/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.18426001]

Don't use the Socratic method on your family

[Anonymous No.18426010]

Should we not apply reason to our daily lives?

[Anonymous No.18426019]

>>18426010
It makes them hate you

[Anonymous No.18426038]

>>18426019
it made athens hate socrates also

[Anonymous No.18426063]

>>18426038
Ok, that's all folks threads over

[Anonymous No.18426105]

>>18426001
How do you use the socratic method, my brother's a smartass law student I want to btfo him

[Anonymous No.18426460]

>>18426001
very close OP
also tell the story why they hate you now

[Anonymous No.18426471]

>>18426001
Now you know Socrates got what was coming for him

[Anonymous No.18426547]

>i cant use any sort of reason or logic with my 3rd generation Italian family
its so hard bros....

[Anonymous No.18426560]

>>18426001
I do and have done continuously for ~5 years. Its deradicalized my sister (from flirting with SJW ideas); however, my dad is a nazi now

[Anonymous No.18426577]

>>18426560
lol

[Anonymous No.18426590]

>>18426547
I'm in the same situation. I feel you.

[Anonymous No.18426638]

>>18426590
I just isn't possible...I either get threatened or guilt tripped.
this is no way to live...I am trapped in a catch-22 situation of misery...

[Anonymous No.18426645]

Did your parents try to execute you anon?

[Anonymous No.18426651]

>>18426638
not all people are able to use logic anon, with some you have to use force

[Anonymous No.18426775]

>>18426560
>my dad is a nazi
same
(and so am I)

[Anonymous No.18426786]

>>18426775
based

[Anonymous No.18426792]

>>18426560
Based

[Anonymous No.18426842]

>>18426638
In my family (>>18426590) it is all about approach. By seeing why my mother's approach (the way she treats her) with my grandmother only led to fights or animosity I could find a way to treat her right and be respected by her.
With that said: don't be a double-faced individual to achieve that. It will most likely eat you up.
Best of luck, anon.

[Anonymous No.18427029]

>WHAT DID WE TELL YOU ABOUT ASKING TOO MANY QUESTIONS TONY
>IF YOU'RE SO SMART THEN WHY DON'T YOU DRINK THE CICUTA?
>CMON TONY, DRINK THE CICUTA! *LAUGHING*
>DOWN THE HATCH YOU FIGGHIE' BBOTTANA

[Anonymous No.18427084]

>>18426560
>>18426775
Very based

[Anonymous No.18427108]

>>18426560
How do you turn someone into a nazi? I think fascism is dumb.

[Anonymous No.18427229]

>>18427108
Introduce them to >>>/pol/
It only works on weak-willed 'men' though.

[Anonymous No.18427236]

>>18427108
Individuals with no aristocratic spirit or historically oriented knowledge if of the development of western (faustian) civilization who accept the "inherent dignity" premise of post-rousseau synthesis-oriented populist regimes (i.e. Marxism, lib-dem, natsoc) but, through personal experience, draw that line down racial boundaries tend towards fascism

[Anonymous No.18427244]

>>18426001
>tfw mom beats me for 'being a smartass' again.

[Anonymous No.18427249]

>>18426560
My dad would make cyclical arguments about foreigners invading us, so I started talking about how we're a puppet being utilised in wars by American jews to attack innocents, and he suddenly became very uncomfortable. The socratic method wouldn't work on him. He's too stupid. He can't articulate how he reached his conclusions in any way, and will just defer to calling you stupid instead. So I out-radicalised him.

Fucking nitwit of a man.

[Anonymous No.18427313]

>>18427108
Usually a few Washington Post articles side by side does the trick

[Anonymous No.18427462]

>>18426547
>>18426590
Italian-Americans aren't people. I hope you and your family get put down.

