How to win every argument on ISH.

[IamRAMBO24]

Let's be real, I am hands down the best debater in here. Why? Because I can pull sh*t out of my a*s and make it sound like I know what I am talking about. If the sky is blue, and I say it's black, I can probably convince half of the forum it is black.

I introduce to you the art of deceptive logic. Ok here is an example:

Let's pretend you are standing front of me and I am going to prove you are not (which is pretty damn retarded since you really are).

Me: I can prove you are not here with me.

You: How is that possible? I am standing right here.

Me: Ok let me ask you a few questions. Are you Chicago right now?

You: No.

Me: Are you in Virginia?

You: No.

Me: If you are not in Virginia or Chicago, you are somewhere else correct?

You: Yes.

Me: if you are somewhere else, then you can't be here.

See the logical deception? It is in the lack of a proper definition of "somewhere else." The person above accepted he is "somewhere else" when he's really not and thus the logician can manipulate the argument to prove he's not standing in front of him when he obviously is. See how powerful this can be? You can use this with every argument. Lebron and Kobe stans do it all the time trying to prove their player is the GOAT. They don't have a true definition of the word GOAT (it is open ended), so they assign the meaning to the word based on their players strong attributes. It is similar to the example above.

Then they would use a hypothetical. Hypotheticals are powerful sh*t. For example, a Lebron stan can say, "If he was on the Lakers, they would of won a championship" and then provide reasons for it and it'll sound perfectly logical, but it is nothing more than a deception. Why? Because Lebron has never played on the Lakers. It is not a fact. So it can be manipulated to fit the argument rather than the argument fitting the facts.

Another great logical deception is to change the premise. A true argument will have a premise, supporting arguments, and a conclusion; most people will argue the supporting arguments in order to change the premise, but to truly get the upper hand, skip the supporting arguments, and attack the premise.

A popular ISH deceptive use of logic is an attack on the character. All you have to do is call someone a troll or bring up an old post where they said something wrong to discredit them. Most posters are dumb enough to view their arguments as fruitless because their character is in question.

Anyways, I have a lot more, but I'll stop right there. I bet a lot of posters in here are guilty of these logical deceptions and they're even aware of it.

[Budadiiii]

Didn't read, you've lost every single argument you've ever had on here.

[fiddy]

OP one of the most pushy and annoying posters

[IamRAMBO24]

Didn't read, you've lost every single argument you've ever had on here.


:roll:

ISH getting exposed and these clowns are turning the other cheek. *as expected ..

[dilley]

wait so im confused, is the sky blue or black? :biggums:

[cos88]

Let's be real, I am hands down the best debater in here. Why? Because I can pull sh*t out of my a*s and make it sound like I know what I am talking about. If the sky is blue, and I say it's black, I can probably convince half of the forum it is black.

I introduce to you the art of deceptive logic. Ok here is an example:

Let's pretend you are standing front of me and I am going to prove you are not (which is pretty damn retarded since you really are).

Me: I can prove you are not here with me.

You: How is that possible? I am standing right here.

Me: Ok let me ask you a few questions. Are you Chicago right now?

You: No.

Me: Are you in Virginia?

You: No.

Me: If you are not in Virginia or Chicago, you are somewhere else correct?

You: Yes.

Me: if you are somewhere else, then you can't be here.


See the logical deception? It is in the lack of a proper definition of "somewhere else." The person above accepted he is "somewhere else" when he's really not and thus the logician can manipulate the argument to prove he's not standing in front of him when he obviously is. See how powerful this can be? You can use this with every argument. Lebron and Kobe stans do it all the time trying to prove their player is the GOAT. They don't have a true definition of the word GOAT (it is open ended), so they assign the meaning to the word based on their players strong attributes. It is similar to the example above.

Then they would use a hypothetical. Hypotheticals are powerful sh*t. For example, a Lebron stan can say, "If he was on the Lakers, they would of won a championship" and then provide reasons for it and it'll sound perfectly logical, but it is nothing more than a deception. Why? Because Lebron has never played on the Lakers. It is not a fact. So it can be manipulated to fit the argument rather than the argument fitting the facts.

