this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2024
115 points (100.0% liked)
chapotraphouse
13393 readers
996 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank
Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here
Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
A long time ago... back in the internet new atheist days, or whatever its called... I was watching YT videos of Matt Dillahunty of the Atheist Community of Austin (last I heard the org was full of chuds... dont @ me) talking about getting into conversations, arguments, debates with Christians trying to "change his mind".
At some point he started responding to their rhetoric with a question, "What convinced YOU to be a Christian?"
The point of the question being, 99% of the arguments are purely rhetorical, they are not real arguments, they only exist to try to score points or back somebody into a "logical" corner where a person would have to admit that logically and rhetorically the Christian was correct.
The "less of two evils" argument is not a real argument. No lib who is talking, debating, arguing with you thinks they are the "lesser of two evils". They think they are correct and are trying to find some way to get you to admit that (1) you have no valid rhetorical counter point, (2) change your opinion and/or actions because you didn't have a valid rhetorical counter point, and (3) reinforce their own position/opinion by seeing that there was no valid rhetorical counter point to their arguments.
Yeah this is something a lot of people gotta understand. Debates are so people can either reinforce their own beliefs to themselves or look cool to people who already share their beliefs.
Debates are performances not communication