Do people with low IQ’s really think name calling and assumptions makes them win an argument?

I’ve noticed the pattern when debating typically leftists, women, and unintelligent people in general. When the script from their Facebook feed backing up their argument doesn’t stand they go straight to name calling typically either saying racist or virgin. When you explain that’s not a counter argument they repeat the name calling and refuse to listen to anything you said despite your sources. Do dumb sheep deserve to be slaves?

Other urls found in this thread:

snopes.com/media/notnews/iqpolitics.asp
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

n u r the dum!

Emotions are an evolutionary tool developed to make quick decisions at the expense of information. That is why emotional arguments are usually not logical. They're logical is the small context the emotional person considers, but inconsistent or illogical in the bigger picture.

So yeah, of course they'll resort to name calling because that is a logical comeback in the smaller picture. You are a bad person and thus your arguments are bad.

However, in the bigger picture even bad people can make good arguments and thus you, who have been trained in logic, art not impressed.

Tl:Dr emotional people become slaves whether they want to or not. To come out of slavery you have to be trained in thinking in the big picture, popularly known as logic.

You are actually at fault for classifying virgin and racist as insults.
Innocence is something to be proud of, and so is logic/comm sense.

common*

do they deserve to be slaves? i would say no. but they need reeducation and if that fails i guess we will see how best, if at all, they could be of use.

there is a popular post about j oliver by a psychologist. i do not have it. the general idea is that the show is intentionally hypnotic in ~20 second intervals whose purpose it is to equate a conservative thought with derisive laughter.

>introduce conservative idea
>quick non sequitur before idea can be fully fleshed out by audience
>repeat

propagandists and liars... reeducation will be tough for most. impossible for some. they are the potential slaves but may not be worth the trouble.

>Do people with low IQ’s really think name calling and assumptions makes them win an argument?

>they go straight to name calling typically either saying racist or virgin

Add Russian troll/bot to that too

Blind racism is a trait of unintelligence despite what the storm fags will tell you. Yes stereotypes exist for a reason and I’m much more cautious in a colored part of town but you should judge people on their actions over a longer period of time typically, though appearances do make an important part of first impressions.
See if I could get responses like this out of people trying to counter argue me, my views might not be so one sided, I feel like we get stuck in the echo chamber though process of Sup Forums which looks for extremes of real issues and it causes us to be narrow minded about some things. I want to be more open minded but every counter argument from different view points seems child like from the people i end up debating.

Honestly this is a bit of a valid point, but I’m gonna give a guy who has a billion dollars and was able to become the president a bit more leeway than a liberal arts major in their sophomore year.

>Do people with low IQ’s really think name calling and assumptions makes them win an argument?


Yes.

I was on twitter and was seeing people accuse others of having russian bot followers because they ran an app and told them they have bots. I told them they also have bots and that Russia didn't invent them or have a monopoly on them and they called me a white supremacist and blocked me

>debating woman
1-woman view is restrained to what they see, what they experience, they have no capacity to lead an army or to build an interesting argument from logic and knowledge.
2-going on social media to debate is stupid in itself, social media is about groups, meaning the goal is to make you feel right instead of bringing contradiction, if you do it, you will be face with self absorb people who don't even want a debate, just positive re-affirmation.
3-muah sources, sources on the internet are for the most part bullshit, in 5mins you will find a study saying coffee is good for you and one saying it gives you cancer, it goes back to point 2.

bottom line, you are dumb and wasting your time instead of lurking more, you need it.

>My persuasion can build a nation
>Endless power
>Our love we can devour
>You'll do anything for me
>Who run the world?
>Girls
>Who run the world?
>Girls
you wanna debate that? haha

Shut the fuck up you libtarded cuck shill piece of shit soy boy.

It does win arguments. 80% of normies don't understand how an argument is formulated, and will instead gravitate to whoever comes off as more aggressive and self-confident.

To be fair, Trump isn't trying to win any arguments, he's already won. He just makes bants for fun and to piss off everyone.