Another great logical deception is to change the premise. A true argument will have a premise, supporting arguments, and a conclusion; most people will argue the supporting arguments in order to change the premise, but to truly get the upper hand, skip the supporting arguments, and attack the premise.

A popular ISH deceptive use of logic is an attack on the character. All you have to do is call someone a troll or bring up an old post where they said something wrong to discredit them. Most posters are dumb enough to view their arguments as fruitless because their character is in question.

Anyways, I have a lot more, but I'll stop right there. I bet a lot of posters in here are guilty of these logical deceptions and they're even aware of it.

http://imageshack.com/a/img824/4767/3ac.gif (https://imageshack.com/i/mw3acg)

[RightToCensor]

http://i.imgur.com/BLkylVU.gif

[IamRAMBO24]

wait so im confused, is the sky blue or black? :biggums:

I was just using an example. You can convince anybody of anything if you know how to manipulate logic. How did Cochran prove OJ was innocent when he obvioiusly was not? He pulled a wool over the jurors since they are not versed in logic.

This thread hands down is better than your ENTIRE EDUCATION.

[IamRAMBO24]

http://imageshack.com/a/img824/4767/3ac.gif (https://imageshack.com/i/mw3acg)

Read and learn young Jedi. What I'm teaching is invaluable.

[fiddy]

Read and learn young Jedi. What I'm teaching is invaluable.
You are either:
A) hardcore trolling
B) very miserable person in real life

[Budadiiii]

You are either:
A) hardcore trolling
B) very miserable person in real life
Both.

[IamRAMBO24]

Both.

I'm surprise you didn't troll this thread with your alter ego Moe. Off night?

[IamRAMBO24]

He's Euroleague. But weirder.

Nm. This is some hardcore trolling. Budaddi makes a comment, Moe responds a couple of seconds later, back and forth at 3 am in the morning. I am actually honored to have the biggest troll target me (how bigger does it get when you create alter egos to gang rape?). I must be doing something right.

[gigantes]

show, don't tell, rambo.

i notice you keep missing that concept.

[IamRAMBO24]

You are either:
A) hardcore trolling
B) very miserable person in real life

Nope. Just spreading wisdom. I speak the truth and I am not afraid to share it. If you truly seek truth, you wouldn't find me annoying. This is why the smartest posters in here rarely engage me in discussions because they all secretly agree with me. I am usually fending off the idiots (like you and Buddaii).

[IamRAMBO24]

You're pretty creepy.

:oldlol:

Both you and your alt are at around 5,000 posts. That's creepy. That means when you created your account, you decided to create an alt just to talk to yourself. It's almost like you have the whole thing pre-planned and not an afterthought, and you are calling me creepy?

Dude at least I don't f*ckin talk to myself loser and then try to alternate between different personalities. What you see is what you get with Rambo.

[fiddy]

Nope. Just spreading wisdom. I speak the truth and I am not afraid to share it. If you truly seek truth, you wouldn't find me annoying. This is why the smartest posters in here rarely engage me in discussions because they all secretly agree with me. I am usually fending off the idiots (like you and Buddaii).
Jesus :bowdown:














































Get a life looser :facepalm

[Angel Face]

Let's be real, I am hands down the best debater in here. Why? Because I can pull sh*t out of my a*s and make it sound like I know what I am talking about. If the sky is blue, and I say it's black, I can probably convince half of the forum it is black.

I introduce to you the art of deceptive logic. Ok here is an example:

Let's pretend you are standing front of me and I am going to prove you are not (which is pretty damn retarded since you really are).

Me: I can prove you are not here with me.

You: How is that possible? I am standing right here.

Me: Ok let me ask you a few questions. Are you Chicago right now?

You: No.

Me: Are you in Virginia?

You: No.

Me: If you are not in Virginia or Chicago, you are somewhere else correct?

You: Yes.

Me: if you are somewhere else, then you can't be here.

