Exactly how is a contest of arguments supposed to go then?rabidtictac wrote: ↑Sat Nov 04, 2017 8:01 pmSecular Talk built his channel on talking to people about polidicks. I wouldn't be surprised if he'd win a debate over mascarafist.
Regardless, every time I hear "youtube debate" I have to be the lone asshole to point out that winning an internet youtube "debate" holds as much value as winning a pissing contest. It means zero to the actual argument. All it says is the person who lost was shit at debating their argument. And that's true no matter which side is youtube debating the other side and "winning." Debates test debate skill, not the truth of the arguments.
Razorfag: Contrarian Megafaggot
- Pope Corky III
- Posts: 1366
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:11 pm
Re: Razorfist (now known as Racistfist probably)
da PAC Nigguh wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 4:14 pmHe may have caught it at the same Bilderberg-Illuminati meeting as Prince Albert in a Can. I guess lizardmen aren't immune.
- rabidtictac
- Posts: 20536
- Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 9:25 pm
Re: Razorfist (now known as Racistfist probably)
I suppose if both parties were 100% honest to the point of not even deceiving themselves, we could hold a debate between two parties and then ask them both at the end two questions:Pope Corky III wrote: ↑Sun Nov 05, 2017 5:24 amExactly how is a contest of arguments supposed to go then?rabidtictac wrote: ↑Sat Nov 04, 2017 8:01 pmSecular Talk built his channel on talking to people about polidicks. I wouldn't be surprised if he'd win a debate over mascarafist.
Regardless, every time I hear "youtube debate" I have to be the lone asshole to point out that winning an internet youtube "debate" holds as much value as winning a pissing contest. It means zero to the actual argument. All it says is the person who lost was shit at debating their argument. And that's true no matter which side is youtube debating the other side and "winning." Debates test debate skill, not the truth of the arguments.
-who do they think won the debate?
-whose position do they think is more likely to be closer to the truth?
But people aren't honest. What you're asking is essentially how to know what's the truth and what's not. Good fucking luck with that one.
I'm just pointing out that beating someone in a debate doesn't mean you aren't still talking shit. It says nothing either way about truth.
Re: Razorfist (now known as Racistfist probably)
This isn't necessary. Winning a debate doesn't mean anything but that's perfectly fine. The point of debate is to exchange ideas.rabidtictac wrote: ↑Sun Nov 05, 2017 5:30 amI suppose if both parties were 100% honest to the point of not even deceiving themselves
The end-game should be to research, further, the points brought up within said debate afterward. The problem is neither Secular Talk or Razorfist will do this. Their audiences even less so.
All that people need to realize is that walking out of a debate with a victory doesn't mean you aren't wrong and everything's fine. That's not what happens, though. Milo Yo-yo-populace is a great example of this-- he'll say things that are either shady or flat untrue but he'll say them to people who have no idea how to argue back and then he'll deceive himself into thinking he's actually correct rather than just quick witted enough to stump a bunch of retarded college kids.
"I currently have 274 pounds of lean mass. My nurse explained that since she'd just seen me walk a quarter mile that I basically was ripped underneath all of this fat." - Arnold Boogienigger
- VoiceOfReasonPast
- Supreme Shitposter
- Posts: 48423
- Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:33 pm
Re: Razorfist (now known as Racistfist probably)
They just like the feeling of "winning", hollow as it may be.
You should know by know that reloading in Hollywood movies only happens out of plot convenience or to look cool.Kugelfisch wrote: ↑Sun Nov 05, 2017 3:43 amThat's nice and all but the slippery slope is anything but a fallacy in that case.Not by me at least. Fury Road is a shit story and a shit sequel. The car stuff is nice and it has a neat meme attached to it but I wouldn't watch it again and hadn't if it wasn't running in the background at a friend's place. The first Mad Max is the only good movie in the entire series.Guest wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 2:16 amSo Fury Road and Blade Runner 3 are the only movies with the DHI seal of approval.
Oh and they have a Glock that holds about thirty rounds in a standard-sized magazine. I hate it when movies do that. I started counting the shots right away because I knew it would be a movie like that.
Autism attracts more autism. Sooner or later, an internet nobody will attract the exact kind of fans - and detractors - he deserves.
-Yours Truly
4 wikia: static -> vignette
-Yours Truly
4 wikia: static -> vignette
Re: Razorfist (now known as Racistfist probably)
Don't forget that RLM already posted theire review of 2049 and they liked it as a stand alone sci-fi movie, so of course Razorfag will have to suck the original's dick and claim that this one raped his childhood.Kugelfisch wrote: ↑Sun Nov 05, 2017 3:43 amThat's nice and all but the slippery slope is anything but a fallacy in that case.Not by me at least. Fury Road is a shit story and a shit sequel. The car stuff is nice and it has a neat meme attached to it but I wouldn't watch it again and hadn't if it wasn't running in the background at a friend's place. The first Mad Max is the only good movie in the entire series.Guest wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 2:16 amSo Fury Road and Blade Runner 3 are the only movies with the DHI seal of approval.