I agree arguing with people on social media is dumb after about the 7-8th person spewing the same shit to me I realized it’s a waste of time. Shit at least I tried to red pill people instead of sitting around eating tendies.
Where did you get the idea I was a libtard? You just resorted to the same sort of name calling I was describing, subscribing fully to almost any ideology is a dumb move mostly but I def lean more right wing you goof troop.

Sadly this

>says this
>resorts to racial epithets and dead stereotypes

why are whitoid males only capable of projecting and being sociopathic retards

this. racism is actually weakness in that you give in to oversimplifications and a boiled down version of reality because your brain can't process the complexity of a subject.
I hate illogical brainlets, will rope.

Yes, however I am not trying to win arguments you fucking cuckhead

redpill with an argument? now you are embarrassing yourself, wtf do you think a meme is a thing? b/c your social media friends have brains reduce to a liquid form in order to buy 400dollars headphones or some shit, their attention span is lower than my german shepherd, only with a 40 word max colorful image can you try to change any of it, a well done meme will short circuit smthg in them, after some short circuits on the same subject they will do their own research and after enough of that, you find them on Sup Forums calling ppl faggots

You don't have a dog in the fight if you resort to name calling and assumptions.
We need to remember this is a tactic of losers.

This.
+
snopes.com/media/notnews/iqpolitics.asp
+
Fact is Republicans have a list of go to "insults". Like snowflake libtard etc. Because they don't have actual facts to support their arguments only opinion
=
Case closed. Nice try. Master bait

John Oliver has those Adam Schiff eyes. Dead stare.

You think I don’t use memes and just spurt random Sup Forums rhetoric? Come on now man.
Yea but then those same brainlets go on to criticize trump for being a child that resorts to name calling after they just got done doing that. They also get mad about “grab her by the pussy” but listen to chimp daddy’s smash new hit “Beatig white hoes in da club wit muh dick” and all sorts of other wonderful rap songs and don’t see the hypocrisy.

>snopes.com
>case closed
oh god, is this a shill thread

I find the opposite happens with the extreme right. Any time someone makes a salient point concerning social justice, it's met with derision and racial epithets ad hominem, i.e.; I can't tell you how many times I've gotten the hivemind reply calling me "nigger"--probably even for this post. Go on. I dare you to be more predictable. And don't feed me that bullshit that this is all done in the name of satire. Most of the time, a rebuttal is met with harsh slander of character. In fact, the extreme right are the most easily triggered group of all. When the extreme right starts calling names, I immediately claim victory over them, as there is nothing of value they're capable of expressing thereafter.

It's kind of retarded to assume than anyone on social media is actually looking for a debate

anytime you actually get someone with genuine curiosity it is the exception

>snopes
1/10 bait. KYS

well Jimmy Kimmel said teeeveeee hosts actually have high IQ so you're wrong on that one, sweetie. go to your bed and let the adults do the talking.

Meanwhile, EVERY thread on Sup Forums:
>shill
>cuck
>Shareblue
>JIDF
>soyboy
>libtard
>goy
I think you might be onto something here, OP.

I agree but you have to factor in a huge part of ch0n culture is trolling and trying to make people mad so you never know who is on the other side trying to have a real argument or just fucking around.
When they send you messages trying to argue with something you said I’d say it’s fair to assume they want to start a debate. Maybe not, maybe they feel threatened by differing views and them chiming up makes them feel like they stood up to something they deem wrong

Make no mistake their are plenty of low IQ blue collar storm fags that somehow stumbled upon this site that’s why I’m saying it’d be nicer to see more variety of view points on this board.

Because social justice is a load of bullshit, everyone here knows it and if you spent more than 5 minutes here you'd find actual evidence, such as statistics and even news articles from left-leaning media, that destroys any "argument" for why anyone would think minorities and women (51 of the population, yet still considered a minority lul) are oppressed. I'm short, why would anyone want to have a debate with you when your retarded non-arguments have been proven wrong every single time when it's just easier to just call you a cuck and call it a day.

