#argumentation

[corvusherpestidae]

Sometimes you see two people arguing and both the person you agree with and the one you disagree with are equally stupid

[tobeabatman]

Two common logical fallacies (fat) activists constantly hear

Fatphobes LOVE red herring fallacies and strawman arguments. So let’s learn what they are together.

A red herring fallacy is a logical fallacy where a person responds saying something that might at first glance seem related to the actual topic at hand, but you’ll soon realize it’s not actually related and is just meant to take attention away from the actual topic and switch the topic at hand.

An example:

”Ozempic is not meant to be a weight loss drug and using it might cause many side effects that might mess with someone’s health, such as constant back pain. People need to consider whether possible weight loss is worth the side effects, and also the possible long-term effects from ozempic misuse that we’ve yet to discover”

Red herring: ”Well, dying at age 40 at 300 lb will also ’mess with your health’”

A strawman argument on the other hand is when one person asserts something that attempts to misrepresent the original message

An example:

”I love my fat body!”

A strawman argument: ”Oh, so you hate thin people then?”

I know most people are familiar with strawman arguments but I hope you guys also familiarize yourselves with red herring fallacy as it is super commonly used as a response to fat activists. It is also used in a lot of arguments, I’d say it’s probably the most common logical fallacy used in all types of online arguments, (for some reason especially by men. It’s very prominent in men’s arguments against feminists), so it’s very important to learn to recognize it by name.

[arrowmoose]

Argumentative Essay Against AI for Artistic Purposes

Welp, I’m finally posting it.

I decided to post it as screenshots rather than just copy and paste, so apologies if you can’t see it.

I’m open to discussion and feedback, but please note that this has already been turned in and graded.

I got a 92, for anyone curious.

[hyperions-light]

okay I swear I will return to happiness and fun in like 5 min

BUT

I really want to do a dissection of that one argumentative/rhetorical style that a lot of redditors and right-wing podcasters use

Where they speak in an academic tone but include deliberately inflammatory language to bait their opposition into anger

So they can say the people arguing against them are wrong because they’re emotional. And imply their opponents’ intellectual inferiority.

Those ppl are so annoying to argue with but they are almost always just empty of actual substantive analysis/are incapable of creating a well-supported and coherent argument

And I feel like it might be useful to deconstruct what they’re doing at some point

[hueman-instrumentality]

△➞ ://0006 Hueman ≈ Instrumentality • [1653] ➞ ▲

My biggest pet peeve is when someone begins to laugh at your position during a debate.

There's nothing funny about watching someone operate with a broken mental model of reality. It's actually sad - like watching someone navigate with a broken compass.

When someone starts laughing at your argument, they've already decided your mental model is worthless and your understanding is fundamentally stupid. They stop addressing your actual points and shift into performing ridicule. The message is clear: "I don't respect you enough to engage seriously." How can you have productive communication with someone who's essentially saying you're not worth the effort? It's not effective at all - it just kills any chance of understanding.

This gets worse in public forums. When there's an audience watching, people may feel even more compelled to mock. It's likely they're performing for whoever they think will agree with them, trying to rally their tribe and marginalize your perspective.

Why do they do this? It's simple. They're running your ideas through their consensus filter - their model of what they believe everyone knows to be true. But the bigger issue is that genuinely considering new ideas is physically exhausting. It takes real effort - cortisol, stress hormones, mental strain - to consider that what you think or believe might be wrong. So some people just give up. They don't have the mental energy for that. Maybe they're already stretched thin managing kids, careers, mortgages, aging parents - their cognitive resources are maxed out just keeping life together.

Sometimes what you're presenting requires them to overhaul their entire understanding of reality. That's overwhelming, I get it. But I can't stand someone disrespecting me with an "LOL" and no longer considering what I'm saying. Just stop talking to me if that's how it's going to be.

I imagine it like a soft— subconscious voice tells them they already know the truth and you're the stupid one. But it's never been about stupidity or being right or wrong. It's about discussing. Scientists estimate the human brain performs the CMOS computational equivalent of about 1 exaflop. When two people discuss, that's 2 exaflops working on a problem. Get 50 people genuinely engaging? That's 50 exaflops. We shouldn't limit ourselves to our individual processing power when we could be combining minds to actually understand reality. But mockery is exactly that limitation - a primitive monkey-mind tool that signals "don't climb the ladder" instead of explaining why the ladder might be dangerous.