See the logical deception? It is in the lack of a proper definition of "somewhere else." The person above accepted he is "somewhere else" when he's really not and thus the logician can manipulate the argument to prove he's not standing in front of him when he obviously is. See how powerful this can be? You can use this with every argument. Lebron and Kobe stans do it all the time trying to prove their player is the GOAT. They don't have a true definition of the word GOAT (it is open ended), so they assign the meaning to the word based on their players strong attributes. It is similar to the example above.

Then they would use a hypothetical. Hypotheticals are powerful sh*t. For example, a Lebron stan can say, "If he was on the Lakers, they would of won a championship" and then provide reasons for it and it'll sound perfectly logical, but it is nothing more than a deception. Why? Because Lebron has never played on the Lakers. It is not a fact. So it can be manipulated to fit the argument rather than the argument fitting the facts.

Another great logical deception is to change the premise. A true argument will have a premise, supporting arguments, and a conclusion; most people will argue the supporting arguments in order to change the premise, but to truly get the upper hand, skip the supporting arguments, and attack the premise.

A popular ISH deceptive use of logic is an attack on the character. All you have to do is call someone a troll or bring up an old post where they said something wrong to discredit them. Most posters are dumb enough to view their arguments as fruitless because their character is in question.

Anyways, I have a lot more, but I'll stop right there. I bet a lot of posters in here are guilty of these logical deceptions and they're even aware of it.

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/32832811.jpg

[Bandito]

I was just using an example. You can convince anybody of anything if you know how to manipulate logic. How did Cochran prove OJ was innocent when he obvioiusly was not? He pulled a wool over the jurors since they are not versed in logic.

This thread hands down is better than your ENTIRE EDUCATION.
The reason OJ was released was because the police lab made an error in recovering the drug at the scene and Cochran used that to prove that there was an error in the evidence, thus there was doubt in OJ being the murderer. Did you watch the news?


Also all I've seen from your arguments is that you just take whatever fit your 'premise' and try to prove people wrong. And when they prove you wrong you do the same thing over again. IF you call that winning, then woe is you. I haven't seen you win any argument at all.

Also when you used stans to prove your premise you lost any credibility you had because what they do is troll. In other words they will use any reason to make other people mad, so they can laugh at you from over the screen. How do I know that? Because I do it all the time.

[Bandito]

Nope. Just spreading wisdom. I speak the truth and I am not afraid to share it. If you truly seek truth, you wouldn't find me annoying. This is why the smartest posters in here rarely engage me in discussions because they all secretly agree with me. I am usually fending off the idiots (like you and Buddaii).
They don't engage with you because they are smart enough to not feed the trolls:roll:

[SAKOTXA]

What the **** did I just read?

[iamgine]

Let's be real, I am hands down the best debater in here. Why? Because I can pull sh*t out of my a*s and make it sound like I know what I am talking about. If the sky is blue, and I say it's black, I can probably convince half of the forum it is black.

I introduce to you the art of deceptive logic. Ok here is an example:

Let's pretend you are standing front of me and I am going to prove you are not (which is pretty damn retarded since you really are).

Me: I can prove you are not here with me.

You: How is that possible? I am standing right here.

Me: Ok let me ask you a few questions. Are you Chicago right now?

You: No.

Me: Are you in Virginia?

You: No.

Me: If you are not in Virginia or Chicago, you are somewhere else correct?

You: Yes.

Me: if you are somewhere else, then you can't be here.


That example is not deceptive logic at all. It's a play on word.

[CeilingFan#1]

Let's be real, I am hands down the best debater in here. Why? Because I can pull sh*t out of my a*s and make it sound like I know what I am talking about. If the sky is blue, and I say it's black, I can probably convince half of the forum it is black.

I introduce to you the art of deceptive logic. Ok here is an example:

Let's pretend you are standing front of me and I am going to prove you are not (which is pretty damn retarded since you really are).

Me: I can prove you are not here with me.

You: How is that possible? I am standing right here.

Me: Ok let me ask you a few questions. Are you Chicago right now?

You: No.

Me: Are you in Virginia?

You: No.

