Message from @pratel
Discord ID: 468564624237658114
It's very hard get them out of their shell. Particularly when they can't run behind their comrads to "recharge" so to speak
Like, I can't say how many messages I got about the 12 Russia indictments. I saw more "ARE YOU READY TO ADMIT YOUR WRONG NOW" posts everywhere (including on fairly 'closed' social media) than I ever did discussing anything about the idictments themselves.
I really like Margaret Hoove.r
Obviously, that's going to make people feel attacked.
It's also kind of shocking that R's are trying to downplay the endictments as if they arent a big deal
Like you can think Trump wasnt involved and also think its a big deal that were indicting people
It's a tribalism issue. Everyone is so obsessed with getting extra voters to themselves they've forgotten literally all other concerns.
Eh, let's not go too deep into it. I was trying to use it as an example of taking an event and go after people. It was the most recent thing so that's why I took it.
It's either be Anti-Russia or Pro-russia. And I'm not even Russian.
It's better not to get too deep on a tangent on this kind of thing.
Like the first moment I was in the ancap server, I mentioned my brother in law was a captian in the army and one guy came running out of the box like "YOUR BROTHER IN LAW IS GETTING PAID WITH STOLEN MONEY" making sound like my brother in law was an inheritantly bad dude and it's just woah buddy, that's not how you start things off.
This also happen to be the guy who would cite books about everything
recreational nukes when
lol. Which server was this? It sounds like someone being a shitlord.
Made me feel like I was debating about God and his response was "because the Bible"
I'd gladly switch to ancap if I got recreational nukes 😃
AnCap and Communist ideologies are like basic physics problems...they only work in a vacuum with a frictionless surface
Eh. Citations make sense. And I can see the argument for just saying "read this book"
Yeah, but it's lazy
It's more an issue if they won't defend the ideas presented in the book or attempt to summarize them.
And you don't truly get the argument until you can recite it by heart.
Or modify it, at the very least.
But enough of them there had read it and were able to summarize it so we could move on.
Actually, one thing I'd like to say.
We are woefully missing long term documentation.
Alot of these servers have very significant ideas come out of them. But I doubt most people are interested in documenting any of it.
The final straw for me was this one new guy, who came in, would use a common word everyone knows as x definition, would debate you a little while, then go "but I'm using y definition" that is basically not a definition for that word like ever.
But when you think about it, these are the thoughts by which future generations will have to consider.
lol i like looking at christian and socialist/communist arguments and finding parts that are reasonable and work
even though im on the other side of both of those views lol
Or you'd start the debate using x definition, he'd argue from y definition, then when you corrected him he would go "oh, so now you are changing the definition because you are losing?!"
Fucking strawman should have been his title.
Yeah, one issue with ideological arguments though is that we tend to define them by the extremes.
And communities will lay claim to "ideas that work" even if they themselves didn't really come up with the idea in the first place or simply renamed something someone else said.
like i dated a pretty religious chick a couple years back and the whole agnostic shit never bothered them hahaha mainly because i could articulate good reasons for a higher power from theri perspective
The fuzzy middle ground is hard to stand on.
also i was never bothered by prayers before supper n shiet n id respect them
Since I hadn't had any good debates for a while since then, and even managed to get one person to shift there position and say I was right, I was just "screw Mr strawman" and left.
@Grenade123
Yeah, definitions matter. And some people just want to rework them. There's not too much you can really do IMO. I've redefined words myself (heck, I've had days long discussions on what definitions make sense), sometimes you just have to if you want to get a point across.
LIke, I can think of atleast 3 definitions of "conservative" that all make sense and can be hard to distinguish in context (and all mean radically different things)
LOL queue the first podcast between sam harris and jordan peterson where they spend an hour defining truth lol