You don’t debate for the sake of the person you’re debating with, you debate for the sake of everyone reading/watching it who hasn’t formed an opinion yet
People’s lizard brains will tend to favor the person on the right. Because their arguments are simple, spoken with confidence and often louder. Our primitive instincts interpret that as ‘correct’ because it comes off as strong. The person on the left looks weak and full of excuses.
People aren’t biologically capable of handling modern propaganda well.
Confident bullshit wins over long-winded but factually correct explanations.
Incidentally, same reason chatgpt became so popular - it’s optimized for sounding confident over being correct.
Not the reason. It is an attribute it has, but the reason it’s popular is it’s ability to quickly summarize data rather than having to dig through many sources.
That number is always going to be far less than you imagine it to be. There’s very few fence-sitters anymore. And the chances that there a significant enough number of them is in the far corner of the internet where your augment with a douchebag RWNJ happens to be is incredibly small.
No, best to just call them names, shame them, and move on.
Don’t wrestle with a pig, etc.
The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than that needed to produce it.
this is a law in the scientific sense, where its function is to describe a phenomenon that occurs in nature (or in society), not as in an authority is decreeing it so
When I say I don’t want any more Reddit users coming here because all they bring is centrist and conservative brains rotted past being useable, this is the kind of thing I’m talking about.
Internet arguments cannot be won
The only reason I argue on the internet (when I can be bothered) is so that people reading the thread will that an opposing opinion exists, not because I hope to convince the person I’m arguing with.
Yeah.
That also means that when the other person starts resorting to personal attacks you can point it out and let that discussion go, as they’re not going to be convincing anybody who is reading and thinking once have, by making it personal and insulting others, implicitly admitted that they don’t have rational arguments backing up their strongly held opinion.
You probably can’t get them to admit you’ve won, but you can convince observers and sometimes them, later, after they’ve had time to internalize.
Just accept that most people don’t have the ego to admit they’re wrong, or arguing against strawmen.
And, if I may be so bold:
Sometimes the person who needs to admit they’re wrong is you.
(Not me tho)
