EPTPraise be to thee.
How To Be Annoying When You Argue - Page 3
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
to miss the mark
Bosnia-Herzegovina1381 Posts
Praise be to thee. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
now, not that i am anything but a novice in this art, but to be really annoying in an argument, takes some more effort and awareness. now, it is fair that not everyone would necessarily pursue an argument on a particular topic with insistence, but it would be fair to say that most people have some topics that they will argue about for hours. so basically, the most annoying argument needs to be on a topic that the victim has confidence and conviction in, so any challenge to the topic needs to be against his conviction. now, one could potentially choose a topic based on the victim's interests, but it is best to focus on a specific question that you are in a position to accept or deny based on your personal feelings. the victim should seek to convince you of his convictions, and what you do is to maximize the points of argument that you can choose to accept or not accept. accept some of them to keep the victim interested, and you seem reasonable, but never let go of some fundamental rejection of his conclusions or opportunities to generate new accept or not accept positions. What to accept in the argument. reduce your opponent's arguments, to a set of predicates. say a b c d. now, imagine two lines of reasonableness. the higher line marks positions that if you do not accept makes you look stupid, and achieve no effect in frustrating the opponent. say for example 1+1=2. These you cannot deny. The lower line marks the position that if you challenge, the opponent will be crushed, and realize the unreasonableness of his own beliefs. But remember, you are not trying to win the argument, but to be annoying, so do not challenge these, and make a good showing in either covering them up or even accepting them. Some work can be done with arguments that assume these unreasonable positions, but never ever challenge the positions themselves, or you have won the argument and failed at being annoying, unless the victim has a religious attachment to the conclusion. It is with those that fall in the middle that you do work. See next section on how to do work with these positions. use variations of 'that's what you say' against strong personal convictions and things believed yet treated like fact. (in layman's definition this covers anything that is not physics, math or holocaust) Since citing the fact that the victim is only speaking his own opinions implies a relativist challenge yet does not explicitly state the challenge, the victim will be forced to provide an absolute account or at any rate an account that you can choose to accept or not accept. This step will be highly frustrating for the victim to take, since it involves not assuming his strong conviction and trying to establish some sort of proof, which may or may not be there depending on whether the conviction is reducible or not. If the conviction really is irreducible, congratulations, you've found a damn annoying question. The question can never be answered but by a circular (which you can quickly point out to the embarrassment of your victim, see next section) and is constantly annoying when the victim thinks about it. If the position is reducible, then help him reduce it, and isolate the positions that are closer to the type you seek, an irreducible personal conviction. Now, really, when you find even one of these, it is a never ending source of irritation as long as the opponent is trying to 'prove' it to you. he will think of relations that are reasonable assuming his conviction, and parade them out to you, each of which you can destroy by either repeating the 'that's what you say' and force the opponent to prove it is a circular himself, or, if you are really in grasp of the argument, lucidly point out the circular to him and set him back to square one. Another strategy is to never do work (or, to never bring out 'that's what you say' to the position explicitly) on the personal conviction itself, rather do work on the circulars erected in defense of it. Pick positions that are fairly built up conclusions, and force your opponent to reduce them, and hope they make a mistake and reduce hte argument to a circular, and never arrive at the basic assumptions. Deny every unsuccessful reduction with a more advanced reduction followed by a 'that's what you say.' The above strategies do not work equally well on every argument, so it takes some awareness to pick which one to use in what situation, but the general rules and goals still stand, make your opponent prove his basic convictions to you. Of course one cannot expect accurate and insightful evaluation of every one of your opponent's positions, so it is helpful to remember some good ones. this is accumulated by experience. some more thing to remember, never explicitly deny a position or at any rate become vulnerable to a reversal. you must remain the buyer, and he the seller. refute all attempts at reversing the relationship. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On March 06 2007 10:30 kawoq wrote: hahahhathis is really interesting... but what if Victim: I think is raining outside Hero: no you don't Victim: are you calling me a liar? then what????..... HELP!!!! pd: never try this with your older and bigger brother..... | ||
