It occurred to me as I was livestreaming yesterday that most people who beg you to debate them, or their chosen hero, online are people advocating for issues, cultures, or politics that will never exist in reality.
Imagine if Ben Shapiro debated some autist with no social skills, a stutter and an unseemly open wound on their nose. Ben took the position that Santa Claus is real and our stuttering fuck with the fucked up nose took the position that santa is just parents leaving presents.
I have no doubt that shapiro's presentation would ve better and more convincing. He owns the unseemly stuttering autist in every way and wins the debate. Does that make Ben right? Did we learn the truth? Or was the person representing reality just ill suited to make the case?
Debates are worthless. It's UFC for nerds. Learning this crushed me bc i was a nerd who loved debates, but it's all a jerkoff. It proves nothing.
Not only is it worthless, but watch ten minutes worth of Destiny and see how corrosive it is to that dude's ability to have any productive thoughts. It does more brain damage to its participants than the actual UFC
Here is where debate and, by extension, the destructive nature of 'Compromise' started:
Gen 3:1-5 (KJV) 'Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?' And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.'
I think a big proportion of people who love debate culture online used to watch The Daily Show and imagines themselves in the Jon Stewart role (or their chosen Hero) where they get to say whatever inane shit they want and always be right and "own" their interlocutor to a crowd of horking seals who clap at them mugging to the camera after calling their opponent a Statist, Fascist or a Racist (Really all these words can be safely interchanged with Faggot and have the same meaning). The issue for them is the people they want to debate understand this dynamic now and arn't going to engage with their faggotry because its a pointless waste of their time to help these people live their gay little fantasy out.
The debate club called. They want to why you won't debate them about debate, if you're so confident in your debatable assertions. They also demanded to know your sources.
In a sentence: they want attention. They don’t have a life irl, literally nobody would entertain listening to the kooks irl, so find a niche online and get off on the attention.
Imagine if Ben Shapiro debated some autist with no social skills, a stutter and an unseemly open wound on their nose. Ben took the position that Santa Claus is real and our stuttering fuck with the fucked up nose took the position that santa is just parents leaving presents.
I have no doubt that shapiro's presentation would ve better and more convincing. He owns the unseemly stuttering autist in every way and wins the debate. Does that make Ben right? Did we learn the truth? Or was the person representing reality just ill suited to make the case?
Debates are worthless. It's UFC for nerds. Learning this crushed me bc i was a nerd who loved debates, but it's all a jerkoff. It proves nothing.
Not only is it worthless, but watch ten minutes worth of Destiny and see how corrosive it is to that dude's ability to have any productive thoughts. It does more brain damage to its participants than the actual UFC
Here is where debate and, by extension, the destructive nature of 'Compromise' started:
Gen 3:1-5 (KJV) 'Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?' And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.'
Yes. Everything always seems to boil down to either man recognizes that God is God or man is trying to be God.
I think a big proportion of people who love debate culture online used to watch The Daily Show and imagines themselves in the Jon Stewart role (or their chosen Hero) where they get to say whatever inane shit they want and always be right and "own" their interlocutor to a crowd of horking seals who clap at them mugging to the camera after calling their opponent a Statist, Fascist or a Racist (Really all these words can be safely interchanged with Faggot and have the same meaning). The issue for them is the people they want to debate understand this dynamic now and arn't going to engage with their faggotry because its a pointless waste of their time to help these people live their gay little fantasy out.
The debate club called. They want to why you won't debate them about debate, if you're so confident in your debatable assertions. They also demanded to know your sources.
Destiny is a good example of this..
That one princess who’s being divorced? 😂
In a sentence: they want attention. They don’t have a life irl, literally nobody would entertain listening to the kooks irl, so find a niche online and get off on the attention.
They’re not important enough to entertain.
DAMN!!! Another 'Pete mic-drip'