/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10502279
faggot faggot

>>9091782
OP is a faggot.

Prove me wrong.

Is this a recognized phenomenon or did I make a sociological discovery:

---------------

Bob has beliefs A and B. There is a good case for A, but not B.

Bob sees opponents denouncing both A and B. He states the cases for A and B, and finds the opponents employing faulty reasoning against A (but not B--the belief was faulty and the case for it is weak and flawed).

Bob's conclusions:

1. Because the case for A was actually good, and the opponents' argument against A was flawed: "[opponents] are all idiots".
2. Bob infers that since they employed faulty reasoning against A, then their reasoning against B is probably also faulty. Thus both beliefs are strengthed by the exchange.

Each time through the cycle Bob's beliefs are further strengthened, and additional fringe/weakly-supported beliefs can be "attached" to solid ones.

Eventually the process is short-circuited; since every encounter with the opponents seemingly shows their utter incompetence, there is no longer a need to evaluate their claims at all. It is sufficient to simply say "[opponents] are all idiots" and dismiss any argument without further review.