>social media
>anonymous forum
you fucking cuck, here when you insult someone nothing happens, debate continues and at best people laugh at you. you faggot got your emotions hurt along the way didn't you, soyboy

Agreed. It used to be much more diverse here. Hell, even Sup Forums has more diverse political discussions. But there are still people that come here who aren't just parroting the tired old stormfag talking points. I'm fairly liberal and like to come here to laugh and study propaganda techniques and groupthink. I'm sure there are many others like me.

I don't think anyone who cares about what people think and gets their fee-fees hurt would last too long here.

First of all, I come here to Sup Forums with an open mind. Moreover, I am a consummate centrist. I do not take sides.

That said, are you so willing to wholesale dismiss that there might be at least some reason to the social justice movement? There is always cause and effect. I don't believe that you have enough evidence to completely discount the politics of an entire demographic.

Unfortunately, both sides fall embarrassingly short of their lofty platitudes.

Like I said--and I mean this sincerely: I come to Sup Forums with an open mind. I do my best as only a human can do to lay down my preconceived notions on the few times I do post here, preferring to spend a majority of my time here lurking. I can clearly see valid reasons for the politics on both sides of the political spectrum.

But none of us are all-knowing. The level of smugness and vanity that your reply connotes is simply unreasonable IMHO. Meanwhile, if you revert to name-calling, your position in my view is rendered moot.

>me monster
>good punctuation
>muh different paragraphs
>not a single argument
the fuck? if i act like that, cut my internet
>at least some reason to the social justice movement? There is always cause and effect.
he told you it's fake and gay. the social justice movement was created by (((some))) right after the 1%movement, in other words, when people spontaneously found a commun enemy and manifest with peace and arguments, some (((people))) create a finance a counter movement that instead of having a commun enemy is a hotch-potch of political-social-cultural-racial movements that nobody understands and that fights for the oldest meme around, gender equality, discrimination, minority rights, pay gap... ...

So a student who had to watch their friend and classmate's brains blown-out by an AR-15 has no reason to seek social justice? A mother of a child in Flint Michigan has no right to protest the fact that they may as well be living in a third-world country without access to clean water? And a US combat veteran has no right to write his local congressperson in protest of his lack of medial subsidy?

There is an old colloquialism that goes "never throw the baby out with the bath water". It means that just because there are bad actors in a given demographic, you do not dismiss the entire movement to be as disingenuous as the bad actors. This is the same argument that 2nd Amendment supporters have about gun regulation here in the US: Just because most mass shooters have been crazy *white* men doesn't mean that this is a problem isolated to that demographic.

Ive lived in flint, maybe if these idiots quit voting in incompetent nigs their shit would get fixed

A rational comment on Sup Forums? What in the hell is going on here?!

They genuinely think that the real problem here is not the logic of any person's argument, but that you're an evil baby-killing racist, so it makes sense (to them) to say so.

...

I've found most people on both sides on the internet become irrational when you start applying logic to their arguments. Dumb sheep deserve to learn.

...

Braindead faggot doesn't understand you get called a retard for posting anything here

>So a student
pic related
SO YOUR SAYING residents did not fight for their community, classmates were pretty alright with a friend death and veterans did not care about medical access before SJW? social justice =/= social justice movement. you just refuse to go into a subject and divert using emotions, what are you? a woman or smthg?

We need more memes on his fucked up face Sup Forums

Adding the modifier "movement" is nothing more than a populist colloquialism. As if just that nomenclature alone is enough to rally someone's opinion on the defensive before the other person can even make their point. You'll find that some people with a true grievance to be had are probably not sophisticated enough not to protest under the banner of being a part of an allegedly dubious social justice movement. That shouldn't nullify the true merit of those who speak on behalf of the suffering of the socially disenfranchised.

