Why is it that no one in modern society, from keyboard warriors to sitting senators and presidential candidates, can argue properly according to reason?
>>67349363
because you touch urself at night
>>67349363
because reason is often at odds with compassion and das rayciss.
I am on a scientists' FB group and you wouldn't believe how many prejudices, ill-stated arguments and the like these people do produce on a daily shitposting basis.
The more into STEM, the more ideological and authoritarian they sound.
I came to believe non-STEM people, let alone the vocal feminist community, are more ready to listen than medical doctors who repeat the naturalistic fallacy and appeals to authority over and over again (muh duh, that's science. Whatever I do and think is science so it must be ethically good).
Because politicians need votes, and voters don't respond to reason. Keyboard warriors are voters.
>>67349411
Leave the shitposting to us Aussies, Canacuck.
>>67349363
>implying ancient-politicucks relied on reason over rhetoric
>>67349462
This.
Those people you mentioned, OP? They either can't stand either to have their fee fees hurt, or can't stand to lose support from these keyboard warriors to stay in power.
arguing implies that i give a shit whether the other person understands what i'm doing or not
>>67349411
Your hand in is allegiance with Satan and must be stopped!
Traditionally, feminism has been linked to leftist liberal arts. But -- God forbids -- most of the libtards have little to do with actual philosophy and critical thinking classes.
I'll tell you what. One day I was tutoring some analytical shit and this dudes come in completely on weed, talking to himself and shit.
He was the one who always argued against truth relations and basic logic just because he didn't like them.
He picked the class thinking philosophy was going to over-feed his libtard ego but guess what? It turned out the class was more like maths, and he couldn't stand it.
He dropped out to do some cinema shit. I have no idea, but this, IMHO, is a case in which the libtards are shown to be either MD or STEM people who are unqualified for rational discourse and the use of reason to investigate politics etc. or just failed libtards.
Usually, authentic humanities people are among the most red-pilled ever and will never argue from authority or try to incept you with libtard shit.
>>67349363
Because all arguments come down to a fallacy of some sort.
Argument and culture is merely your ability to justify the fallacy so the majority of people agree with you.
Every day, you are arguing. You are a walking argument. The way you dress is an argument that this is the way civilized people dress. That being a civilized person is important, and so on. Every action you take, every food you eat, everything you do, is all a cultural argument.
There is no such thing as a platonic ideal, anon. Merely the arguments that set up the world by setting forth the earth.
>>67349863
>>67349974
Wow. Weird, a post like that from a Analytic and Continental came in at the same time.
>>67349974
You remind me of George Costanza trying to justify wearing sweatpants outside.
>>67350137
Eh, probably rooted in the same ideas.
Honestly, everything is an argument. Even the language I'm using right now. I'm implicitly making the argument that these symbols arranged in this way create some sort of meaning that others should be able to understand. Of course, a lot of these arguments we just let slip by us because they seem to have been 'won' already. But they are in constant flux. We add and remove words and meanings from our language every day. Likewise, as far as clothes, we have changed our wear in both casual wear and business wear. Most business people only wear suits these days when it's formally required for them to do so, and it's slowly becoming even more relaxed, though in a different way than just falling into line with casual wear.
>>67349363
Are you seriously implying that reason is somehow a mathematical principle with real value? Get real, m9
