Azelma wrote:
You do this all the time. You're very good at it. If someone catches you red-handed having a shitty opinion or being a hypocrite you dance around it and attempt to poke holes in unrelated statements.
Rebuttals are as subject to being debunked as any initial argument.
Rebutting does not make a bad argument more valid or further criticism unwarranted.
Azelma wrote:
For example, if I bring up the question: "why don't you have a job" or "why are your parents still supporting you?" in the context of an argument where you are railing against people who have jobs and contribute taxes to the government....
You will dance around it, blame others, and refuse to see the fact that you could be responsible for your own failures, in part.
Making an argument, "could", is not the same as what the facts are, "is", and it's characteristic of you that you fail to understand this.
Azelma wrote:
It probably comes from the theory that: since it's true the average person is an idiot...you can extrapolate that most commonly held opinions are simply born out of mass ignorance.
That said, it still holds no weight for me. A dumb person can have a valid opinion, though their reasoning may be flawed, and they may not be able to withstand all the charges of a man such as Aestu. It doesn't mean the opinion itself is invalid.
See sig
Ignorance is only as good as knowledge if you believe that facts and knowledge are arbitrary and meaningless. i.e., nihilism
