Posted on 02/14/2020 7:01:41 PM PST by rktman
Wildly inaccurate facts and spurious arguments are unavoidable features of social media. Yet no matter how infuriatingly wrong someone is, or just how much counter-evidence you have at your disposal, starting arguments on the internet rarely gets anyone to change their mind. Nearly a century-and-a-half ago, British philosopher John Stuart Mill explained, in a few clear sentences, why certain arguments simply won’t go anywhere. As historian Robert Saunders notes, Mill’s analysis neatly applies to heated and futile internet debates.
(Excerpt) Read more at getpocket.com ...
Or the ‘Lost Cause’ fools.
Still trying to figure out the attraction of the leading contestant for the demodrones. Boynee sanDUHs. WTH?
Persuasion skills refer to the talent of changing the attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors of a person or group towards another person, group, event, object, or idea. ....It is usually done by conveying, in a message, some feelings, information, reasoning, or a combination......NONE of which needs to be true.
bttt
A favorite of mine. I often repeat it to the wife.
There's simply no objective standard by which the discussion can be measured.
The emotional thinkers (generally, liberals) will always try to move the argument away from the black and white of the facts and towards the emotional tug of a particular position.
They had single 32 year olds living in thier parent’s basement in 1850?
Summary:
“Logic won’t get a person out of a position that logic didn’t get them into”.
However, "Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit" (Proverbs 26:5) can have its place, as well as to show others that the proffered propaganda polemic is refuted.
Currently doing so with a advertising cloned Mormon. Beginning and end so far, by the grace of God..
“...single 32 year olds living in thier parent’s basement in 1850?...”
-
I have seen many records of my ancestors from that time period
where 3 and sometimes 4 generations were living in the same house.
It was not uncommon at all.
"Rule By Anecdote"
"Rule By Anecdote"
There’s a guy on the Mallard Fillmore comic strip board at Arcamax that uses different names as he is constantly banned.
Three quarters of that board is always littered with people answering his anti-Trump posts. I blocked him as useless, but too may there rise to the bait.
Yep. “Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.” -—Euripides.
No it isn't.
;|
New Living Translation
“Don’t waste what is holy on people who are unholy. Don’t throw your pearls to pigs! They will trample the pearls, then turn and attack you.
“I never get into arguments on the Internet. You never know what sort of silly stuff the poster is making up.” Socrates, 410 BC
That’s all very interesting; but very few people will read it.
Many people decide things according to their own educations and experiences, and derive their thoughtful conclusions from same.
A lot of other people just want to be ‘one with the crowd’, and decide what they think according to what they’ve seen ‘acceptable’ among the people they follow on the Web, or from the consensus of their local cohort.
You can’t argue with it, and there is no sense in posting about it.
You have to just post truth, as you see it, and hope that someone is watching who may understand and be influenced.
Posted on 02/14/2020 7:21:21 PM PST by Jamestown1630 (”A Republic, if you can keep it.”)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.