[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 217 KB, 1728x1142, 1608671760229.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17345888 No.17345888 [Reply] [Original]

This is 4chan.

This is not your university debate club. If you wanna be a whiny little faggot who'd rather get bogged down or "win" on a technicality instead of actually having a discussion then FUCK OFF BACK WHERE YOU CAME FROM. What's your actual intention here, to learn something or just to score e-peen points? Anyone who brings up logical fallacies is a grade A wanker.

>> No.17345894

>>17345888
wow, you sound like a fucking retard

>> No.17345903

>>17345894
Agreed, OP is a faggot.

>> No.17345904
File: 41 KB, 822x960, 1608289671704.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17345904

if you can't argue against the 'fallacy' (shouldn't be hard if it's a fallacy, right?) and your only 'argument' is pointing it out, you've already lost

>> No.17345905

Chad Hominem

>> No.17345906

>>17345888
FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGOT

>> No.17345919

>>17345888
No true anon would ever even think this, how embarrassing

>> No.17345921

>>17345888
go home contrarian. dint even disagree with your sentiment, but you explained it in a gay way and your point isnt even half original.

at least say something like “using the term logical fallacy rather than explaining what you disagree with conceptually is reductive”

this topic is old and you are new here or else baiting.

>> No.17345922

The problem with logical fallacies is that sometimes they are just simple things that don't change the end result at all, and sometimes they subvert the end result entirely. It's not really possible to make a simple heuristic around when it's ok to just let it slide for a stupid internet debate, and when it actually makes a fundamental difference to the conclusion, so why don't you just stop making logical fallacies and we won't have a problem

>> No.17345930

>>17345904
The hypocrisy

>> No.17345941

>>17345921
>“using the term logical fallacy rather than explaining what you disagree with conceptually is reductive”
Look everyone, a pseud who thinks using big words makes him smart.

>> No.17345953

>>17345888
Great literature thread.

>> No.17345957

>>17345922
>so why don't you just stop making logical fallacies and we won't have a problem
Because if you make a point so fucking dumb and idiotic all it deserves is a single word reply then my counter argument will be to call you a fucking nigger.

>> No.17345996

>>17345904
THIS.

People just throw out "muh wibbly wobbly wogical fawwacy" like they just played Exodia the Forbidden One.

>> No.17345998

>>17345941
>“using the term logical fallacy rather than explaining what points you disagree with is pointless”
is that wording better for you?

>> No.17346002

>>17345957
why do you bother arguing with people who aren't willing to have a rational argument? Can't you just ignore their posts and not reply? This really feels like a personal problem you have, rather than an issue with 4chan as a platform.

>> No.17346021

>>17345996
you don't play Exodia you have to have all parts in your hand

>> No.17346023

>>17345998
>is that wording better for you?
Yes, why didn't you use that to begin with? Every heard of "never use a long word when a short one will do"? It's nothing to do with intelligence either, dumb people are the ones who fill their sentences with long words because they're insecure.

>> No.17346041

>>17346002
>why do you bother arguing with people who aren't willing to have a rational argument?
Because it's fun and a decent argument is like a dance. There's push and pull, you agree on some points and couldn't be farther apart on others. People who don't enjoy that are faggots, if you wanna have calm little civil gaylord "talks" like some woman then good luck to you but fuck out of my face.

>> No.17346045

>>17346021
Autism speaks.

>> No.17346051

>>17345904
Fallacy? I say Phalluscy.

>> No.17346068

>>17345888
>His post contains a No True Scotsman fallacy, Ad hominem, Hasty Generalization, and Straw man fallacy
You lose, OP

>> No.17346082

>>17346045
you were the one bringing it up, why are you so defensive?

>> No.17346096

>>17346023
it was not as precise, i wasnt trying to be smart, i was just talking in a more direct way.

last time i remember “conceptually” and “reductive” are not fucking galaxy brain words.

If i said teleologically and reductio ad nihilum i would have said you had a point retard.