~ archived since 2018 ~
~ archived since 2018 ~
| Upvotes | Title | Category | Author | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|
| Upvotes | Comment on | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Q4BP: When was a time evidence changed your mind?1) What is your standard of evidence of a generalisation being true? 2) What are some generalisations that you think are untrue? | /r/PurplePillDebate | 17/06/24 01:40 PM |
| 1 | Q4BP: When was a time evidence changed your mind?because we don't have beliefs in the first place. Blue pill isn't a belief system like the red pill. It's just anyone with mainstream views that isn't explicitly red pill. Blue-pillers do have a worldview and that worldview does encompass beliefs, beliefs that must be contestable for them to deny red-pill beliefs. As an example, blue-pillers would deny that dual mating strategies exist, because it would attack their idealistic belief of fairness regarding female sexuality. Because of that, blue … | /r/PurplePillDebate | 17/06/24 01:38 PM |
| 3 | Q4BP: When was a time evidence changed your mind?https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question You are asserting that bluepillers cannot reject evidence. I'd like to see an answer to that. | /r/PurplePillDebate | 17/06/24 01:29 PM |
| 1 | Q4BP: When was a time evidence changed your mind?So he catfished men for dates he did not actually go on? Yeah. He fulfilled the parameters of the experiment, which were; Prove that average looking women have easy access to dateable (not losers, sex addicts, or weirdos) and decent looking men on online dating platforms. His experiment was supposed to last a week, but it took him less than 24 hours to find 7 suitors who are open to going on a date with the fake female profile. For what it's worth, the initial bluepiller that denied this was pos… | /r/PurplePillDebate | 17/06/24 01:21 PM |
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter