/lit/ - Literature

>>14728439
>Debating Feminists
>Not realising that all debate is dictated by the preconceived overton window and the winner of a debate is determined by the overton window of the people viewing the debate


You deserved to get btfoed desu. Just read Nietzsche and Evola or someshit instead and live an individual life without trying to change society, let accelerationism do its thing

>>14728439
read Cicero

>>14728439
>>Get BTFO'd by muh patriarchy femoids
IM GONNA COOOOOMMMMM

>>14728439
Theres also my favourite option, only engage in negative dialectic. Instead of putting forth your own opinions, all you need to do is point out fallacies in theirs, its almost impossible to make an argument without using a fallacy, especially if you are a seething feminist. Most of the time they will just make appeals to emotion that dont need to be refuted.

Just study this list and focus entirely on pointing out fallacies without putting forth your own views
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

>>14728465
Though god help you if you run into someone who knows to say "fallacy fallacy."

>>14728493
And that's fucking everybody, so good luck.

>>14728493
You don't have to argue that your opponent's conclusion is false, only that their arguments don't establish their conclusion.

>>14728508
>>14728493
Just dont make the fallacy fallacy? that isnt a hard one to avoid. people make genuine fallacies all the time

for example:
>>14728508
Generalisation Fallacy

You lost the debate because you don't know your shit. You deserved it

>>14728439
Rhetoric is for females and weaklings. Picrelated is the only argument a real man needs. Might makes right.

>>14728560
Pretty much this. Really says a lot about the state of society we live in that lives off of rhetoric

Just carry a picture of that ripped dude in black and white around and show it to someone while you say "Why, yes, I [...]". Always works on /lit/.

>>14728591
The IRL solution would be to BE that blackandwhite ripped dude with a sleek'n'tears logo floating besides you.

>>14728439
Keep going and always speak when you get the chance. 3 years ago I was a mess, would break down into fits of nervous laughter if I had to present to more than 1 person. But after 3 years of debating, it's really enjoyable to hold a room captive and I win most. Just keep at it anon, you'll eventually develop your own style of speaking that you can be confident with.

I don't know how debate goes in muttland, but in general >>14728452 is wrong. It is true that most debate societies will prohibit blatant racism and sexism in their speeches, but any debate club that has decent judges will know to judge a debate with no preconceived ideas.

This >>14728465 is also a retarded idea if you want to become decent at debating, and won't fare well as a strategy in debate competitions. Rarely I might spend my entire speech tearing down opposing teams arguments for fun, but that rarely gets you a good ranking. You need good constructive as well as destructive. And either way, listing fallacies will just make you sound like a retarded high schooler.

>>14728751
kek

Have you ever thought that maybe you got btfod because they're right and you are wrong?

>>14728439
just ask people to define the words they use. if some mentions the patriarchy, just ask them to define it or give examples. if they say the patriarchy is 'systematic' then ask them to define what systematic means and to give empirical examples. most people literally cannot defend their beliefs after just a few questions that force them to provide meat to their argument. my mum's political knowledge is 100% just from what she sees on facebook and has no conclusions of her own and probably couldn't properly defend her beliefs if questioned.

Do whateve Destiny doesn't. He's the most insufferable sophist faggot to have ever walked the planet on trial-sized legs.

Don't study alt-right talking points, study libertarian talking points and the supreme right of freedom
It's easy to dismiss racist viewpoints but it's hard to argue against the basic principles of liberty which feminist rhetoric consistently violates

>>14728439
There is literally no point in debating in 2020 due to echo chambers and overabundance of information. I was arguing with a girl on the question of IQ and she didn't know (or didn't want to know) that IQ is simply used as a proxy for g (general intelligence) and isn't supposed to be literally synonymous with "intelligence". She kept repeating that there's "different kinds" of intelligence such as creative intelligence. When I said "I really doubt Beethoven would score low on a standard IQ test, intelligent people tend to be intelligent in a broad range, at least above average" she just said "I don't believe so." Then you're at a dead end.

>>14729464
>I was arguing with a girl
This was your mistake, not the year.

