Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

People should know when they are conquered.

Rate this topic


LandonWalsh

Recommended Posts

I have been having a debate with a socialist on medicine. Now when I start an argument I ALWAYS end it on my terms. I finish what I start. However. I am too the point where I feel like im swimming in a cesspool of stupid. I'm not going to back down, but I don't know how to get through an argument where the guy is as thick as they come. How do you get through all those levels of evasion? This guy also claims to have read all of Rands books, and compares her to Marx. AH... It never fails to amaze me about people.

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=126011328594

Feel free to jump in it.

I'm also curious. Am I debating him properly? Am I doing something wrong?

Edited by LandonWalsh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something for you to consider: It sounds like your concept of victory is in some way dependent on his knowing he is conquered.

A [second-hander] is one who regards the consciousness of other men as superior to his own and to the facts of reality.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something for you to consider: It sounds like your concept of victory is in some way dependent on his knowing he is conquered.

Not really. I just like that quote in the movie gladiator. I do know my argument is not as effective as it should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
I have been having a debate with a socialist on medicine. Now when I start an argument I ALWAYS end it on my terms. I finish what I start. However. I am too the point where I feel like im swimming in a cesspool of stupid. I'm not going to back down, but I don't know how to get through an argument where the guy is as thick as they come. How do you get through all those levels of evasion? This guy also claims to have read all of Rands books, and compares her to Marx. AH... It never fails to amaze me about people.

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=126011328594

Feel free to jump in it.

I'm also curious. Am I debating him properly? Am I doing something wrong?

You have to be very aggressive. Never defend, just attack. Just keep swinging and telling him exactly why his statements are retarded without yourself ever going on the defensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a debate should be friendly and should be an honest attempt to find the truth and settle disagreement, not a fight.

(The link doesn't work for me, I get forwarded back to Facebook's home page.)

I don't know what you argued, but the only rational argument against national healthcare for me is that it often doesn't give an individual what he needs when he decides he needs it, since it's the government who will establish priorities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Ultimately, you can't "win" a debate against a person who has never put a second of rational thought into their own beliefs. I put win in quotes because winning does not necessarily mean having the other party know he/she has lost. Like I said, they'll never give up because they have nothing to give up. They have no firm ground to their argument to lose. They'll just keep arguing endlessly with their emotions and whatever cliches they've heard on the news and what public school taught them.

I can't remember who said it, but someone once said that you can't reason a man out of an idea he never reasoned himself into.

I applaud you on your game of attrition, however. Who knows, you may be able to pound even a minuscule thought into this person's head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...