[Anonymous No.18427509]

>>18427249
I've found that this is the best way to deprogram brainwashed leftists. Present them with an idea that one would assume a leftist would support, but one that's so extreme that no rational person could support it. Then attack them for not supporting it.
For example: white people should be forced to pay 50% of their salary to blacks as reparations for slavery, and if they struggle to survive on that, too bad, they'll have to make do.
There are the odd few who would actually agree with this, but most would see the problem in it and would begin to understand how bad this line of thinking really is.

[Anonymous No.18427521]

>used the Freud Oedipus method and now my mom is pregnant

[Anonymous No.18427527]

>>18427509
Did this with my sisters
They know I'm right
They still hate me for it
I hate them harder

[Anonymous No.18427532]

>>18427521
Ewwwwww gross

[Anonymous No.18427567]

>>18427521
..and your father?

[Anonymous No.18427581]

>>18427462
based, It*lians aren't white

[Anonymous No.18427644]

>>18427236
Hi. I'm a traditionalist, too.
>>18427229
A few solid questions tends to lead people to it, if not just to flirt with the concepts. But only the ones who aren't full of themselves and think they have all the answers.
>>18426560
Same.

[Anonymous No.18427653]

>>18427567
dead and pregnant.

[Anonymous No.18427674]

>>18426001
Is that an order?

[Anonymous No.18427699]

>>18427527
As someone who has successfully oriented his sister towards reason and the utilization thereof, allow me to say that you should never forget your archetype. Your obligation is not simply to possess information and successfully convey it; rather, it is to, first and foremost, convey it whilst maintain the archetype of "big brother" which is considerably opposed to father. Western women do not respond well to obvious/masculine authority and consequently do not respond well to facts in a vacuum. The unfortunate reality, as such, is that this indicates the delegitimization of anyone that they previously deemed to possess traits they don't like. For example, if you're deemed by your sister to be fascist, she will, quite literally, never truly value any political statement you make for the remainder of your life. It is vital to utilizing the highest degree of finesse humanly possible when having actual intellectual discussion with women you care about—if you cannot cultivate this, simply remain quiet.

[Anonymous No.18427711]

>>18427644
The first and third person you responded to are both me. Interesting to note that there's another out there with a similar familial orientation

[Anonymous No.18427725]

>>18426105
Law student here. You literally just keep asking questions. Kinda like when little kids keep asking “why” to annoy you, only you asked more complex questions with the idea of getting to the bottom of someone’s argument. It works great

[Anonymous No.18427732]

>>18427725
Can't a talented bullshitter just dodge the questions?

[Anonymous No.18427750]

>>18427509
Btfo any tranny supporter with this string of questions:
>gender is a social construct?
>race is a social construct?
>why can I be trans gender by not trans racial?

Works like a charm. They will put up squabbles and talk about power dynamics and shit, but if they are an honest thinker (and they do exist on the left) they can’t get around that argument. And if they are not an honest thinker, who cares? Still fun to fuck with them

[Anonymous No.18427756]

>>18427732
Yes, but that’s part of the fun of dialogue. If they aren’t trying to be honest, and instead just bullshit then you’re not really having a conversation, you’re just have internet a language battles, so sit back and enjoy it

[Anonymous No.18427761]

>>18427756
Some people bullshit to protect their ego and beliefs, not to enjoy an argument.

[Anonymous No.18427784]

>>18427761
Well right, but if that’s the case your can either keep asking them questions for your own amusement, or walk away from the conversation because you know nothing productive will come from it. A proper Socratic method requires a certain degree of understanding from both parties.

That’s why it works so well for Lawschool. There is a professor there to teach, and a student wanting to learn. But if I showed up to class with no intention of what constitutes a murder, then the Socratic method wouldn’t really work

[Anonymous No.18427787]

>>18427784
No intention of learning*

[Anonymous No.18427812]

>>18427509
> but one that's so extreme that no rational person could support it. Then attack them for not supporting it.
Expecting this to work is like expecting to persuade a leftist with the attack helicopter joke

[Anonymous No.18427861]

>>18427812
I think this poster is saying use it as a gateway to begin a conversation, then using the Socratic method to reach the core or flaw of their actual position.

