At what point do you stop taking other people's arguments seriously?

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

At what point do I stop taking other people's arguments seriously?

5am Monday morning...

Give or take.

Anything that involves people throwing around childish insults or actual threats. Or people who use the words "PC" or "SJW." The internet has made me really sick to death of people arguing about that particular subject.

erttheking:
When they post citations they clearly haven't read and make false claims about it and refuse to own up to it.

I swear to god, the number of times somebody would say "[person] is attacking <game> for being <whatever>-ist" and then posting an article where said person does none of those things...

I mean, I appreciate the reminder that just because you're a nerd, that doesn't mean you're smart, but the lack of reading comprehension makes me scared for the education system.

I'll add "person immediately believes some rando anon on reddit/the chans". That's how we got such gems like "Anita Sarkeesian called Mirror's Edge's controls sexist and is working on the sequel". It's goddamned embarrassing. They were anon (obviously), and specifically declined to post evidence. How goddamned stupid do you have to be? EA had to say she wasn't working on the game twice, and I'd bet money there's still people out there thinking she's the reason it didn't do well.

Ad hominem attacks are basically a shorthand for "my argument holds no water therefore I will attempt to discredit my opponent with pejoratives". Insults I can understand, calling someone a "cuck" or "sjw" is just their version of "-ist". Trying to say that the person's ideas have no foundation simply because "its misogynist, its libtard, it's whatever" will likely invalidate the accuser's argument because it implies that it cannot stand on its own in the marketplace of ideas.

Kenbo Slice:
Anytime someone throws around terms like "cuck", "libtard", and "sjw" I can't bear to listen to them anymore. Or anytime someone resorts to personal attacks.

When the person fails to respond to your points after calling them out on it. When someone can no longer respond to you in a civil manner and argue against the points you have made, then they've lost.

Kenbo Slice:
Anytime someone throws around terms like "cuck", "libtard", and "sjw" I can't bear to listen to them anymore. Or anytime someone resorts to personal attacks.

Aw, man, you took mine.

Excessive use of exclamation marks; I'm not keen on them at all, seeing two together is borderline insulting. Even worse when people use them instead of a question mark (Anne Rice, we're looking at you). Or opening with 'Do you not think that...'. (And no, I do not think that exclamation marks should run away together and get married. Can you imagine what their children would look like!!)

It's the internet. A better question would be "when do I START taking people's arguments seriously?" :P And that point is when they show they've done actual research into the topic and come with actual facts that have been tested.

Seriously, more people should try it. About 90% of internet arguments aren't even worth "taking seriously". Just make a reply or two if you like, and move on with your life.

sanquin:
About 90% of internet arguments aren't even worth "taking seriously".

This. Too many times I see people flipping out about things that will make little if any difference and ignoring other things that are vital. The presidential elections compared to congressional elections are a perfect example of this.

When they're wrong. Which is any time they disagree with me.

When they start using insults or threaten violence. That tells me you've got nothing to come back with and have exhausted your mental capacity.

Saelune:

As Jon Snow would say:

You know nothing, Saelune.

On Topic: When people are being blatantly disingenuous. When people avoid acknowledging valid points that has been made. When people demonstrate that they have no interest in having an honest debate. Instead, they want to harass you for having a different opinion. When people refuse to acknowledge dictionary definitions as a valid source to confirm what someone is saying. (This has happened way too much on these forums alone.) In general, when people want to act like an asshole when you engage them in any conversation or debate online. Which is, anymore, most of the time when I am on The Escapist.

KissingSunlight:

On Topic: When people are being blatantly disingenuous. When people avoid acknowledging valid points that has been made. When people demonstrate that they have no interest in having an honest debate. Instead, they want to harass you for having a different opinion. When people refuse to acknowledge dictionary definitions as a valid source to confirm what someone is saying. (This has happened way too much on these forums alone.) In general, when people want to act like an asshole when you engage them in any conversation or debate online. Which is, anymore, most of the time when I am on The Escapist.

It is even worse when such a person seems to acknowledge and almost take pride in doing such yet simultaneously expects you to continue to engage them. The complete and total arrogance/lack of awareness is staggering at times; Both online and off.

People who don't look up words and concepts but then writes conspiracy theories about them.

Feminism, social justice, liberalism...

At no point. Words are just words, if arguments aren't serious or after verification turn out to be false, they are not serious. If you on the other hand just deflect an argument you don't understand, don't like where conclusion takes you or don't like the way it has been delivered... well at this point you yourself can't be taken seriously.
Even the most vile, disingenuous, disgusting, repulsive, always wrong person may have a valid point, that would allow you to adjust your wrong position aka learn something.
If you just dismiss it, you're a fool (granted it's fine not to have time; just say you don't have time for it then, you're done etc.).

Addendum_Forthcoming:
People who don't look up words and concepts but then writes conspiracy theories about them.

Feminism, social justice, liberalism...

