No autism?

You’re asking for too much

What's the purpose of this channel @The Big Oof ? To debate people only with facts and logic and not weaponized autism?

Cringe and bluepilled

@𝕿𝖔𝖙𝖆𝖑𝖎𝖙𝖆𝖗𝖎𝖆𝖓 𝕲𝖗𝖆𝖓𝖉𝖆𝖉𝖉𝖉𝖞 yes

for when the spergs crawl out at night and people want a serious channel to move in to

Well it will certainly help it the ad-hominens, shitpost and memeind during the discussion, but it would be better for the channel name to be: No Autism Discussion so people catch what's about faster

If you think Ad Hominem is bad, you’re a retard

*banned*

hello fellow autists

Ad hom is bad but most people don't know what that is

Everyone I meet on these lower discords think it means insults

you're wrong because you're a retard : adhom
you're a retard : not adhom

That's incorrect

It would be "you are wrong because you hold x belief"

that just points towards a bias

hardly constitutes as adhom

It's a type of bias

What you described is insults either way

hurr you're wrong because u read breitbart

Yep

There you go

some truth in there tho

breitbart is retarded

Can be

Not all logical fallacies are bad

Or wrong I should say

slippery slope can apply in a lot of cases

like the degeneration of the society

Depends on the level of correlation

If it's above a 50% correlation than yes

For example queer theroy causing pedophilia

it's not what I'm saying, I'm saying that typically the slippery slope already happened and that saying it won't happen because it's a logical falacy is a bit of a lie

Well yeah that's appeal to stone though

There is also a fallacy fallacy

some meta shit right here

Not really think about a war vs a battle you can lose a single point to a fallacy but your overall idea is not fallacious

They're using the literal definition of ad-hom

It does mean an insult, however, an insult does not become a fallacy until it is used as an argument

I can say Islam is dangerous, all Muslims are terrorists. I've committed a fallacy of composition but to say I'm completely wrong would be false

Calling someone retarded is not a fallacy

Exactly

Shapiro gets it

saying someone is wrong because he is a retard is fallacious tho

Yes

that's what I said initially my friend

But that's an insult not ad hom

go read again

I'm just pointing out that technically ad hom does mean insult, but that doesn't make it a fallacy right away

I dont like the way its defined

it gets misused a lot

An insult is not a fallacy

using it as a reason to dismiss someone, is

Fallacious

but im just going into semantics and getting this off topic

This isn't semantics though

This is nitpicking

yeah

Me and Irma argued about that for 2 hours last week

thought this was no autism channel

is it autistic for me to point that out?

I'm not autistic I've been tested

I'm retarded

I've had people try to claim I was wrong because if "your retarded your IQ is under 70 so you can't possibly understand this"

where do you stand politically?

Classical liberal

oh no

😏 that's what I like to see

If I tell people my politics and their like "oh me too" I leave I don't like echo chamers

I'm here to teach and learn not to be told I'm correct.

did u watch spencer vs sargon debate?

Yes

who do u think won that?

Clearly Sargon Spencer refused to refute half of sargons points

I couldnt sit through it

It was really bad

That whole debate

It was gross

I watched pieces of it

alright fair enough, not sure what answer I expected. I'd have to rewatch the debate if I wanted to continue discussing the finer points of the debate

Sargon and Richard both embarrassed themselves, but Sargon even more so

I think he held his own

I don't think so

I feel in that debate that Sargon got demolished

Richard Spencer is also a generally weak debater

For someone to lose to Richard Spencer

and it's the reason behind his autism continuing forward

it's pretty sad

spencer is not really a debater tho

SAD!

and u can see he wasn't debating, more like stating his reasons for his own views

^

Speaking of sad I've been watching gad saad recently

it's usually what the debates between liberals and the "alt-right" devolve into, just liberals asking for us to justify our views

Right because there is no justification for idenity politics

saad is a jew tho

I'm a jew

well even better reason not to listen to him

he's a secular jackass

I'm secular