What does "not an argument" actually mean?

What does "not an argument" actually mean?

that's not an argument

It’s his stupid cult mantra.

But what does it actually mean?

...

Not an argument literally means not an argument. An argument is to take a position on something substantive that isn't feeling based. An argument should be based on reasoning and facts.

"I think Trump is doing a good job."

"You're an asshole!"

Not an argument, attacking the person is ad hominem and not actually attacking their position.

"Trump is pro-American."

"No true American would say that!"

Not an argument, affixing the word "true" to something doesn't magically alter the word it prefixes to mean something completely different. All Americans ARE true Americans.

Basically any feeling or emotional response to a comment is not an argument, or any response built on inherently fallacious logic is not an argument.

It's when you say something and the other person doesn't know how to respond because they don't have an argument.

NOT AN ARGUMENT REEEEE!!!!!

>no space for exchange of ideas and (((discussion))) must always argue forever!

It's when someone uses a thought terminating cliche instead of a reasoned set of observations to form a judgment about something.

racist/bigot are such thought terminating cliches: you do not need to think about whatever issue is being discussed, you just shout the cliche. There is no argument, no exchange of observations and viewpoints.

It means the provided counter statement holds no value when faced with the original argument.

thanks

basically it's a knee jerk response for ditto heads to use when they want to scream "CHECK MATE" instead of hashing the pros and cons of a situation/issue with a person who has an opposing view/values.

So basically what you're saying here is that you say "not an argument" if you're too fucking retarded to point to the exact logical fallacy you have spotted in the post to which you are responding, thereby showing the poster why his argument is invalid?

Wow, such great wise insight.

It's just another way of saying your opponent is using a logical fallacy, usually relative privation, ad hominems, straw men etc

E.g.

Person A: "Donald Trump is right to block unvetted migrants from lawless shitholes, they are a threat to national security."
Person B: "White police officers killed more black people in the US last year than foreign terrorists"
Person A: "Not an argument"

bump, yes

That the person doesn't accept the justification of a claim.

Claim: Agencies in the US collect/spy on all data from every English speaking country (five eyes).

Person 1: It's okay if they do it because we have to stop the bad people.
Person 2: Not an argument.

Basically, "not an argument" means "try harder to justify it".

It's not a cult mantra, we're making fun of him.

"I don't know how to respond to that because your message is not serious or unclear"

it means you're not raising a legitimate point based on any evidence that can be discussed in any meaningful way

this is said often when people just state opinions or call people names as if they are fact

Pointing out logical fallacies is only useful when someone actually makes an attempt at a cogent argument, if they are just flinging out ad homs and appeals to emotion, pointing that out is just autistic and cringe worthy.

>Claim:
This is the argument. The ground point we all center our points/opinions around.

>Person 1:
This is an opinion. Person 1 puts forth opinions and backs them up with relevant facts and interpretations of those facts to form his case

Person 2:
This is also an opinion. Person 2 counters Person 1's opinions with facts and interpretations and puts forth their own case to be further countered by Person 1 in further exchanges.

Person 1:
Person 2:
Person 1:
Person 4:
Person 5:
Person 2:
Person 1:
etc etc etc etc

Jesus fuck are you guys fucking retarded? No wonder this board has gone to shit.

So point out their logical fallacies so everyone observing knows he's a fucking retard and why he's a fucking retard.

Something is not an argument if does not tend to prove some thesis or disprove some other thesis.

For instance, if I were to support the thesis that blacks commit more crime proportionally that some other ethnic group, and was called a racist as a result, I could say "this is not an argument", relative to the thesis that they do indeed commit more crime on a proportional basis.

I may be a racist, I may not be a racist, and yet it would change nothing to either the truth or falsehood of the statement "blacks commit more crime proportionally that some other ethnic group". The reason Molymeme uses the "not an argument" trope so often is that he very often gets reply that are unrelated to the thesis being presented.