Me: If you are not in Virginia or Chicago, you are somewhere else correct?

You: Yes.

Me: if you are somewhere else, then you can't be here.

See the logical deception? It is in the lack of a proper definition of "somewhere else." The person above accepted he is "somewhere else" when he's really not and thus the logician can manipulate the argument to prove he's not standing in front of him when he obviously is. See how powerful this can be? You can use this with every argument. Lebron and Kobe stans do it all the time trying to prove their player is the GOAT. They don't have a true definition of the word GOAT (it is open ended), so they assign the meaning to the word based on their players strong attributes. It is similar to the example above.

Then they would use a hypothetical. Hypotheticals are powerful sh*t. For example, a Lebron stan can say, "If he was on the Lakers, they would of won a championship" and then provide reasons for it and it'll sound perfectly logical, but it is nothing more than a deception. Why? Because Lebron has never played on the Lakers. It is not a fact. So it can be manipulated to fit the argument rather than the argument fitting the facts.

Another great logical deception is to change the premise. A true argument will have a premise, supporting arguments, and a conclusion; most people will argue the supporting arguments in order to change the premise, but to truly get the upper hand, skip the supporting arguments, and attack the premise.

A popular ISH deceptive use of logic is an attack on the character. All you have to do is call someone a troll or bring up an old post where they said something wrong to discredit them. Most posters are dumb enough to view their arguments as fruitless because their character is in question.

Anyways, I have a lot more, but I'll stop right there. I bet a lot of posters in here are guilty of these logical deceptions and they're even aware of it.

This is beyond stupid.

[GASOL IS GOAT]

Nice copy pasta. Just do this :lol, this :oldlol:, this :roll: , or this :kobe: at the end of your post and you'll never lose. Also, make sure you're the last one to post no matter how garbage the post is. Last one to post always wins.

[VIntageNOvel]

Nice copy pasta. Just do this :lol, this :oldlol:, this :roll: , or this :kobe: at the end of your post and you'll never lose. Also, make sure you're the last one to post no matter how garbage the post is. Last one to post always wins.

:applause:

and one more thing, choose your side wisely, if you want to win every argument on ISH, better go to team :kobe:

easy win there:cheers:

[gigantes]

... and one more thing, choose your side wisely, if you want to win every argument on ISH, better go to team :kobe: ...
clinging to some old NBA player is going to improve his debating skill?

what...?

[CeilingFan#1]

Didn't read, you've lost every single argument you've ever had on here.

How to win every argument on ISH:

Only argue with IamRAMBO24.

[niko]

So you're basically admitting you don't know anything and just argue using semantics? Everyone knew that. This makes you look stupid. :facepalm

[HarryCallahan]

Nm. This is some hardcore trolling. Budaddi makes a comment, Moe responds a couple of seconds later, back and forth at 3 am in the morning. I am actually honored to have the biggest troll target me (how bigger does it get when you create alter egos to gang rape?). I must be doing something right.

Sorry, i'll stick to trolling you with this account.

[CeltsGarlic]

So you're basically admitting you don't know anything and just argue using semantics? Everyone knew that. This makes you look stupid. :facepalm

This. Dude thinks he always wins cause his post is always the last one..

[nathanjizzle]

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/32832811.jpg

mr "thinks" he knows it all.

[Lebowsky]

Didn't read, you've lost every single argument you've ever had on here.
By default, I'd add.

[Jailblazers7]

Rambo's Formula for Success

1) Base your argument on a subject that almost no one on ISH will have read about extensively.
2) Claim to have extensive knowledge on the subject attained over years of experience.
3) Tell anyone who tries to engage you to "Do your homework."
4) Victory

When in doubt, appeal to your own self-crowned authority and you will never lose.

[IamRAMBO24]

Rambo's Formula for Success

1) Base your argument on a subject that almost no one on ISH will have read about extensively.
2) Claim to have extensive knowledge on the subject attained over years of experience.
3) Tell anyone who tries to engage you to "Do your homework."
4) Victory

When in doubt, appeal to your own self-crowned authority and you will never lose.