|
Tarte
Canada933 Posts
On March 06 2007 11:10 Ryp wrote: ![[image loading]](http://www.playwithlinn.com/Images/funny%20pics/bullshit%20thread.jpg) LOL, nah man this thread's so fun =D. Just enjoy it =] | ||
|
A3iL3r0n
United States2196 Posts
Victim: Oh god, it's raining outside. Hero: Sure it is. Victim: *pauses* Victim: You don't realize it's raining outside? Hero: No, I'm sure it is if you say it is. Victim: What the fuck is your problem man? Hero: What do you mean? Victim: You're being an asshole. Hero: How so? Victim: I don't know-- Hero: (interrupting) Explain it to me. Victim: I don't know you're just being an asshole. Hero: Okay, this is what I'm hearing from you. You're upset, because I'm putting my total faith in your ability to observe the obvious. I already agreed with you, what? twice? And then you get upset. I'm not sure I'm the one being the asshole here. (pause here, and then change tone to complete friendliness) Hey man, if you say it's raining outside then I'd say it's raining. Don't get so worked up, sheesh. | ||
|
Servolisk
United States5241 Posts
| ||
|
Sadir
Vatican City State1176 Posts
On March 06 2007 11:10 Ryp wrote: lol, this thread is gosu, not full of shit  nice video Servolisk | ||
|
poilord
Germany3252 Posts
On March 06 2007 08:19 Hot_Bid wrote: Ally Chat KTF: Yellow: they are massing in the midd-- Reach: I AM REACH! Yellow: go go counter at 6 o'clo-- Reach: I AM REACH! Yellow: help they comi-- Reach: I AM REACH! Yellow: he-- Reach: REACH! Yellow: i-- Reach: REACH! Ally Chat SKT1: Boxer: interplanatar interaction is pivotal to terran's variety of optionitudals in the pre-midgame preperatories as well as the protosstinal deterriggation of elite zergling strikes Iloveoov: oov like banana. you give oov banana. oov macro. oov win. Boxer: please time your build order to coincide with mine. Iloveoov: macro? :D hilarious! | ||
|
il0seonpurpose
Korea (South)5638 Posts
liar | ||
|
poilord
Germany3252 Posts
Did you call Slayer91 a liar? | ||
|
~OpZ~
United States3652 Posts
and...LiquiScoop! | ||
|
zobz
Canada2175 Posts
On March 06 2007 11:57 A3iL3r0n wrote: Victim: Oh god, it's raining outside. Hero: Sure it is. Victim: *pauses* Victim: You don't realize it's raining outside? Hero: No, I'm sure it is if you say it is. Victim: What the fuck is your problem man? Hero: What do you mean? Victim: You're being an asshole. Hero: How so? Victim: I don't know-- Hero: (interrupting) Explain it to me. Victim: I don't know you're just being an asshole. Hero: Okay, this is what I'm hearing from you. You're upset, because I'm putting my total faith in your ability to observe the obvious. I already agreed with you, what? twice? And then you get upset. I'm not sure I'm the one being the asshole here. (pause here, and then change tone to complete friendliness) Hey man, if you say it's raining outside then I'd say it's raining. Don't get so worked up, sheesh. indeed | ||
|
DeadVessel
United States6269 Posts
liar | ||
|
Slayer91
Ireland23342 Posts
You don't think tha someone who defended me a liar, bitch, do you? | ||
|
urban_attack
Poland88 Posts
On March 06 2007 09:44 [r]h_probe wrote: And Mr. Hot Bid what would you do if this happens: Victim: I think it's raining outside. Hero: No you don't. Victim: Uh... yes I do. Hero: Are you calling me a liar? Victim: Yes, I am. WWHBD? | ||
|
ilovezil
United States4143 Posts
On March 06 2007 13:31 Slayer91 wrote: You don't think tha someone who defended me a liar, bitch, do you? C-C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!! Meh...it's not that funny second time around, is it?  | ||
|
Tarte
Canada933 Posts
 ! | ||
|
CloseandBan
Korea (South)100 Posts
| ||
|
bsmd
Peru186 Posts
Victim: I think it's raining outside. Hero: No you don't. Victim: Uh... yes I do. Hero: Are you calling me a liar? Victim: rofl no Hero: lol Victim has left the channel | ||
|
DeadVessel
United States6269 Posts
On March 06 2007 13:31 Slayer91 wrote: You don't think tha someone who defended me a liar, bitch, do you? liar Edit:  Edit x2: Good thread Hot_Bid. Edit x3: | ||
| ||