>white people should be black peoples slaves to make things even

No that’s crazy!

>but we should pay reparations?

Yes, that’s fair

>50% of income and turn over half of our property to blacks?

No! That’s too extreme

>so what what would be fair?

And then just go on like this. Again, this is going to require good faith discussion on both parties. You cannot use the Socratic method on someone who is arguing in bad faith. Well, you can, but its a waste of time

[Anonymous No.18427894]

>>18427861
>You cannot use the Socratic method on someone who is arguing in bad faith.
This is the problem. The reason why Socrates dialogues dont work for politics. More often than not your partner is your opponent, and has absolutely no interesting in coming to the truth. They just want to epicly own their other, and will suspend with whatever need be in order to accomplish that.

[Anonymous No.18427934]

>>18427894
Well right. You’re never going to see two opposing politicians have a Socratic conversation (not in America in any case). They are going to debate because they are trying to defeat each others positions through show and rhetoric. It’s just a different thing.

That being said, you can have productive conversations even with people who have very different views from you using the Socratic method. And that’s not to say that you can’t go into with the intention of trying to change someone’s mind; you can. But you both have to afford each other a measure of good faith and a mutual understanding of what you are trying to accomplish with the conversation.

[Anonymous No.18427966]

>>18427509
how would you go about deprogramming brainwashed rightists?

[Anonymous No.18427979]

>>18426651
Based

[Anonymous No.18428004]

>>18427966
Not him, but imagine you could use a similar method with just a different hypothetical. I imagine it would be a little harder to do because most people that far to the right don’t rely on empathy/feelings as much. ie you can understand why even a leftist would recoil at super extreme reparations, but you probably won’t get the same thing if you prose to a right winger that there should be absolutely no government benefits at all.

[Anonymous No.18428012]

>>18427934
>That being said, you can have productive conversations even with people who have very different views from you using the Socratic method
Ideally sure, I just can't see it happening realistically. Though that may very well be merely my experience, it seems that there is always some certain positions that are off-limits. This extends even to those who are as open minded as you can imagine. I just think that nobody is unilaterally open minded, even if they truly think they are. In fact, maybe even if they WANTED to be, I would conjecture some positions are just so outside their perception of things that they are incapable, through no fault of their will, of being truly open to. The question is then about those who change entire worldviews? I'd say those people were simply in a sort of intellectual cognitive dissonance.

Isk. I'm just speculating from my experience. I've met some really smart people and some really open minded people. For all I know the people I've met just aren't as smart or open as I thinm they are.

[Anonymous No.18428093]

>>18428012
>Ideally sure, I just can't see it happening realistically. Though that may very well be merely my experience.
It can and does happen. I’ve had conversations of the nature we are talking about with full on leftist. But you are right, it is rare. I can count the conversations with my fingers.

>I just think that nobody is unilaterally open minded, even if they truly think they are. In fact, maybe even if they WANTED to be, I would conjecture some positions are just so outside their perception of things that they are incapable, through no fault of their will, of being truly open to.
I tend to agree with you there, however I think that two people who know each other well define the scope of their conversation so they can talk about things/positions that would be totally off limits, because they would both have the understanding that they are working out positions that neither of them actually holds. Agreeing to play devils advocate, basically

>I'd say those people were simply in a sort of intellectual cognitive dissonance.
I think everyone has cognitive dissonance to some degree. People are limited, it’s laughable to think that every view a person holds has been full thought out
>Isk. I'm just speculating from my experience. I've met some really smart people and some really open minded people. For all I know the people I've met just aren't as smart or open as I thinm they are.
I tend to agree, but I also think there is such a thing as being too open minded

[Anonymous No.18428132]

>>18426010
>>18426019
>>18426105
>>18426547
>>18426560
You're all doing exactly what Socrates was not trying to do. If you go into it trying to convince them of something, you're not gonna make it. You have to go into it with the mindset of you actually don't know anything and then you allow them to come to a conclusion through your questioning.