I do not use logical deceptions in my arguments; this is the reason why I am making this thread. 90% of ISH users use it, even the insults flinging at me is a form of deceptive device.

If these idiot ISHers actually read my post and understand logical fallacies, they will know what I am saying is sound and powerful stuff. Politicians use it, Foxnews use it, radio personalities use it, the best lawyers use it, etc.

This is the reason why many people are deceived by the sh*t they spew: they have absolutely no knowledge of the rules of logic.

I do not manipulate my premises; I make sure they are sound with sources and evidence to back them up, hence why I always ask people to do their homework .. this way they will know it is sound. I do not manipulate the premise around the evidence, but rather I use the evidence as a foundation for my premise. Huge difference.

[TheSilentKiller]

I feel like you are a freshman in college and when you get off classes you come here and babble about you psych 101 and philosophy 101 lectures.

[IamRAMBO24]

This. Dude thinks he always wins cause his post is always the last one..

An argument works like this:

1. Premise
2. Supporting arguments
3. Draw a conclusion

If the typical ISH poster does not understand my premise, I simply ask him to do a bit of research on it before he responds. You can't take on an argument if you don't know what the f*ck you are talking about. I always focus on the premise, but 99% of the time, an ISHer would either 1. Try to change or 2. Try to discredit me by calling me a troll.

If they can't argue my premise, and I can argue all of their's, then it is reasonable to conclude I have won the argument.

[IamRAMBO24]

I feel like you are a freshman in college and when you get off classes you come here and babble about you psych 101 and philosophy 101 lectures.

I doubt a freshman in college has this level of deep conceptual understanding of logic. Btw, they don't teach this stuff in psych 101 or philosophy of ethics. The best lawyers and politicians are pros at this, so I would only imagine the Ivy league schools are teaching it. Forget about public education; the best knowledges are usually reserved for the rich.

[HarryCallahan]

I doubt a freshman in college has this level of deep conceptual understanding of logic. Btw, they don't teach this stuff in psych 101 or philosophy of ethics. The best lawyers and politicians are pros at this, so I would only imagine the Ivy league schools are teaching it. Forget about public education; the best knowledges are usually reserved for the rich.

What if the freshman was Immanuel Kant? See what I did there?

[IamRAMBO24]

What if the freshman was Immanuel Kant? See what I did there?

:facepalm

Kant never went through the public educational system.

[Budadiiii]

:facepalm

Kant never went through the public educational system.
Yes he did, troll.

There are plenty of 'Kant's' who have gone through the public educational system. You're wrong.

I win.

[HarryCallahan]

:facepalm

Kant never went through the public educational system.

Non sequitur.

[Le Shaqtus]

Didn't read, you've lost every single argument you've ever had on here.

/Thread

[Bandito]

An argument works like this:

1. Premise
2. Supporting arguments
3. Draw a conclusion

If the typical ISH poster does not understand my premise, I simply ask him to do a bit of research on it before he responds. You can't take on an argument if you don't know what the f*ck you are talking about. I always focus on the premise, but 99% of the time, an ISHer would either 1. Try to change or 2. Try to discredit me by calling me a troll.

If they can't argue my premise, and I can argue all of their's, then it is reasonable to conclude I have won the argument.
Somebody give this guy a medal:applause:

[Ai2death]

Let's be real, I am hands down the best debater in here. Why? Because I can pull sh*t out of my a*s and make it sound like I know what I am talking about. If the sky is blue, and I say it's black, I can probably convince half of the forum it is black.

Of course you can, cause half the forum is stupid :facepalm

[ILLsmak]

Read and learn young Jedi. What I'm teaching is invaluable.

real alphas say what they say and don't care if people respond or believe them.

True alphaism is a form of delusion. It's impenetrable.

It's not about winning or losing. You are you, they are them, you see what I mean? Refer to my post about Phil Jackson.

If a child comes up to you and tries to argue, no matter what he's saying, you should win. Even if it's right. If you lose, you got mentally pwnd by a child.

Maybe that's some variant of what you were saying, but like I said arguing is worthless.

