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 ...
Mark Twain has received credit for a germane cautionary remark:
“Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference”.
like trying to address some of these rat idiots.....sterilizing men at age 50....I mean, don't even give them the time of day....
Agreed. That’s why it’s best to support each other here and elsewhere, and let those interested come aboard.
I lost patience with the Rats long ago, and have no desire whatsoever to endure their vacant diatribes.
Really? Think it wisdom to allow a lie unchallenged to be repeated so often it become considered truth? Simpy because you are too lazy to fight for truth and are looking to rationalize your moral cowardice?
The Only Thing Necessary for the Triumph of Evil is that Good Men Do Nothing
Yeah, well, you know,
that’s just like, your opinion, man!
“””””””’It’s Pointless to Start Arguments on the Internet.
No it isn’t.
;| “”””””””””
I used to belong to a discussion that was more ag related and most of the posters were farmers, truckers etc. Good people.
We had a lot of good times sharing general stuff from life.
Naturally there were always a few that were morons and had to prove it on a daily basis. It was so much fun messing with their heads. Good times.
Minnesota winters are long and cold, gotta have fun somehow.
*If I had known the difference between anecdote and antidote, maybe my friend John Stone would be alive today.
Bkmk evidence
“Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong. “
Been there lots of times, even very recently.
When the teenagers start sparking, haven meet the grandparents.
Then, tell them that’s what they are getting in 20-30 years.
GMTA.
I was going to say...
I thought Lincoln said that on April 15, 1865
But I came here to lodge a complaint...
;)
Yeah, but it sucked because they had to post their tweets via Western Union.
You can use the lefty’s emotions against them using Alinsky tactic—make them live up to their own book of rules.
This is particularly effective against the “climate” crowd—make sure and point out every detail of their gigantic carbon footprint...(call them Bigfoot or Sasquatch :-) ).
Well I would have to disagree with that, especially on the internet!
I argue with people that are wrong, even people I KNOW I have no chance of changing their mind... Because there is a good chance other people will see it who are not so closed minded and possibly be able to change one random persons mind and open their eyes to the truth!
You cannot win an argument with a Mormon. They are thoroughly indoctrinated to believe that opposition is confirmation. You can spend days pointing out the gaping holes in their doctrine (hint, it is not based on the Book of Mormon), the many ludicrous events in the Book of Morman, the tens of thousands of edits, deletions, and additions to their scripture in a vain attempt to make it coherent, and all you’ll do is convince them that they’re right.
I do the same thing. I think of it as planting seeds. It also has helped my debating skills immeasurably over the past 20 years. It’s futile I know, but it’s still fun calling ppl out on their idiocy.
[[starting arguments on the internet rarely gets anyone to change their mind.]]
You’re not trying to educate the stubborn- you are hoping that your sound factual arguments are going to cause someone who has never looked into the subject, OR someone who has been taught one way, but is object e enough to listen, to look with an open mind- in a way they would never have thought about had you not brought the argument up
bottom line is= you are NOT arguing with the mule headed folks, you are hoping that someone someday sees your arguments and learns something- you just never know who will stumble across your posts, or when the Holy spirit will work
Contending for the faith! (When the arguments are about religion) is what it’s called- and it’s never pointless- The Holy Spirit works where He will, when He will- as He sees fit- the important point is not winning the argument, but getting the facts out there-
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.