For example
>A father mourns his son being slain, and in an emotional rant, calls for additional regulations to be imparted
>LOOK AT THAT ASSHOLE UP THERE BLUBBERING LIKE A FUCKING BABY...THIS IS JUST YOUR USUAL SJW BULLSHIT
Yet one has to wonder: What other motivation does a grieving father actually need?

shut up faggot

Do people use "virgin" as a slur in the US?

It's not positive to be a late virgin here if you are male, but it's not common to call other people that.

exactly, but that father is speaking for a form of social justice, he is not a part of a movement. the nomenclature is extremely important here. on one side you have different individuals speaking for what they believe needs to change, what we used to call a concern citizen. but those citizens are not part of a movement because nothings unite them, they have no share purpose and seek different goals. on the other hand you have SJW, using division as form of engagement (woman vs men, black vs white) as if a poor black woman from chicago suburbs working 3jobs and oprah have the same goal because they both go into black and woman as a category for social fight.

in other words and to come back to my first point, one is a natural need felt by the community that organize because of a commun goal (Flint Water Fund, 99% movement) the other is a movement created by (((some))) to divise.
> divert using emotions, what are you? a woman or smthg?
x2

Yes that is women’s go to argument anytime you criticize them, that and “haha you will always be alone and never have a GF loser!”

Racist isnt an argument

Calling you a virgin? Theres so many ways to counter that. But I would say that their normalizing virgin shaming/bullying they should shut the fuck up right there

Intradesting

The go to argument for the less logically driven people here are more like "I can't believe you said that" "Just wow" etc.

> The alt-right accuses leftists of name calling and having low IQ's.

Sweet, sweet irony.

>People are starving in sudan as we speak
> most of the products you buy are made in sweat shops by 11 years in china
>people around the world die everyday from a bullet.

Wheres the outrage over that? How vain can you be?
A couple white kids get killed then its the end of the world for you...

Never claimed to be alt right have you read any of my other posts or are you just jumping to conclusions like a typical brainlet?

Again, to borrow a famous phrase, "by any means necessary": Had you ever considered that those who are afflicted don't necessarily care who their benefactors and allies are? Their goal isn't to make you comfortable, my friend.

Who said I wasn't?

lol faggot, so by any means necessary even if counter productive to my original goal.
yeah you make a lot of sense! keep it up, champ

Aaaaaaaand here we go with the name-calling. You've got a real open mind there, I see.

NIGGERS ITT

my mind is as open as your mom's anus.

aaaaaaaaaand here we go again with the sweep of counter arguments with an emotional response, the lack of progression in the conversation and the inaptitude to master logic.
what you are is wasting my time and contradicting yourself, plus, your feelings seem to hurt a bit so i'll let you go back to r/politics elegantly.

>calling names
>using slurs against me
>I'm the emotional one
Yeah, don't flatter yourself.

If you follow the typical Sup Forums redpill journey. You went through your logical debate tactics of freedom, and free enterprise through your Libertarian phase. As you keep going down the redpill journey you don't succumb to emotions yourself but you use it as a tool in the midst of the argument. I've shamed liberals for supporting Hillary/Obama using Libya and things of that sort. Not the whole "see dems are the real war mongers", but a different approach...something along the lines of attributing motive and making them seem like a horrid person for even thinking about supporting them.

Just the past couple of days I've been telling liberals that float around my circles through my work that the kids in Florida are awful human beings. Bring up their narcissism and that they're tied to Podesta, and bring up podesta's art and that anyone associated with them is a horrible human being in my opinion that's worthy of hate, and show them the art. It shuts them up immediately. It's really that simple OP.

yes, spot on, normies are super similar to dogs, maybe handle them as such; offer them things in return for pretending to think a certain way or telling them they are a good boy or bad boy but desu i have no idea

Once you realize that...it's actually very easy to win an argument being that you will be more intelligent and use very simple facts to back up your argument. Tidbit facts with a lot of emotion, easily wins a normy debate for anyone on the right.