The art of getting ***** and making good forum posts is exactly the same. You go into a room... or into a thread, and you grace it with your presence. You say what you want to say, and you leave... or you decide to hang out.

I know u feel me. lol. I don't even need bold type.

-Smak

[B-Low]

Didn't read, you've lost every single argument you've ever had on here.

This :oldlol:

It's almost cartoonish how often you lose. You're like the Team Rocket of ISH arguments. At the end of every debate I imagine you spiraling off into the distance and exploding

[gigantes]

rambo is resilient and not afraid of putting himself out there.

in a world of evasive, manipulative, passive-aggressive people who tend to cling to the easy route, i do admire people with guts.

[niko]

rambo is resilient and not afraid of putting himself out there.

in a world of evasive, manipulative, passive-aggressive people who tend to cling to the easy route, i do admire people with guts.
He has the opposite of guts. He doesn't argue where he can lose. He uses semantics, ignores points that contradict him, changes his argument in the middle. And when a thread is really bashing on him (like now) he leaves it.

It's the absolute opposite of guts, creating a situation that you engage in only when you can win and run away if it gets hard. He's like a 5 year old playing checkers changing the rules as they go along and flipping the table when someone says no.

[Jackass18]

It's pretty simple. How to win every argument:

1. Make compelling argument that crushes the opposition
Win argument

or

2. Make argument
Fail at argument
Still claim you won argument

[gigantes]

He has the opposite of guts. He doesn't argue where he can lose. He uses semantics, ignores points that contradict him, changes his argument in the middle. And when a thread is really bashing on him (like now) he leaves it.

It's the absolute opposite of guts, creating a situation that you engage in only when you can win and run away if it gets hard. He's like a 5 year old playing checkers changing the rules as they go along and flipping the table when someone says no.
i see your point, and maybe he's so oblivious about the whole thing that it's moreso delusional self-righteousness than guts that propels his threads.

OTOH, few people have guts from beginning to end. maybe he starts these threads, goes as long as he can, and then runs out of rocket juice.

anyway, people are too complicated for me to judge in any particular way, so i prefer to separate out their behaviors and speak about those, not the person as a whole. but, yea... no question many of rambo's arguments are rubbish.

still, to have so many threads turn out like this and then keep coming back for more. isn't that at the very least rather interesting...?

[pauk]

But seriously, this is how you do it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnTmBjk-M0c

[T.O.RapsJays]

So you're basically admitting you don't know anything and just argue using semantics? Everyone knew that. This makes you look stupid. :facepalm

It's like he doesn't even realize he just flat out said that all he's been doing is trolling. If I were to follow his "arguments" knowledge, all I'd need is to type a bunch of crap, and then rebuttal every response by saying "Troll, go do your homework".

Herp dskplerck mash burp. Got any response to that? No? Argument = won.

[IamRAMBO24]

It's like he doesn't even realize he just flat out said that all he's been doing is trolling. If I were to follow his "arguments" knowledge, all I'd need is to type a bunch of crap, and then rebuttal every response by saying "Troll, go do your homework".

Herp dskplerck mash burp. Got any response to that? No? Argument = won.

It is a fair expectation.

If I want to take on an argument, I will understand where the person is coming from first and foremost. If what he is arguing is beyond my comprehension, I will 1. Do the proper research or 2. STFU.

This is the problem with ISH. Too many times ISHers pull sh*t out of their a*s without even understanding what the argument is all about. That's just pathetic. How the hell are you going to argue someone when you don't even understand where they are coming in the first place?

The ideas I bring up are usually complex and will need the proper research to fully comprehend it (hence the reason why I get so many backlash from it), so it is perfectly reasonable for me to ask someone to research it first before they respond.

I mean just getting all sensitive and mad just because I challenge a viewpoint is a total cop out.

[CeilingFan#1]

Too many times ISHers pull sh*t out of their a*s without even understanding what the argument is all about.


Because I can pull sh*t out of my a*s and make it sound like I know what I am talking about.

Like you have any room to criticize.