What people call the Socratic Method nowadays is just being an annoying fucker asking leading, intellectually dishonest questions to manipulate someone into a conclusion

[Anonymous No.18428134]

>>18428093
>I think that two people who know each other well define the scope of their conversation so they can talk about things/positions that would be totally off limits,
Very true here. The contentious nature of trying to bring disparate ideas together is probably best done with a good friend. Now of course you run the risk of losing that friend if our hypothetical partners don't value one another beyond the insulting of their principles, however, the comfortability afforded by friendship makes bitter disagreement a lot easier to work through. My personal experience in this is having many long and contentious discussions with a Catholic friend of mine, me being secular. We challenge each other, but it's never become a debate in the sophist sense.

[Anonymous No.18428141]

>>18428132
Do you feel in charge?

[Anonymous No.18428159]

>>18428141
In charge of what?

[Anonymous No.18428194]

>>18428134
Interesting that you mention running the risk of damaging the friendship because gets back to OP’s post; don’t use Socratic method on your family. You certainly can push someone too far. As someone who has gone through law school I frequently have to remind myself in conversations with my family that they have not been trained to argue the way I have been. But that’s just getting into the weeds and nuance of relationship.

Also interesting that you mention your Catholic friend. I’m a believer myself, but was raised secular and both my brothers are atheists. It can cause contention for sure, but we are respectful of each others views. I understand why they think they do, and I hope they feel the same towards me. But you’re right, we don’t let it turn into a debate. I learned pretty early on faith is not something that can be debated into a person. Atheist v Christian debates are complete cringe to me.

>inb4 Christcuck
I wear the name with pride

[Anonymous No.18428234]

>>18426038
>>18426019
>>>/r/iamverysmart
fuck off

[Anonymous No.18428280]

>>18428194
>I’m a believer myself, but was raised secular and both my brothers are atheists.
Not to digress so far, but would you mind offering up what changed your thinking? I was raised catholic but have become secular. I would like to find faith once again, I think it would make me happier. I attribute my lacking it to inexperience, that I havnt nor learned nor witnessed enough to really know. And so I like to ask people why they're convinced in the truth of Christianity, hoping maybe to find a lead for myself.

[Anonymous No.18428344]

>>18428280
Sure thing man. Attached is an excerpt from a letter I wrote my brother when we were having a conversation about religion. I’m gonna post the picture, but it’s a screenshot from my phone. If the quality is shitty I’ll type it out for you. Sadly it’s saved as word doc so I can’t just copy paste.

[Anonymous No.18428437]

>>18427313
kek

>>18427108
tribalism, clown world, propaganda and a complete lack of depth about the moral fallacies of collectivism

[Anonymous No.18428480]

super non-knower here. how do i learn socratic method? do i read socrates?

[Anonymous No.18428493]

>>18428480
Go to law school

[Anonymous No.18428496]

>>18428480
Socrates has no writings. Rather, you read Plato. There is where you find Socrates and Socrates doing what Socrates does. Many of the dialoufws are short. You don't need to start with the Republic. A good one which, to me, demonstrated the socratic method very well and very concisely is the 'Euthyphro,'

[Anonymous No.18428499]

>>18427966
do your own homework tranny

[Anonymous No.18428505]

>>18428493
I’m actually being flippant about this, law school won’t teach you about the Socratic method the same way >>18428132 this Anon seems to know about it

[Anonymous No.18428507]

>>18427567
my sister's pregnant with his child
and he's dead obviously

[Anonymous No.18428522]

>>18428496
>>18428493
thanks bros

[Anonymous No.18428566]

>>18428496
will reading plato help me hoodwink people like columbo?

[Anonymous No.18428585]

Without a doubt it has had a good effect on my father and brother. My mom on the other hand jsut starts to resent me talking about thinks she feels passionate about at this point.