It's a sad world when we stay in our little ponds, afraid of larger forums. We default to protecting the models we already have. It feels better than sitting with uncertainty you can't mentally or emotionally solve, than rebuilding your understanding, than admitting you might have been wrong about something fundamental.

But if you were truly confident in your understanding, why would you need to perform ridicule? It's fragile beliefs that need protection through mockery.

If the truth can be told so as to be understood, it will be believed.

There's real power in the effort to explain things on someone's level. The laughter, the "LOL," the dismissal - these are just primitive tools we use to maintain tribal conformity, the same way we were once coaxed into line ourselves. It's a relic of our evolutionary history, it needs to be done away with.

[arguments-sophistry-truth]

Philosophy profs with undiagnosed autism, too, are among the best profs to have

[earthling-wolf]

Te Mechanics

Te is a function that defines objects by their interactions with other objects (Je) while also experiencing them as having an inanimate (T) character. Causal dynamics are thus registered mechanistically as impersonal clockwork operations following cleanly from their premises. This inanimate assignment occurs even if the objects are technically alive; in this case, the entities are still examined clinically but as complex biological systems with various requirements for optimal functioning. These needs may be met through actions, while those actions are still registered as being mechanical.

Process-Orientation

Like all types, the Te user is motivated by a desire for truth, which they pursue uniquely. The Te user will instinctively understand reality in a process-oriented manner, seeking to answer questions of truth as a relationship between the antecedent and consequent. Te's core curiosity is the space between the input/output and what happens within it, making Te an altogether causality-oriented process. While all people can -- if their attention is so turned -- reason out a causal sequence, the Te user will do so with far greater speed and regularity. They will love theories, systems, models, and languages where there are interactions between variables and actions that can result from their calculations. This often leads to a magnetic attraction to computer programming, the art/language of pure logical computation, and the relationships between objects- whether physical or intangible variables (digits, numbers)- that become the primary focus of the Te user.

Moreover, when this habit becomes excessive, it can lead to a mechanical mind that always tries to make sense of things through logical sequences. The Te user may apply the same computational approach to other more human domains of life and come across as robotic to family or friends. They may develop a reputation as a code junkie or nerd as they spend a great deal of their time engrossed in technical pursuits. The Te user wants more than anything to understand "how things work," how the pieces fit together, and how all of this comes about through the collision of variables. The Te user is not content with a general answer but desires to know the precise order of operations that leads necessarily to the actions we see before us.

Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics

Because of this attitude, the Te user quickly develops a thirst for scientific questions. Their pursuit of knowing the dynamic workings of things leads them to ask, "How do bacteria create organic matter out of chemical reactions at the bottom of the ocean?" "how do moons like Titan fit into the formation of the early solar system?" or "Where do ultra-high energy particles come from?" The Te user will commonly develop an affinity for domains such as astronomy, biology, chemistry, and physics, the latter offering a concise platform and language for understanding causal and objective relations. The Te user is highly pragmatic in their pursuit and framing of truth, often evaluating the reality of a thing by its observable effects. They tend towards empiricism and highly value precise measurement in their understanding. Quantification is critical to the Te user, as it allows for the rigorous study of phenomenon and their interactions. This proclivity often blossoms into an appreciation and immersion in engineering, which presents a practical operationalization of those essential laws. The Te function is responsible for much of our scientific advancement in the past century. There is little more stimulating to the Te user than to achieve ever higher orders of aptitude through the discovery, creation, and application of elegant logistical systems.

Economics & Business/Law

However, their understanding of causal relations is broader than the sciences. Indeed, many Te users will forego the sciences and apply their logistical comprehension directly to the financial sector. They will gravitate to fields like economics, law, and, by extension, government for its interconnection with the former. Moreover, just as the scientists do in their respective domains, the Te economist will understand the social world as a system of variables which, if rightly maneuvered and arranged, will give specific, predictable outcomes and revenues. Numbers, graphs, and statistical reports may populate stacks on their desk as they wrestle with bureaucracy. Many Te users will start business enterprises, taking the road of the entrepreneur and businessman. Over a few Te users have developed an acute interest in politics, campaigning for high and low office positions.