>>14729464
Talking about IQ is a trap. The topic is extremely emotionally loaded and people will forget the meaning of phrases like "on average" and how anecdotes aren't evidence. Say one group has a higher-on-average IQ than another group and you'll quickly be met with "that's bullshit, I know lots of smart people of [group]"

>>14728452
Stop making shit up about Evola, worthless nigger.

>nuh-uh, you made a logical fallacy number 37.13-B
why do anglos want to quantify philosophy like robots?

>>14729507
Kill yourself pseud.

>>14729507
Island-mentality. Everything put in a neat little box with clear lines of distinction.

>>14729513
As opposed to burger mentality where everything is one big grey, oozing, pus-filled mass of equality and nothing has any bearing on anything else?

>>14729542
Burger mentality is the final conclusion of Anglo rationality.

>>14729549
They are polar opposites retard virusfag

>>14729542
As opposed to Continent-mentality where you allow for a broad range of influence for your thought, from literature to theater and painting, as opposed to the rigidness and "define your terms" autism of Anglo/analytic philosophy

>>14729561
>The recently deceased John Dewey was applauded by the American press as the most representative figure of American civilization. This is quite right. His theories are entirely representative of the vision of man and life which is the premise of Americanism and its 'democracy'.

>The essence of such theories is this: that everyone can become what he wants to, within the limits of the technological means at his disposal. Equally, a person is not what he is from his true nature and there is no real difference between people, only differences in qualifications. According to this theory anyone can be anyone he wants to be if he knows how to train himself.

>This is obviously the case with the 'self-made man'; in a society which has lost all sense of tradition the notion of personal aggrandizement will extend into every aspect of human existence, reinforcing the egalitarian doctrine of pure democracy. If the basis of such ideas is accepted, then all natural diversity has to be abandoned. Each person can presume to possess the potential of everyone else and the terms 'superior' and 'inferior' lose their meaning; every notion of distance and respect loses meaning; all life-styles are open to all. To all organic conceptions of life Americans oppose a mechanistic conception. In a society which has 'started from scratch', everything has the characteristic of being fabricated. In American society appearances are masks not faces. At the same time, proponents of the American way of life are hostile to personality.

>>14729568
Cringe tranny philosophy doesn't follow from analytics. It follows from communism. If anything analytics is MORE essentialist at its core, since it believes in truth values.

>>14729586
Cope

>>14729593
Not an argument, goatfucker. And 'cope' is not a noun.

>>14728439
The correct response to a femoid is to scream SHUT THE FUCK UP until she cries.

>>14729607
Angloid philosophy and communism have the same lineage. Look into Socialism and Prussianism by Spengler.

>>14729614
You're ignorant. Moore invented analytic phil, it has nothing to do with your cancerous ideology.

>>14728452
>Not realising that all debate is dictated by the preconceived overton window and the winner of a debate is determined by the overton window of the people viewing the debate
That's true.
I have once completely "lost" a debate where I refuted all arguments from the other side and no one could refute mine. Had good data to the point that their objection to it was "I bet there are studies out there saying the opposite, b-but I won't look for them". But since I was far away from the overton window of everyone there, pretty much everyone went against me.

>live an individual life without trying to change society,
This I disagree with.

>>14729616
>Moore invented angloid philosophy
And Guenon (pbuh) refuted it, retroactively.

>>14728439
1. Look up a phd reading list in rhetoric and find some books that look interesting. Most of the times these wont be too difficult reads unless you're reading some Kenneth burke.
2. Go on Americanrherotic.com and rewrite a few speeches word for word which eoimuld said you in a way similar to memorizing poetry. Also rewrite the same speech in your own words.
3. Study rhetorical devices and memorize their usage so that you can add one into your writing whenever you like. Silva rhetoricae(at leadt I think thats the correct website) has a long list of these devices

>>14729632
Kek I fucking love guenon poster(s)

>>14729653
4. Find some of the progymnastnata exercises and start at the beginning. Work your way forward. These exercises have been used by developing rhetors for millenia.