[Anonymous No.18428636]

>>18427249
>Fucking nitwit of a man.
That's right anon. You're superior to your father for being a /pol/tard.

[Anonymous No.18428665]

>>18428636
His dad probably is a nitwit. It seems to run in the family

[Anonymous No.18428725]

>>18428280
Not him but my 2 cents: I was raised Christian but became fairly agnostic from end of high school to start of college. While in college, I began having a lot of GI issues and wound up with stomach ulcers that left me in fairly constant pain. This came to a head when I unknowingly boarded a plain with the beginnings of an ear infection that quickly turned into vertigo. Sitting in the middle seat in coach for several hours with constant waves of dizziness and nausea combined with the pre-existing pain from the sores in my stomach left me rather wretched.

The flight was to a funeral, and I'd brought a Bible to read up on because religious talk was sure to abound. I noticed that the only time that I didn't hurt was when I meditated on what I read. I won't claim that there was some miracle that transpired, but at the very least the psychological effect of these meditations brought me incredible peace, enough that it renewed my interest in studying Scripture.

The more I read and learned, the more I believed. Many of the preconceived notions I had were founded in my own ignorance I discovered. At this point, it just seemed to make more sense to believe than not to. It might not be the best answer, but it's what did it for me.

[Anonymous No.18428728]

>>18428566
Nah. But you'll know the advantages and disadvantages of boypussy. Thats for sure.

[Anonymous No.18428745]

>>18428344
Perfectly reasonable. Thank you anon. I appreciate it. Your testimony tracks with what a lot of people I say. Aka, Pure Reason is the wrong place to look.

>>18428725
A heartwarming story, really, aside the pain of course. How old were you? I am fairly young (but old enough to post, jannie) and so I think a large part of my skepticism is a consequence of my age.

[Anonymous No.18428780]

>>18428728
TO THE LIBRARY

[Anonymous No.18428877]

>>18428745
Original christ cuck poster here. Thanks Anon, I try and be reasonable. My secular upbringing does help. I became a Christian at 17 fyi. Like a lot of teenagers I was in a pretty dark place mentally, and I was a full on fedora atheist. Literally one of my cringiest memories was standing up in class and saying “I believed in Santa Clause longer than I believed in God.” But I was challenged by my then girlfriend to spend just one week as if I thought there was a God. So I did, and then I went to a very moving church service. It had a huge effect on me. After that I started to read the Gospels for the first time in my life.

Our modern age is filled with so much noise. Even just browsing this board I see so many philosophers and so many ideas put forth by men much smarter than me. And I know I’ll never be able to read and properly understand them all. I am to try, of course, but like I’ve been saying, every human is limited. We just are. So in the face of that, you have to cling to truth when you find it. And I found it in the gospels. To be told that my “life is more than bread, and my body more than clothes” is a truth that cuts through the noise like a knife.

The interesting this is that my life didn’t get better after becoming a Christian. The world still appears awful to me in a lot of ways. I understand why so many people look at the horrors of history and then cannot believe in a benevolent God. But all I can really say to is that through my faith I have become strong enough to be brave in the face of that. It’s why I don’t “debate” with atheists. There is no one thing a person is going to say to me that is going to make me abandon what has proven itself to be true in my life. Anyway, I hope that helps.

>sorry to the other anons for Christing up a thread about the Socratic method

[Anonymous No.18428884]

>>18426019
They were going to do that anyway dumbass, you have to learn subtly or learn that most people around you dont like hearing how retarded they are

[Anonymous No.18429051]

