Monday, 10 August 2009

I Don't Accept the Premise of the Question

Much to Eva's rightful chagrin, I argue far too much with people on the Internet, I have quite a bit of time on my hands at the mo; so more than usual I am exchanging verbals with idiots.

From such practice I have discovered one way of cutting back on the sheer volume of crap pointlessly exchanged in a virtual format, it is to use a technique mentioned by Leo McGarry in the seminal TV show The West Wing: if you don't accept the premise of the question then don't answer it.

Although I find this frustrates the hell out of the goons you're debating with it saves a lot of time, it also means that you don't end up validating the question's premise with the dignity of a response; which is usually based on personal prejudice and has no basis in fact, or getting into a mess arguing against something that it isn't even true. Rather like the premise that you should never argue hypotheticals, one I always try and stick to, again to the frustration of cretins.

Sticking to these rules is easier said than done though, a recent debate I was having about Fascism was a point in hand, there was no point me arguing about whether it stemmed from the Left or not because the premise of the question; that Fascism is from the Left, is total fiction, the premise in itself is wrong but by arguing it, I gave it credence.

It's like arguing about the Earth being flat, or there being a God, or those birther twats that think Obama isn't a US citizen...no point doing it; the premise is flawed and thus, arguing with someone using a flawed premise is pointless because they are obviously an ignoramus.

Come back next week when I explain that having the last word doesn't mean that you've won an argument, it just means that you've had the last word.

14 comments:

  1. Love it.

    I find that those who present flawed premises are incredible talkers. They can talk their way out of a hole in the ground. I've seen it.

    And the best way to deal with a talker is to not talk...

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have a much simpler solution (though I don't argue with idiots anymore as you just can't win - golden rule of anything is never argue with an idiot). I use a technique that I've coined as bombing in which I make my statement, my argument against theirs, I pepper it with enough foul language and aspersions against them, their parentage, their latent and repressed homosexuality and then I never go back.

    That's the trick. If you really want to fuck with people, wind them up and walk away. Let them argue on their own. It frees up time and allows you to piss off a whole new babble of halfwits.

    The Internet is an arsehole...

    ReplyDelete
  3. I start by saying the sky is green. Show me how you would respond, with your new style.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Lindsay:

    Thanks for stopping by, how did you find me?

    Darren:

    I've tried that. The people I wrestle with are biger arseholes than the Internet could ever be.

    Ren:

    I don't accept the premise of your statement, so no piint debating it.

    Having said that, the infernal cretins you have at yours Ren in the shape of FJ and Sentinel are not the sort to respond well to people not accepting their premises, they just carry on regardless.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "if you don't accept the premise of the question then don't answer it."

    Just answer the question with a different, but equally stupid, question. If someone asks you 'when did you stop beating your wife', just ask them when they stopped fucking their dog. Simple.

    Funny thing is, they usually jump in with both feet instead of doing the sensible thing and ignoring you.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Yes Neil but I'm trying to cut down on the amount of my life wasted dealing with these idiots.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Then disengage...

    I mainly use the internet for news and masturbation and scoring hookers. Make (self) love, not virtual war, dude.

    You will feel better for it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Easier said than done, esp. as I'm so bored at the mo.

    Oh well.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ren: I could only imagine, saying to FJ, you reject his premise. That would trigger 20 Wikipedia quoted comments from him.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ha, yes, and don't forget a few Nietzsche quotes thrown in for good measure.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Come back next week when I explain that having the last word doesn't mean that you've won an argument, it just means that you've had the last word.

    No it doesn't

    ReplyDelete
  12. West Wing was my personal crack for 1 year of maternity leave.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Yep and me and Eva's, we love it and have the entire box set.

    ReplyDelete

Please do not be under the misapprehension that this blog has a laissez-faire comments policy where commenters can get away with whatever they want to say on account of their ‘freedom of speech’.

Blurred Clarity has a stringent comments policy. So anything off-topic, diversionary, trollish, abusive, misogynist, racist, homophobic or xenophobic will be deleted.

Cheers duckies.