You know you make a good point. We see people use terms like "libtards" for "liberals" they hate, but I've yet to see such people use it on actual liberals. People on the left who hold anti-liberal views seem to be lumped up with liberals for some reason, guess some can't get the idea that progressives and liberals aren't interchangeable and in many very important ways antithetical.

Zontar:

You know you make a good point. We see people use terms like "libtards" for "liberals" they hate, but I've yet to see such people use it on actual liberals. People on the left who hold anti-liberal views seem to be lumped up with liberals for some reason, guess some can't get the idea that progressives and liberals aren't interchangeable and in many very important ways antithetical.

Going to have to add "progressive" to that list...

Fischgopf:

votemarvel:
I tend to tune out if anyone starts an argument with words similar to "I'm not racist but...."

I've always wondered about this one. I take it, atleast before reading the rest, as simple acknowledgement that race is a sensitive subject.

So I'll just test it. Show of hand is the following a statement racist or not?

I'm not a racist but I do think that the glorification of it's criminal elements contributes to the problems and barriers that the black community faces.

-----

I don't really take anyone on the Internet seriously. Kinda difficult to do when I can make them go away by clicking on the little x. And in real life, people generally avoid conflict with me unless they know me and therefore know that I'm a chill guy.

On a rare occasion it can lead to what you describe, but more often than not it goes "I'm not racist but science has proven black people have a smaller brain."

Perhaps some people use the term as a way to say that they aren't racist, homophobic, sexist etc but for the vast vast majority, they are jut making a ham fisted attempt at trying to hide that is what they actually are.

votemarvel:

Fischgopf:

votemarvel:
I tend to tune out if anyone starts an argument with words similar to "I'm not racist but...."

I've always wondered about this one. I take it, atleast before reading the rest, as simple acknowledgement that race is a sensitive subject.

So I'll just test it. Show of hand is the following a statement racist or not?

I'm not a racist but I do think that the glorification of it's criminal elements contributes to the problems and barriers that the black community faces.

-----

I don't really take anyone on the Internet seriously. Kinda difficult to do when I can make them go away by clicking on the little x. And in real life, people generally avoid conflict with me unless they know me and therefore know that I'm a chill guy.

On a rare occasion it can lead to what you describe, but more often than not it goes "I'm not racist but science has proven black people have a smaller brain."

Perhaps some people use the term as a way to say that they aren't racist, homophobic, sexist etc but for the vast vast majority, they are jut making a ham fisted attempt at trying to hide that is what they actually are.

I don't know, I often get the feeling that people just WANT to believe that apparently everyone but themselves is some kind of hateful monster.

It certainly doesn't help that 9 Times out of 10 the same people claiming that such a statement must be coming from a racist tend to be massive assholes and also surprisingly often terrible little racists themselves.

When I can hear air being wasted, or when I feel that my brain cells are being assaulted when I haven't been drinking. You know the feeling. You know what it's like. You know what it means.

Ooh, also, when the person I'm arguing with, on hearing that I disagree with their stance, assumes I then take the most ridiculously extreme opposite stance. Case in point, I argued with a guy who was claiming their was no wage gap. He countered with "what, so you think there are evil spooky men in every office, denying women more pay?" And of course, the answer is no, but the fact is he'd already decided what my stance was before he even heard it.

Typically when they can't even cite sources that support their arguments, or the sources are extremely biased, or just fluff opinion pieces dressed up as an "Expert opinion".

I find I value empirical and statistical evidence more than other forms.

Generally three things trigger my 'this is just a lunatic not worth my time' sensor:
1. Espousing a certain position but very plainly contradicting that position. I can give people slack if it is a very hidden contradiction, but when the contradiction is obvious and they still don't see it, they're hopeless.
2. Almost immediately reaches for the insults and character attacks. I can understand frustration after a long debate, but if the very first thing they reach for is attacks designed to poison the well you just know they haven't got a point worth considering. However, this does not apply to venting. If someone has a long history of good argument, I'm not going to suddenly discount them simply because they start a new argument in such a fashion. No, it has to be generally be one where people are talking in dialog and this is the first thing that they do.
3. Can't define their own terms to any degree that doesn't lead them to silliness like tautologies. I don't expect a rigorous definition, but again if their definition very plainly doesn't support their views, or creates a situation where everything is X then they're just talking nonsense.

When reading two or more posters on a forum arguing over a topic, it'll come down to if someone starts letting their emotions get the best of them and stop using logic. I've seen on many of topics whether it's politics to specifics on game localization where things start civil, but someone starts attacking the other. From there, I end up stop reading the back and forth as anything I could possibly learn is gone and while perhaps at first it can be amusing, it quickly escalates and at times can get really ugly.

