I suspect that if the user you are talking to reads your post he or she will be even more convinced he or she is right because what you've written bears all the hallmarks of someone who has lost an argument trying to manufacture some kind of fake image of victory and to cause emotional upset. And that's sad. :(
Message to An Unnamed User
Sort:
Jun 7, 2015
0
#3
chyss wrote:
I suspect that if the user you are talking to reads your post he or she will be even more convinced he or she is right because what you've written bears all the hallmarks of someone who has lost an argument trying to manufacture some kind of fake image of victory and to cause emotional upset. And that's sad. :(
You can't lose an argument on the internet. That's kind of the point of this post.
MY MY MY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jun 7, 2015
0
#5
TheNewMikhailTal wrote:
chyss wrote:
I suspect that if the user you are talking to reads your post he or she will be even more convinced he or she is right because what you've written bears all the hallmarks of someone who has lost an argument trying to manufacture some kind of fake image of victory and to cause emotional upset. And that's sad. :(
You can't lose an argument on the internet. That's kind of the point of this post.
If an argument can be had it can be won or lost. Communicating through the Internet is not fundamentally different from using sign language, or the telephone, or indeed face to face spoken verbal communication.
Jun 7, 2015
0
#6
Who determines winner and loser? Arguments are to convince rationally minded people to change their views. On the internet, everyone is convinced that everyone else is a monkey and therefore no one is going to take most of the blather that goes on on the internet as winnable or losable. To take a pertinent example, we are arguing right now. I highly doubt this argument will end with one of us conceding. In fact, I'm willing to wager that this argument would go on for pages. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. And no headway would be made, as happens so often on these forums. OR when headway is made, people ignore it and revert to repeating the same things they were saying under the pretense of "its just my opinion" or "I think this" and then laughing at "stupid people" who think different. The ironic portion of your statement is that in order to prove to me that you can lose an argument over the internet, you would have to concede that I am right, thereby losing the argument that you can lose an argument over the internet.
chyss wrote:
TheNewMikhailTal wrote:
chyss wrote:
I suspect that if the user you are talking to reads your post he or she will be even more convinced he or she is right because what you've written bears all the hallmarks of someone who has lost an argument trying to manufacture some kind of fake image of victory and to cause emotional upset. And that's sad. :(
You can't lose an argument on the internet. That's kind of the point of this post.
If an argument can be had it can be won or lost. Communicating through the Internet is not fundamentally different from using sign language, or the telephone, or indeed face to face spoken verbal communication.
But in face to face spoken verbal communication you can, at any point, plant your feet, wind up, and knock the other person out... Just sayin... on the internet you can put up any argument and say things you'd never utter face to face. That's how internet arguments are indefensible.
Jun 7, 2015
0
#8
See I never understood that line of reasoning. You would punch a guy in the face 'cause he didn't agree with you? That's obviously not it. You might be sued, face criminal charges, lots of bad things can happen in real life if you knocked a guy's teeth out. The real reason the internet is different is because you are constantly exposed to people you don't know. These people are much different than you oftentimes, and so you are always running into differing points of view. It also feels relatively disconnected. You are usually arguing with an ideology rather than a person. You can also choose to walk away and not face the social consequences of having been wrong. Even so, most arguments are not easily winnable even in real life, and to say that punching a person in the face wins an argument you don't like the sound of is like saying punching a person in the face wins a chess game you don't like the look of. Next time you are in a heated discussion with someone and they won't see your point of view, think about the consequences of hitting them in the nose. If they are your friend, they may be mad. If they are a stranger, you may be sued. If they are a police officer, you may be arrested. Is there really any real use for physical voilence in debate? I didn't think so.
I personally wouldn't, because I, like yourself, think of such things carefully, but I'm saying there are plenty of people out there who would [punch someone in the face over an argument]. They simply "forget" or don't possess the line of reasoning to know, in the heat of the moment, that this next action (violence) is going to have immediate and direct consequences, such as what you outline (being sued, arrested, etc).
That's why internet debates are unlike face-to-face arguments - One guy could fly off the handle and deck the other guy in a face-to-face, but on the internet... I guess you just type in ALL CAPS???
This is message is intended to be sent to an anonymous user. I will not say who he/she is but I hope he/she understands. Thanks.
You talk about how "we"(An imaginary posse invented by your mind cause you're mad) have been proven wrong by your "superior intellect"(Which isn't superior by the way, get your head out of your ass). I have three things to say:
A) You brought it upon yourself. Your "intelligent debate" consisted of ad hominem attacks and logical fallacies and you handed the baton of proof off to someone who wasn't present. This is wrong.
B) Let's say you were right about the particular issue you were discussing. You might have been! It doesn't actually matter cause that's not why you're a little prick. It matters because you totally ignored your opponent's point of view to feel like you won.
C) You may wonder why I am doing this. I do not know or have any relation with the guy you were arguing with. Actually, the reason I got involved is because you were under the pretense that you had won but this isn't true. You lost. And I'm showing it to you. If you had won I wouldn't have gotten involved, but you're a big fat loser. Your argument is a bunch of tricks and traps and he mated you and you kept talking. You're a loser, live with it. Admit it and I'll back off.