Logical arguments discussing the cases of civility in argumentation and discourse, which we are counterpointing by saying that is boring, and we need more spice and edge in argumentation to really get to the heart of any type of issue.
Logical arguments discussing the cases of civility in argumentation and discourse, which we are counterpointing by saying that is boring, and we need more spice and edge in argumentation to really get to the heart of any type of issue.
99% of the time. I wouldn't say no to an argument that ISIS wishes they could do what Hitler accomplished though. It's not most arguments, but it's topically relevant. They want an empire, they're most likely gonna lose, but they're willing to fight to the death for it. They are fanatical, and are literally fiction tier bad guys.
It's a shame that OP has so many words of wisdom yet my brain wants to resort to calling people idiots when they don't agree with my obviously correct statements.
What it all comes down to serious conversation is our egos are either calm, fragile or explosive -- and our nerve in all of us gets exposed whether or not we want to admit it.
Also sometimes there really isn't a point to debating something. You can't expect people who are steadfast in their ideas to change their opinions even in the face of overwhelming evidence (climate change, evolution, vaccinations).
It is on the internet because of some paradoxical stuff involving anonymity and diffusion of responsibility, wherein a single person feels like they are being personally insulted if they're in some way associated with a group that's currently being criticized or mildly disagreed with, and also because they think posting from behind 7 proxies makes them almost untouchable they attempt to deliver the internet equivalent of an IRL face-punching and/or shit-flinging and/or stabbing the disagreeing entity in the thigh with a dinner fork
Also sometimes there really isn't a point to debating something. You can't expect people who are steadfast in their ideas to change their opinions even in the face of overwhelming evidence (climate change, evolution, vaccinations).
Pretty much nobody on the internet is going to change their opinions anyway so online debates are just an autistic dick-waving contest which could easily be condensed to "my IQ is higher than your IQ and I know bigger words"
EDIT: Also should consider mentioning in the OP that rating people autistic/dumb in Deep Thoughts is effectively revealing your salt levels and it shouldn't be done