Personally, I almost never get in an argument online, and the few times I remember I stopped because more myself than anything else. Outside of certain fictional series that I am really into and perhaps some small subject matters, I know that I lack all sorts of knowledge in 99% of topics related to life. I can understand surface level things about politics, religion, economics, but go any deeper and for the most part that's beyond my understanding of the topics. So if I make a comment and somebody starts going into much more detail about stuff, I may comment or ask a few questions, but generally back off because it would be disengenous of me to argue when I know nothing, and for an internet argument I don't feel like putting in hours of effort to respond. In the end, I still manage to come out of any debate/argument with some sort of new found knowledge, even if it's a little bit.

Any time they massively generalize.

All Christians are child molesters.

Aaaaaand I'm out.

Like how dumb do you have to be to actually say stuff like that as if its fact.

Ad hominems and whataboutisms are the point of no return.

I look for fallacies.
Ad Hominem is a huge one. Example: "Wow you're an idiot!"
False Equivalencies are harder for me to spot but some are obvious, like comparing weed possession to treason. Example: The current political climate.
False Dichotomies, when people think there's only two options of a thing. Life is so much more nuanced.
I don't like generalizations, grouping up one set of radicals with people as a whole. Example: One group of Christians are violent so they must all be fascists.
Someone saying "Political correctness" just shuts down a conversation because they typically don't address the fact that culture evolves past things and certain forms of humor cease to be funny over time. This ties into the "appeal to tradition" fallacy to people who just latch onto past things "Ahh, the good ol days", not realizing the "good ol days" were so much worse.

Just a few things I can pick up on where I'm like "Okay wow nope bye".

Addendum_Forthcoming:

Going to have to add "progressive" to that list...

May as well ad "liberal" to the list too given you're not making it impossible to even discuss entire ideologies. And how about "conservative" and "libertarian"?

Zontar:
When someone claims to hold a certain view then immediately goes on to take positions that are completely at odds with those stated beliefs. Hard to take someone seriously when they try and make it look like they hold two contradictory beliefs that can't be reconciled, especially when those beliefs are what people are arguing over.

I've seen too many people claim they think everyone is equal, then turn around and openly hold white supremacist views, and claim it's all consistent. It wouldn't be so bad if such people hadn't taken over entire political movements though, what ever happened to progressives being JFK's "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" and into the "mememe" wing of politics?

Yeah, I can't get on with this stuff either. another example would be people using snowflake without realising that they're actually giving a good demonstration of acting like a snowflake. Sargon and the term Regressive.

Also, messing up things like a racist comment or a racist person. The former is one just instance while the latter is a person with a bunch of racist comments showing a clear pattern of behaviour. There's a big difference between 'that's racist' versus 'you're racist'. But then I also find the whole 'demographic x is superior' a silly argument. Even if it was true, what does that even mean for society. E.g. Some people believe that men are much better at math. If that is true, what does it mean for society? Does it mean we should ban women from STEM subjects? Or does it just mean nothing. Some people think that white are more productive than every other race. Does that mean every other race shouldnt get paid or get a job?

Zontar:

May as well ad "liberal" to the list too given you're not making it impossible to even discuss entire ideologies. And how about "conservative" and "libertarian"?

Communism, cultural Marxism, Marxist theory ...

I'm pretty sure I could do this all day.

KissingSunlight:

Saelune:

As Jon Snow would say:

You know nothing, Saelune.

On Topic: When people are being blatantly disingenuous. When people avoid acknowledging valid points that has been made. When people demonstrate that they have no interest in having an honest debate. Instead, they want to harass you for having a different opinion. When people refuse to acknowledge dictionary definitions as a valid source to confirm what someone is saying. (This has happened way too much on these forums alone.) In general, when people want to act like an asshole when you engage them in any conversation or debate online. Which is, anymore, most of the time when I am on The Escapist.

When people make great points...against themselves.

Like when a Trump supporter complains about fake news.

Or when someone criticizes people for not holding people accountable for their actions, then complain about being held accountable for their own actions.

Saelune:

Or when someone criticizes people for not holding people accountable for their actions, then complain about being held accountable for their own actions.

Oh! This reminds me.

When people fail to understand or acknowledge context and nuance. When people have reductive views on complex issues. Basically, when they put everything into binary, good or evil, categories.

Same as OP, those words just really make me care less.

Also, anyone who uses 'true' fan in the arguement, like who are you to judge if someone else is a true fan of something?

Kenbo Slice:
Anytime someone throws around terms like "cuck", "libtard", and "sjw" I can't bear to listen to them anymore. Or anytime someone resorts to personal attacks.

Whenever someone starts throwing religion-based justifications for their completely non-related argument.

Fischgopf:
On a rare occasion it can lead to what you describe, but more often than not it goes "I'm not racist but science has proven black people have a smaller brain."

In favor of playing Devil's advocate, that is still not a racist statement, it's an objective fact that can be proven either true or false.
Assuming that it is true (I really don't know), the predicted follow-up reasoning of "therefore, they are inferior." would be racist, because that is the value judgement that actually justifies a discriminatory attitude or approach.

Because even smaller brains can be trained into great minds, just like large brains can be woefully wasted.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here