>>18426001
>>18426010
>>18426019
>>18426038
>>18426063
>>18426105
>>18426460
>>18426471
>>18426547
>>18426560
>>18426577
>>18426590
>>18426638
>>18426645
>>18426651
>>18426775
>>18426786
>>18426792
>>18426842
>>18427029
>>18427084
>>18427108
>>18427229
>>18427236
>>18427244
>>18427249
>>18427313
>>18427462
>>18427509
>>18427521
>>18427527
>>18427532
>>18427567
>>18427581
>>18427644
>>18427653
>>18427674
>>18427699
>>18427711
>>18427725
>>18427732
>>18427750
>>18427756
>>18427761
>>18427784
>>18427787
>>18427812
>>18427861
>>18427894
>>18427934
>>18427966
>>18428004
>>18428012
>>18428093
>>18428132
>>18428134
>>18428141
>>18428159
>>18428194
>>18428234
>>18428280
>>18428344
>>18428437
>>18428480
>>18428493
>>18428496
>>18428499
>>18428505
>>18428507
>>18428522
>>18428566
>>18428585
>>18428636
>>18428665
>>18428725
>>18428728
>>18428745
>>18428780
>>18428877
>>18428884
sneed

[Anonymous No.18429064]

>>18428132
That's not really true. Especially on re-reads of the socratic dialogues you will notice that he almost always is going in to prove a point and he deliberately sets up his questions to make it. His "I know nothing" is but a smug veneer designed to never be held accountable for any position.

[Anonymous No.18429443]

>>18427509
you're a fucking moron with a strawman argument. you've invented an extreme viewpoint that doesn't exist and then labeled it as ridiculous. one could do the same for the idea that black people should be paid no reparations despite the obvious effects of intergenerational wealth & the bald fact of uncompensated labor.

>I've found that this is the best way to deprogram brainwashed right-wingers. Present them with an idea that one would assume a right-winger would support, but one that's so extreme that no rational person could support it. Then attack them for not supporting it. For example: white people should not be forced to pay black people any reparations for slavery, and if they struggle to survive without it, too bad, they'll have to make do.

[Anonymous No.18429803]

>>18429051
Feed?

[Anonymous No.18429886]

>>18429051
Buck

[Anonymous No.18430009]

>>18427509
You are a certified brainlet. The way to deprogramm a leftist is to show him the contradiction in his ideology THAT ACTUALLY EXIST IN REALITY, not by inventing some retarded strawman. So for example that "anti"-racists are pushing for segregated dorms for blacks and whites. This is something that is actually happening and leftists struggle to explain it

[Anonymous No.18430664]

>>18429051
undeniably based

[Anonymous No.18430976]

>>18429443
>you've invented an extreme viewpoint that doesn't exist
>doesn't exist
>you've invented
You never stood a chance.

[Anonymous No.18431116]

>>18426001
I had had a few drinks already and as the discussion was veering towards politics, I asked what's the difference between populism and democracy. It was a funny interaction, I did very little other than ask questions whenever they tried to explain the difference. I will never do it again, though. I don't want my family to hate me.

[Anonymous No.18431120]

>>18426001
Also, the Socrates Method is just a way to disguise your sea lioning. Stop it, you chuds.

[Anonymous No.18431129]

>>18427699
Or contain the retards in their middle class wage cage and mock their folly from my tower. Do not feed pearls to swine. Let the swine know they are swine.

[Anonymous No.18431142]

>>18427699
Such people have no political recourse and are an extreme cost to no returns. Unless you need a woman to get pregnant and raise your baby right, you don't need to care about what women "think"

[Anonymous No.18431155]

>>18431120
You're paranoid

[Anonymous No.18431214]

>>18426001
>Proves you absolutely wrong
>His daughter pops out and laughs at you as she says, "Not an Argument"
Sorry Subhumans can't into basic dialectic

[Anonymous No.18431293]

>>18431120
Why do you assume I am a chud?

[Anonymous No.18431410]

>>18429051
Got a good chuckle out of me

[Anonymous No.18433039]

>>18431120
lmao

[Anonymous No.18433049]

>>18427567
He fell off a cliff. It was totally an accident.

[Anonymous No.18433068]

>>18428636
>You're superior to your father for being a /pol/tard.
Fuck you're stupid if that's the message you got. I used poltard rhetoric because my dad was being a poltard over shit he'd read in trash newspapers, getting drunk, and cyclically ranting about it non-stop. He didn't set the bar high for being smarter than he is.

