though... slavery and wife beating were "legal" at one point. See what I mean?

Here's one that has popped up lately, mostly from just one poster though.

"Ignorance Is Bliss"

Continually post that 'you' are ignoring and not reading others [evil]comments while spamming the thread(s).

yeah, alot of people fluff up their posts with endless fillers to compensate for their lack of a point.

you'd think they were typing up their resumes.

Well some debating would have to take place on this forum for anyone to debate badly wouldn't it?

Originally posted by Zebedee
Well some debating would have to take place on this forum for anyone to debate badly wouldn't it?

R-D-R-R.

Due to recent resurfacing of the tactic I will state now and have stated before I will repeat it.

You don't see it that often, but it is hilarious when it happens. Here's how it goes:

A person (R) makes an argument that's very easy to defeat (because of its stupidity)
Another (B) destroys it thoroughly.
R then claims he meant something completely else (usually the argument the other person (B) that countered the initial statement supports) and tries to get B to agree with the statement.

Can be annoying too, but if you catch it you can constantly make fun of them.

Just a coincidence you used "R" and "B" as examples, instead of the more common "A" & "B"?

I agree though, it was silly.

Originally posted by Robtard
Just a coincidence you used "R" and "B" as examples, instead of the more common "A" & "B"?

I agree though, it was silly.

Mere coincidence.

Didn't want it to be confused with the indefinite article.

The Larry Craig Copout

key ingredient is hypocrisy. make a career out of lashing out against individuals for statements/actions which you deem as damnable. declare that anyone who commits said actions/statements deserve no leniency what so ever.

when caught doing/saying something infinitly more deplorable, simply invoke those that you damned as a justification for your actions, and how they 'got away with it'.

an example would be far too longwinded, but im sure you get the picture.

I've got an example:

FistoftheNorth: "Whites are genetically racist!"

Everyone: "You're a retarded racist."

FistoftheNorth: "If I'm racist, it's because I've been discriminated against my whole life."

[I don't actually know if he ever said that, but I'm pretty sure that he would.)

Originally posted by FeceMan
I've got an example:

FistoftheNorth: "Whites are genetically racist!"

Everyone: "You're a retarded racist."

FistoftheNorth: "If I'm racist, it's because I've been discriminated against my whole life."

[I don't actually know if he ever said that, but I'm pretty sure that he would.)

Confirmation:

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
Since i was a kid most Whites I've confronted in my life have judged me based on my skin color and treated me and my family horribly while always just minding my/our own business.

And they would always let us know what the problem was with us: Cause we were "n*ggers" and they couldn't have us around. I've mostly received racial slurs from Whites, like here on KMC, due to having an African background. Life's been horrible for me with Whites but everything ele's in life, with everyone else, has been good.

I remember one time when our home was attacked and my sister called the police and i had to tell her to say we're White so they'd come faster than normal. They did but when they came they were highly upset and told us that they won't fill out a report despite the damage and with the White offenders across the street, and they left. And the cops were White too. I felt guilty for lying but my family was under attack and we needed assistance.

So i just don't go near Whites anymore. I completely stay away from them, as i have tons of friends and not one White one. Crazy, hu. Like i already told myself that in the future, when I do buy a family house, it can't be in an all White neighborhood. No way. I'd fear for the safety of my family, my children, and i'd hate for my family to go through what me and my family unnecessarily went though with Whites for years and years. I'd definitely want to move to a racially diverse town or street with my new family. And yea not all Whites are like that but i haven't had any luck so I'm not taking any chances.

What a retard.

Originally posted by FeceMan
What a retard.

I second that.

Personal attacks aside, I revive this thread to enter my own entry which is very common and the most annoying tactic ever known.

Person 1: 2 + 2 = 5

Person 2: No, 2 + 2 = 4.

Person 3: "2 + 2 = 5" I agree.

Person 2: "No, 2 + 2 = 4"

Person 1: "I agree." See, I am right.

Person 2: Once again: "No, 2 + 2 = 4"

Person 3: "See, I am right." Yes you are.

Person 2: FFS. "No, 2 + 2 = 4"

Person 1/3: "FFS." Don't get angry.

Now, obviously the stupidity is basically Person 3 ignoring Person 2's responce, and just saying that Person 1 is right (it's especially annoying when Person 2's responce is posted straight after). I just wanted to expand the debate, as this is what typically happens after. I've come across this many times, it's more annoying than any other tactic I've come across.

This thread just seems an excuse to bash. I'm making an observation here. I see a lot of chat, some discussion, hardly any debate but a lot of disagreement. Most of the time the arguments involved entrenced opinions which are opposites and as such cannot be debated merely argued.