On Debating and Discussion as a Man

JustApproach · Sun Jan 25 20:10:38 2015 UTC

The people who are mad at you for speaking the truth are the people who are living a lie. These same people deny the truth because they don't want their illusions destroyed and would rather be opinionated rather than informed. In this day and age of technology ignorance is a choice.

User-31f64a4e · 2015-01-25T21:17:57+00:00

This is a very interesting thought; I hope Stardusk or Barbarossa make a video about it.

In Dead Poet's Society, there's a line about how athletic competition is how men push each other to excellence. True intellectual discussion and debate is analogous in the field of ideas. I have always approached discussions with an open but skeptical mind. I put my case forward as strongly as I can (but, not in a manipulative or emotional way) and expect the same from anyone with a diverging opinion. Through rhetoric, argument and disclosure of facts both sides are meant arrive at an understanding. As a side note, I have been amazed how often I arrive at a dispute and find both parties hold views which can be reconciled, but there is so much emotion that the principals themselves are unable to accomplish this.

Alas, this type of communication seems like either a throwback or a way of being that was never in vogue. So many people take their identity from their beliefs (feminists for sure, but it goes far past that) that few men and almost no women operate this way.

Me, I take my identity from the sense of investigation and discovery, from the quest for superior ideas whatever they may be. I identify with the process, not a specific result set.

Gynocentrism and it's current feminist incarnation don't take this approach. Part of this comes from an identity of being oppressed - which justifies the rampant oppressive behavior of females today, and makes women feel good about their shortcomings, and probably has all sorts of other disfunctional psychological payoffs. Part of this comes from female nature. Female nature involves group membership and considerations of status within the group (derived by consensus, not accomplishment.) Female nature involves emotionalism and prioritizing feelings over facts. Female nature involves manipulation, not outright open competition. Because of female nature, open competition between ideas in the more masculine style will be anathema.

This is why there is never a point in arguing with a woman.

trpalternate · 2015-01-25T21:03:41+00:00

Name-calling and other appeals to emotion mean you've already lost the debate.

What you're saying is true intellectually, but if you're trying to convince the masses, emotional appeals and ad hominem attacks are incredibly effective. Look at political attack ads, for example. They appeal to fear and paint the other side of the issue as evil people who you can't trust.

"John Doe admitted he smoked pot in college. [fade to black and white] Is this someone you want to trust your child's future to?"

That kind of thing is incredibly effective because the average person remembers things that appeal to emotion rather than logic. They don't think of issues by thinking of facts or policy, they think about how the issue makes them feel.

Johnny10toes · 2015-01-25T23:20:57+00:00

It's interesting that you point this out at this time. I'm currently going through some lessons at https://www.khanacademy.org/ and some apps brushing up on Algebra because I want to learn Calculus and Calculus because I want to learn Physics. Now... I wasn't good in math. I'm still not but Algebra I was decent at and have forgotten tons of stuff. But the reason for learning is maps, models, realities, ideas, etc.

When you're a hammer everything is a nail.

We are in a bit of a Hammer/Nail situation here on /r/TheRedPill and this place was where my first version of reality dropped. You see TRP is our hammer and sluts/feminism/beta is our nails. We see the confirmation of our theories everywhere, but we're looking for them. If you're a feminist that's your hammer and the patriarchy is your nail, the evidence is everywhere. If you think you're beautiful then you'll find evidence of that.

My second drop in reality was from reading The Gervais Principle.

Then we have a conglomerate of things that started making me change how I view things in quick succession. Prometheus Rising, Be Slightly Evil, Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed The Art Of War and I'm sure there were a few more in there. Texts from John Boyd prove useful and tie into the other books and brings us back to models of our reality.

OODA Loop and at Art of Manliness -- At it's basic you may already be doing this. But at it's most complex you're probably not. It's not just about building a snowmobile either but that's a good way to explain it. And while we're on the subject of snowmobile this is the reason I want to learn Calculus and Physics and Transactional Analysis and Psychology and ... you get the point. I may find pieces of my snowmobile in one that I can use in another. Ideas that I can rip apart from Physics and use in Psychology or whatever.

This can be useful in that maybe a hammer is not the best tool for the job. Maybe you need a ruler. Which brings me to my point.

