Overused Catch Phrases to win arguments

I love that one, because it makes the person more irate than they already are.

Works much better when you add "It's going to be ok, just calm down"

 
It may work on someone who hasn't seen it before, I guess. If you've been on Reddit or just about any message board in the past two decades you've seen people say this how many times? 100? 500? It loses effectiveness when you know why it's being used.

 
knapplc said:
"calm down"

It's called tone policing. The intent is to disparage the person on the other side of the debate by casting them as angry or irrational.
Click to expand...
Seems similar to telling someone to not get their Jimmies rustled or any of a number of other ways to say it.

I really hope you don't feel that is what Landlord was doing in that other thread. It was more than apparent to me that, in the context he used it, he was simply continuing with intent of my post which was only trying to be humorous. And if you took my post any other way, Iapologize, that was not my intent at all. (I think you know this but just in case...)

Also, just a general comment on this thread, I don't see where hardly any of these are used to "win" an argument. Seems most of them are used by people who are possibly under the delusion that they have won/are winning the argument but I think most everyone uses other criteria than self proclaimed victory shots.

 
It's interesting that the Christians in that thread perceived all of the other Christians' actions as benign, while I, a known atheist, was perceived as being "condescending" and "obnoxious" by those same Christians, and as "annoying" and "disrespectful" by NUance (another Christian) in his Status Update.

In that context, maybe it's easier to see why I didn't take all of those as the jokes they were intended to be. There were a lot of things said about me, personally, in that thread that weren't warranted.

 
I didn't really read this section of the other thread, but I agree in general about "tone policing". It's often used to enforce conformity...which is great in some cases, and terrible in others.

Similarly, the fact that all our institutions exist to promote and enforce normality of our politicians. That's good and proper in normal circumstances.

The danger is that there's a strong appeal in calling for reason/calm/middleness. But sometimes, it's this:

dae9d5fc0800f12f5c720be598b6bea6.jpg


...and so it's important to recognize when this is the more reasonable response:

14716667_1176704902417397_8582222230895722496_n.jpg


 
knapplc said:
It's interesting that the Christians in that thread perceived all of the other Christians' actions as benign, while I, a known atheist, was perceived as being "condescending" and "obnoxious" by those same Christians, and as "annoying" and "disrespectful" by NUance (another Christian) in his Status Update.

In that context, maybe it's easier to see why I didn't take all of those as the jokes they were intended to be. There were a lot of things said about me, personally, in that thread that weren't warranted.
Click to expand...
I guess I need to re-read that thread and see if I can understand this. Yes, I and Moiraine said you were being condescending and obnoxious. I can't really back off of that based on what I read. Now if you didn't mean those things in a condescending manner, then I will apologize for misinterpreting your intent. But that is honestly the way I took some of it. When I pointed it out to you, it was more of a "hey, this is what it sounds like" type of thing. I'm sorry if you took it as attacking you rather than the friendly heads up it was intended as.

I really think you are dragging some other feelings into that issue and projecting a bit but there is nothing I can do about your perception other than hope you know I'm being genuine. As far as the Christians vs atheists angle, I'm not purposely trying to team up with other like minded Christians in any type of conspiracy. Heck most of the time I argue with LOMS and Moiraine rather than agree with them. And much of the time I agree with your posts rather than argue with you. We don't and probably won't agree on what transpired in that thread but when 3 people are telling you the same thing, it might be time to reevaluate why instead of doubling down on it. I don't think it's as simple as the C's vs the A's issue you seem to think it is.

 
ZRod thought I was being condescending, too. Rike didn't. So there's that.

I guess if nothing else that whole conversation is a good lesson to people who have felt ostracized from P&R: Even if you feel like your point of view isn't being given the respect it deserves, have the conviction of your belief and persevere. You, Moiraine, ZRod, me, Landlord, Rike - we all disagreed, and there were a lot of "you" statements in that conversation. But nobody bailed, nobody let it push them out.

That's something I've always respected about all of you guys. You have the wherewithal to maintain your stance even in the face of heavy dispute. Same goes for Tood, Dewiz & Coach. I may not agree with them, but they're still here standing their ground. You have to respect that.

 
knapplc said:
That's something I've always respected about all of you guys. You have the wherewithal to maintain your stance even in the face of heavy dispute. (...) I may not agree with them, but they're still here standing their ground. You have to respect that.
Click to expand...
Maybe it's the wording, but this reminded me of:

"The greatest thing about this man is he's steady. You know where he stands. He believes the same thing Wednesday that he believed on Monday, NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENED TUESDAY."

-- Stephen Colbert, WHPCD 2006. What a gift.
default_biggrin.png


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top