Moreover, while they can be seen from all stripes, the strong Te politician more naturally aligns with a classical/laissez-faire economic policy where people and business owners can trade willingly based on an agreed value/demand without government interventions. Over-regulation and over-taxation, the Te user may protest, is an unethical exploitation of the efforts of business owners. The Te user may hold a meritocratic view and wish for their (or anyone's) financial success to depend solely on their hard work and not have their assets appropriated by ideological infringements.

Challenge & Conscientiousness

Moreover, this financial proclivity arises from a deeper drive in the Te user, a native, and often powerful, compulsion towards agency. The strong Te user cannot stand being idle and may be plagued by a craving for challenge, action, and achievement, impulses that are all the more facilitated by their procedural comprehension of life. They will tend to be efficient, constantly wishing to "get things done" and optimally structure their lives. An affinity for order often develops from this compulsion, which drives many Te users to regiment their energies, developing diligence and structure carefully. Some may go as far as to organize their house/work by labels and folders, while others may have a disorderly house but a specialized protocol in their areas of interest. In all these manifestations, Te's capacity for agency is combined with an insensitivity to feelings - particularly of one's weakness. Once a goal is set in the mind of the Te user, they may become a diehard busybody and be unyielding in their expectations of themselves to the point of physical exhaustion. Staying busy may have its addictive quality, aside from the benefits of becoming self-empowered and achieving security. Thus, many strong Te users experience burnout at some point in their careers as they push aside the body's limitations and place their ambitions above moderation and health. This tendency may also earn them a reputation for being militant and unrelenting. Family members and loved ones may retaliate against an overly controlled home environment.

Management & Leadership

However, despite the complications this potency may cause at home or with their intimates, the Te user's conscientiousness is highly coveted in the workforce. So long as their tasks and obligations align with their long-term goals, they can perform consistently and will have fewer problems than many in climbing the chain of command and landing in managerial positions. They will instinctively understand and accept the need to do what is necessary and not just what is easy. Their solutions-oriented mentality adds confidence, effectiveness, and resoluteness to any leadership roles they may undertake. However, this added responsibility can also lead to frustrations for the Te user who, when in a group setting, is confined/limited by the motivations and wills of others who may not share their level of resoluteness. It can be challenging to negotiate duties with others, as the Te user often lacks the grace or tact to present their reasoning in a friendly and sensitive manner. Navigating the emotional landscapes of others is one of the Te user's most significant difficulties. It may feel tempting and far more straightforward for them to take the reigns and finish the task by themselves than to mediate a middle ground with others.

Bluntness & Argumentation

This difficulty with emotional negotiation is compounded partly by Te's blunt articulation, which is often outspoken and unfiltered. In their pursuit of succinct and forthright argumentation, the strong Te user may develop a reputation for being tactless. Unless great efforts are taken to mitigate this bracing verbal effect, niceties will be omitted from the Te user's delivery as they present their reasoning matter-of-factly and with a deadpan expression. They will speak their minds even (or perhaps especially) on taboo or politically controversial topics. It is of less concern to the Te user that their opinion be popular with the crowd than for it to be genuinely theirs. However, this honesty can also be highly refreshing to others, as the Te user will not shy away from stating the facts as they appear before them with no compromise or dilution of truth - especially when others may be biting their tongue for fear of offense. However, many Te users learn over time to smooth the edges of their presentation by incorporating dry or sarcastic humor. The Te user can be very witty, interjecting commentary at a moment's notice and releasing the tension in the room that their frankness would otherwise cause.

-Behaviors Under Stress

Steamrolling

Steamrolling refers to the continued advancement of an agenda through a series of obstacles with little consideration of what consequences or devastations may emerge. The Te user is usually aware of the steps needed for something to occur, but when plagued by distress, all that matters is resolving the crisis. "I need to get to the other side of this" is the single phrase that echoes in the mind of the stressed Te user, and in those moments, all consideration of complexity is lost as their mind entirely narrows down to a single solution. They may say to others, "It does not matter how just do it," or "If it cannot perform, it is out." If the setting is the workforce, droves of people may be cut away from their jobs without notice. Protocols are skipped over. There is a complete inconsideration of anything that does not work here and now for the given goal—that which cannot output is eliminated. People may be treated as pawns or kept or removed based on their logistical value. The Te user places 110% of their energy into manifesting their outcome, and when the dust has finally settled, they are left to contend with the consequences of their decision. While they may have made it to the other side, friendships may be lost or irreparably damaged. Family members may be ostracized, and new public enemies may be created.