Dismissing arguments

Can we have any conversation without someone dismissing an argument with "Read [ideological text I prefer]?"

This is not come across as an intellectually lazy way of ending discussion until guidelines you've set have been met?

Of course I'm not saying text has no place in our discussions that would be ludicrous. Simply reading the text doesn't get anyone anywhere they are just words.

We should be debating the merits of the text and explaining them in our arguments. Saying things like "read so-and-so" is the most intellectually lazy thing about this board and comes off as disingenuous to the subject of the text itself.

Just a thought.

Other urls found in this thread:

samkriss.com/2016/05/26/in-defence-of-personal-attacks/

Leftcoms gonna leftcom user. The best thing you can do is actually read it because they haven't. I agree, totally redundant and arrogant way to argue, very lazy

I posted this very thread like a month or 2 ago also

Theres two situations where the "read xyz" is used:

1. Youre a cunt and use it to dismiss arguements
2. People say a lot of bullshit and then expect you to write a phd-level paper to refute their arguments on an imageboard.

In the latter case it is 100% valid to tell them to read book x or y.

Gomen be, user-kun, but I can't agree completely with you, but I do believe your points have some validity. It is difficult, because of the (occasionally) high likelihood of the opposing party being disingenuous at best. It can be very despiriting to put a great deal of effort into a post only to be "slapped in the face" with boorish dismissal. You're not wrong when you call it lazy, yet I cannot help but think that laziness of this kind is the natural result of both the argumentative nature of the environment and confrontational tone of the board (though it isn't as though rude visitors themselves are blameless too).

Sorry, but I haven't any solutions to offer.

tbh sometimes it's annoying have to explain Holla Forumstards shit over and over. fuck that.

just tell them whats the source. What I'm talking about is not ideological through. It's the explanation of physical things, zero ideology attached.

The least you can do is cite the ideas you're talking about if you hold them to such high regard. I saw another user doing this about Stirner's work. It didn't convince me 100% but it got me interested in further exploring some of his ideas.

no, read Bordiga

Holla Forums consists of passive receiving nerds who fetishize books

read this: samkriss.com/2016/05/26/in-defence-of-personal-attacks/

Sam Kriss is a fucking hack who uses personal attacks so that he doesn't have to engage the material he argues against. The left does have a great literary tradition, it's just one that goes against the naive humanist principles he espouses. The dude can get fucked.

The argument can be summed up as "the right is better at being mean than the left is, therefore being mean is more important than making substantive points". You're a fucking brainlet faggot for reading it and buying into his nonsense.

He has a point. Those why cry ad hominem often have no problem murdering millions, but saying they have a tiny penis, that's not an argument!

This
But I agree with OP over all. Read X is abused more.

You can do both tbh

which group got their guy into the white house? Which group is converting all the stupid little meme kids and gaining momentum?

The argument is that we do not exist on ethereal plain of pure text and debate. Correct him where he is wrong.

Leftism should not be a phase little jimmy goes through when he's 12 because his friends on reddit shared dank memes with him.

It sure as hell isn't Holla Forums.

Crying ad hominem without explaining why something is ad hominem isn't an argument. Obviously insulting someone doesn't make a person's ideas invalid, but using insults to cover up the fact that your ideas are inconsistent does. Having valid points to compliment your insults makes them infinitely more brutal. Holla Forumsacks who come here to call us cucks get genuinely mocked and belittled; they seem absolutely pathetic because their insults have no weight behind them. Obviously we don't exist on an ethereal plain of pure text and debate, but nobody was ever arguing that. Sam is arguing against an imagined figure here. You're a massive faggot.


Lmaooooooo, the idea that the alt-right propelled Trump into the whitehouse is laughable at best.
If you have any younger siblings you'd know that a majority of kids aren't alt-right, and in fact the ones who are tend to be pathetic and unpopular.

The retardos here believe that their viewpoints were influenced solely by texts. They are too autistic to realize that they were subjected to brainwashing at multiple angles.

If you consider working long hours for someone else for little pay to be brainwashing, then many of us have been brainwashed.

Why the fuck not? Use the weapons that are available to you. I say this in all seriousness but memes are a part of the fight. Modern-day propaganda. If a couple of seeds take root in a kid and later he grows up and actually reads some shit why not. I'm in my thirties and I got interested in communism through KMDFM when I was 14. What does the point of entry matter?

You think those Aut-right kiddies won't grow up to be useful idiots? Stop being such a purist and let things take their course with whatever means they take hold.

I showed you my dick. Answer me.