Intelligence

Intelligence has been defined in many different ways such as in terms of one's capacity for logic, abstract thought, understanding, self-awareness, communication, learning, emotional knowledge, memory, planning, creativity and problem solving. It can also be more generally described as the ability to perceive and/or retain knowledge or information and apply it to itself or other instances of knowledge or information creating referable understanding models of any size, density, or complexity, due to any conscious or subconscious imposed will or instruction to do so.

It's not so much that you know more about what is being debated it's that you can use information about things you do know to refute the debater. For this you're going to use all of your intelligence. Emotional, Academic, Social and whatever else. Sometimes having Social Intelligence means just shutting up and not debating.

BPtoRP · 2015-01-25T23:44:59+00:00

Quality post, worth the read! Raised by a mother that feeds on debates, being in debate clubs and plenty of philosophy courses, I'd like to add a few basic tips for effective debating:

1) is obvious: hold your fucking frame. No emotions, don't make it seem like you're trying to win them over like a religious preacher, make it seem like you're exploring the truth together. If she gets emotional or yells or name calls or anything, "Check yourself, I won't be talked to this way, let's table this until you can speak like an adult."

2) Your biological advantage is in seeing the Big Picture, following the tree of arguments as in what was said to prove what point, how we got to this argument so you can retract back to the original debate once you finish the argument. This impresses any woman as they're always in the moment, in the current argument and they're utterly lost once they're done with it. I remember a debate started over the difference in experiences and effects between sex and porn between myself, 2 guys, and a girl. While she was there, the conversation was a bit light, she'd always digress and take the arguments somewhere else pointless to the current debate, inconclusive. Once she left, three guys were casually going back and forth across seven layers of logic, knowing exactly the general purpose of each one. The master of this art is undeniably Patrice.

3) Listen before replying. You always have the advantage when she's the one that starts, she's now on the defensive and you're on the attack. Knowing her emotions behind her logic helps in calibrating your argument for her. If she can't start, say something inflammatory and have her branch off. This is close to Socrates' style of argument: poking holes in the opposite argument without offering an alternative or his own, having the opposite side get to the truth themselves.

4) This is crucial: Have them reply to EXACTLY what you said. Remember she doesn't have the Big Picture tree of how to lead the debate to a conclusive end, she's just spewing out whatever thoughts she has and she WILL branch off. A lot. If she starts off her sentence by something irrelevant to what you just said, you should ask "You sound like you're a bit off course, are you sure you're addressing the point I just made?"

5) Another trick they use a lot is replying to what her emotions perceives you saying. Once she does that, "I never said that, rethink/reread what I said. You're profiling me into people who've previously said things similar to what I said instead of actually listening to what I said." This is particularly easy to fall into in politics.

6) Like OP said, admit when you're taking it too far. "You're right about that, only after you pointed that did I realize how harsh and unwarranted my language was, but you need to understand that..."

7) Another trick that particularly works on women is to agree with them, then say the exact opposite. "Yeah you're actually right, but exact opposite of what she just said" When done subtly across an argument, it keeps her defenses down instead of getting her alert once you start your sentence with disapproval of what she just said.

8) If you want to get across a point without having it associated it to you, (worst case scenario in a feminism debate) "Alright, let me play devil's advocate here."

sir_wankalot_here · 2015-01-26T14:25:27+00:00

But how did that guy become the smartest guy in the room?

Nobody likes a smart guy, they like people that echo their belief systems. Read "How to win friends and influence people". The exception to the rule is people in postions of power, they are used to people BSing them, and they also are experts on BS. So they can smell BS, they like people who tell them the truth.

So lets say you meet a Christian. Mention some Bible verse or Bible story. He will assume you are Christian, then make the hamster wheel spin for you.

Feninazi same shit. Echo her crap. Then make the wheel spin for you.

rpscrote · 2015-01-26T17:07:54+00:00

All I can say is when you find someone to work with/debate with who can 1) entertain an idea without agreeing or disagreeing prior to real contemplative thought, 2) can counter with their own ideas, resulting in 3) a refined and more perfect idea ... stick around. This is so incredibly rare. I constantly search for someone who can bounce ideas back, won't take offense if "their" idea isn't chosen, put their egos aside at least some of the time, focus on the idea and not the people.

Title	On Debating and Discussion as a Man
Author	NightwingTRP
Upvotes	26
Comments	10
Date	January 25, 2015 5:46 PM UTC (9 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2tmp9i/on_debating_and_discussion_as_a_man/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/on-debating-and-discussion-as-a-man.28345 https://theredarchive.com/post/28345