Oh and they have a Glock that holds about thirty rounds in a standard-sized magazine. I hate it when movies do that. I started counting the shots right away because I knew it would be a movie like that.
Blade Runner doesn't interest me at all so I won't see the new one. The original was boring enough.
- Pope Corky III
- Posts: 1366
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:11 pm
Re: Razorfist (now known as Racistfist probably)
That's the thing though, never mind the participants, the audience. If the audience thinks you won they're going to walk out thinking they just heard the truth and that their enemy just got humiliated and everything they espoused is wrong.rabidtictac wrote: ↑Sun Nov 05, 2017 5:30 amI suppose if both parties were 100% honest to the point of not even deceiving themselves, we could hold a debate between two parties and then ask them both at the end two questions:Pope Corky III wrote: ↑Sun Nov 05, 2017 5:24 amExactly how is a contest of arguments supposed to go then?rabidtictac wrote: ↑Sat Nov 04, 2017 8:01 pmSecular Talk built his channel on talking to people about polidicks. I wouldn't be surprised if he'd win a debate over mascarafist.
Regardless, every time I hear "youtube debate" I have to be the lone asshole to point out that winning an internet youtube "debate" holds as much value as winning a pissing contest. It means zero to the actual argument. All it says is the person who lost was shit at debating their argument. And that's true no matter which side is youtube debating the other side and "winning." Debates test debate skill, not the truth of the arguments.
-who do they think won the debate?
-whose position do they think is more likely to be closer to the truth?
But people aren't honest. What you're asking is essentially how to know what's the truth and what's not. Good fucking luck with that one.
I'm just pointing out that beating someone in a debate doesn't mean you aren't still talking shit. It says nothing either way about truth.
da PAC Nigguh wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 4:14 pmHe may have caught it at the same Bilderberg-Illuminati meeting as Prince Albert in a Can. I guess lizardmen aren't immune.
-
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:35 am
Re: Razorfist (now known as Racistfist probably)
The perfect example of this is the Destiny vs Jontron debate. Destiny 'won' the debate, but it doesn't prove him right on the issues because he was debating against someone who can barely form a coherent argument.
- Le Redditeur
- Supreme Shitposter
- Posts: 11590
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 5:58 pm
Re: Razorfist (now known as Racistfist probably)
I prefer debates in text form, back and forth, preferably when the debaters do a paragraph-by paragraph breakdown of the opposite arguments. Not only it's usually easy to follow, it takes out the debaters' personal quirks out of the presentation, and usually ends up in better quality arguments being used because they can consult sources and have more time to formulate their points.
- rabidtictac
- Posts: 20536
- Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 9:25 pm
Re: Razorfist (now known as Racistfist probably)
I suppose it depends on the audience, as Stranger said. And the format as well. And how well the debate is set up. There are a myriad of factors relating to the setting up and administration of the debate which can make it more or less honest, and more or less a waste of time. The kind of "debates" people like Miscarriage of Acchild get up to on youtube aren't shining examples of how to run one.Pope Corky III wrote: ↑Sun Nov 05, 2017 1:54 pmThat's the thing though, never mind the participants, the audience. If the audience thinks you won they're going to walk out thinking they just heard the truth and that their enemy just got humiliated and everything they espoused is wrong.rabidtictac wrote: ↑Sun Nov 05, 2017 5:30 amI suppose if both parties were 100% honest to the point of not even deceiving themselves, we could hold a debate between two parties and then ask them both at the end two questions:Pope Corky III wrote: ↑Sun Nov 05, 2017 5:24 am
Exactly how is a contest of arguments supposed to go then?
-who do they think won the debate?
-whose position do they think is more likely to be closer to the truth?
But people aren't honest. What you're asking is essentially how to know what's the truth and what's not. Good fucking luck with that one.
I'm just pointing out that beating someone in a debate doesn't mean you aren't still talking shit. It says nothing either way about truth.
I think a better way to exchange ideas is for two people to just talk. Debate implies some party pwns the other, and you can't openly exchange ideas if you're only obsessed with racking up pwnage points in front of your paymetons audience while arguing against someone you claim to despise.
Re: Razorfist (now known as Racistfist probably)
Honestly I think these debates should be held in private chats with neutral parties who have never heard of these people sitting in on the debate so there's no pressure to pander to their audiences.
"I currently have 274 pounds of lean mass. My nurse explained that since she'd just seen me walk a quarter mile that I basically was ripped underneath all of this fat." - Arnold Boogienigger
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 17 guests