@applejack this is incredibly reductive, for example, I don't strictly believe in X, there are other options other than Y, and following X strictly to the conclusion of Y may violate another principle, Z, or may inadvertently lead to outcomes that run counter to X. It's simply dumb to look at it as a strictly black and white scenario where only X and Y exist with no other context or externalities.

@shitgrifter The meme doesn't mention externalities or context, it implies the argument is wrong because the libtard doesn't believe it himself

@applejack @shitgrifter That makes it a bad faith argument and therefore wrong.

@AR-15 @shitgrifter That's not in any way true and you know it. You have your own brain, you can look at whether the point is valid or not, regardless of what the libtard's motives are

@applejack @AR-15 @shitgrifter >That's not in any way true and you know it.

Are you suggesting he is arguing in bad faith? According to your own logic that isn't even relevant. Why bring this up?

Now you're arguing in bad faith, by accusing him of arguing in bad faith, in bad faith.

@Donald_McRonald @AR-15 @shitgrifter I said nothing about bad faith. He obviously knows reality doesn't distort according to what a libtard thinks

@applejack @Donald_McRonald @shitgrifter No, but the libtards' view of reality is warped on purpose and they want to kill me, so listening to anything they say is dangerous even. Once you start playing with infohazards it ends with "gosh the sirens' songs sure are pretty and they're hot, maybe those rocks aren't so dangerous after all!"

@AR-15 @applejack @Donald_McRonald engaging with bad faith ideas is like letting in the trojan horse because you can't physically see the greek soldiers coming out of it and it would just be rude to refuse it

@shitgrifter @AR-15 @applejack "What will my enemies think of me if I don't let in the trojan horse? They will think I'm WEAK! I NEED to let it in even though it's an obvious trap!"

@Donald_McRonald @AR-15 @shitgrifter I've said on the thread multiple times we have no reason to care what libtards think

@applejack @Donald_McRonald @AR-15 then why are you dedicating so much of your time trying to convince me of the exact opposite of that

@shitgrifter @AR-15 @Donald_McRonald Because a valid point is a valid point, irarespectivearniggerdlessicious of what the libtard thinks

If you have a genuine fault in your thinking, you, yourself, are going to be better off by having it exposed and correcting yourself

We're right, but none of us is unconditionally right

@applejack @AR-15 @Donald_McRonald I would like you to explain to me how it is a genuine fault in thinking then.

@shitgrifter @AR-15 @Donald_McRonald Because pointing out your opponent being logically inconsistent, obviously, means they're being logically inconsistent (assuming the point makes sense)

If an opponent of a mathematical proof, theorem, function, whatever, find a condition where it's wrong, then it's wrong. It's supporters can't just say "well, clearly you don't believe it", that's retarded

@applejack @AR-15 @Donald_McRonald opinions and political philosophy are not mathematical proofs, retard. I do what I believe to be best for me and my own. This cannot be quantified and no amount of formalist logic circlejerking will change that.

@shitgrifter @AR-15 @Donald_McRonald If you want what's best for you and yours, you must rationally understand that having a correct view on reality is important to cause the outcomes you want

I think this myself, so yeah, this argument would work on me

@applejack @AR-15 @Donald_McRonald Do you think if your enemy is bringing up perceived inconsistencies in your beliefs they're doing it because they want you to have stronger beliefs? Of course not. They're doing it because they can't attack them with their own principles and they want you to believe something else so they try this strawman horseshit. It works on you because you're a dumbass who can't help but want to let the trojan horse in.