Had a privileged education and upbringing and pissed it at all away.

[Anonymous No.18433078]

>>18433068
We will all die sooner or later. In the mean time if reading yeah, getting drunk, and going off on rants is wrong, then I don't want to be right.

[Anonymous No.18433081]

>>18427108
If you are strong isn't it natural for you to drift towards the ideology of "might makes right" ? Especially in modern era when the media and culture seemingly steer towards leftism such transition to extreme right wing can also manifest itself as a counter reaction from a person who feels persecuted. It is also common for people to absorb beliefs as part of their personality, so someone seeing nazism as the belief of the masculine and mighty can be a pathway for someone to adapt the mindset.

[Anonymous No.18433091]

>>18433078
It was just drunken emotional abuse from a spoiled rich boy who grew up to live far short of his gifts. I'm grateful for the roof he put over my head, but he's a shit person.

[Anonymous No.18433136]

>>18433081
i disagree, "might makes right" is for psychopaths with a huge ego, not strong ones, not that they're wrong, but the collectivist fool/pawn is only strong when compared the demiqueer laqueesha, the reason for their reactionary movement resurgence.

[Anonymous No.18433173]

>>18433136
pic related is literally me

[Anonymous No.18433497]

>>18429064
No, it's to make them put their guard down before he finds flaws in their reasoning and makes them realise that they don't really know what they're talking about

[Anonymous No.18433522]

>>18431120
That is the most psychopathic comic I've ever seen.

[Anonymous No.18433572]

>>18433081
No, the might makes right thing was more of an objective statement rather than an ethical code originally, and reactionaries would do well to not live by it considering they don't have power, nor should genuinely good leaders live by it. But you're close in the last sentence. If someone doesn't like the state of the world he might be inclined to embrace the official enemy of the powers that be, which is in the end just a caricature and exactly what they want you to do

[Anonymous No.18434002]

>>18433136
You're fundamentally misevaluating the world and how human behavior works. You're inserting some autistic liberal humanist set of ideas into the equation when you should be just studying history and judging how things work in actuality.

[Anonymous No.18435128]

>>18426560
based dad

[Anonymous No.18435378]

>btfo mother in argument
>instead of conceding she starts calling me out for being a 24 year old NEET
b-but thats a ad hominem fallacy mom

[Anonymous No.18435380]

>>18428132
This is what Louis Theroux does in his documentaries. He approaches people with complete naivety, and completely exposes them in the process.

[Anonymous No.18436050]

>>18428132
thats not what it actually i through is all the "dialogues " are stupidly one sided and they agree with him after a few pages
plato just wanted to make his point there is no real discussion

[Anonymous No.18436062]

>>18436050
Thinking that a little logic and reason can undo a lifetime of devotion to bullshit is bringing a toy plastic shovel to landfill

[Anonymous No.18436071]

>>18436062
Delet this

[Anonymous No.18436072]

>>18436062
is anyone ever convinced by argument?

[Anonymous No.18436089]

>>18436072
"No"

[Anonymous No.18436104]

>>18427249
You better shut up about it until you can gang up on him with /pol/acks and televised media. Without /our/ debate club and AV club, it's over. What doesn't matter is asking the fish what bait to put on the hook it's not sinking your ship to their level ever.

[Anonymous No.18438036]

>>18436104
>You better shut up
Or what? It's boring hearing the same drunken rant every weekend. He doesn't have any real points against it other than he doesn't like the slavs he works with, which is fair enough, but for it to be a 4+ hour issue every weekend is exhausting. He did jack shit to raise me beyond being a breadwinner. He just laments for 'the good old days', which he didn't actually live in, because he's a failed posh boy fantasist.

[Anonymous No.18438130]

test

[Anonymous No.18439040]

>>18427966
ask them if they support pic related

[Anonymous No.18439500]

>>18427509
You have the bad kind of autism