Here is a third angle in this thread. This is the 'constitutive' argument. It asks us to look at the meaning of the words we're using. Norms constitute a society, so it is incoherent to talk about a society without any.
Ok, I’ll take a stab at it, any sexual act outside of heterosexual is just masturbation. It will never satisfy or fulfill. You’ll always be missing something which drives further deviency. It will only get worse not better. You’ll start by quietly doing it by yourself to finally dancing naked in the streets trying to corrupt children.
So, you're going with the functional angle. We shouldn't treat sex as an end unto itself -- or at least: society can't treat sex that way -- but can only consider it as the means to the end it serves, i.e., reproducing.
In an indirect way, you see how Person 2's case is going to weave together with environmentalism. In order for a society to shirk the value of promoting its own continuity into the future (by having babies), you have to think either (i) this continuity is just guaranteed regardless of our sexual norms or (ii) we shouldn't continue into the future.
Here's my argument to person 2. I don't give a fuck what you think you fucking retard, "slap" now shut the fuck up before we stomp your fucking head in.
I've tried this to mixed results. It could work depending on the relationship and temperance of the NPC in particular. This stance is the way one would for sure want to get their 'debate opponent' (for lack of a better term) to get into.
For example, have THEM provide and articulate the basis like at the level stated (like the problems with being homosexual). Have them articulate WHY more gay children is better for the children, and society.
[ - ] Dingo 1 point 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:39:36 ago (+1/-0)
You can't argue with the enchanted. That said, we can improve upon the argument by rebutting:
Why would you want these people to genocide themselves? Why would you have them be happy where they aught not be happy?
Keep the conversations QUANTITATIVE (avoid QUALITATIVE) and have them give you the STATISTICAL basis.
Note that the first "person 1" statement was also a QUALITATIVE OPINION. Try a more "cutting" first statement like so:
It is concerning how young people are so lost that they are turning to homosexuality at younger and younger ages.
See, in this case, the problem isn't "homosexuality" (NPCs have been programmed to attack if this is stated) but the problem for them to rebut is (either):
1. young people are lost 2. people are turning to homosexuality BECAUSE they are lost
Any rebuttal they provide requires data. Have them provide it and show you the proper argument. When it gets heated, start asking them to articulate (like the questions above).
Also, I want to provide an important quote:
The great masses can be rescued, but only by sacrificing much time and patience.
But a Jew can never be parted from his opinions.
It was simple enough, at that time, to try to show them the absurdity of their teaching. Within my small circle, I talked to them until my throat ached and my voice grew hoarse. I believed that I could finally convince them of the danger inherent in Marxist foolishness. But I only achieved the contrary result. It seemed that the more they understood the destructiveness of Social-Democratic doctrine and its consequences, the more firmly they clung to it.
The more I debated with them, the more familiar I became with their argumentative tactics. At the outset they counted upon the stupidity of their opponents; but when they got so tied up that they couldn't find a way out, they played the trick of acting as innocent simpletons. Should that fail, in spite of their tricks of logic, they acted as if they couldn't understand the counter arguments, and jumped away to another topic of discussion. They stated truisms and platitudes; and if you accepted these, they applied them to other matters of an essentially different nature. If you pointed this out, they escaped again and avoided any precise statement. Whenever one tried to get a firm grip on one of these apostles, one 's hand grasped only a jelly like slimer-that slipped through the fingers, and then recombined into a solid mass a moment later.
But if you really struck a blow on one of these adversaries and, due to the audience present, he had to concede the point, a surprise was in store for you the following day. The Jew would be utterly oblivious to what had happened the day before. He would start once again by repeating his former absurdities, as if nothing had happened. If you became indignant and reminded him of yesterday's defeat, he feigned astonishment, and couldn't remember a thing-except that on the day before, he was proven correct.
Sometimes I was simply dumbfounded.
I don't know what amazed me more: the agility of their speech or their art of lying.
I gradually came to hate them.
-- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf - Dalton Translation.
Note that the above is about "jews" but actually is about anyone that is "jewed up". Your tranny-allied aquantances are the same as the marxist-jews that Hitler was talking about.
[ - ] Dingo 1 point 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:53:06 ago (+1/-0)
It is my pleasure. Protect yourself if you argue openly with these people. They will (by sending the mob at you) attack you from the shadows.
It is all very similar to learning to deal with "clinical" narcissists. You may find the term "flying monkeys" handy. This is essentially the secret sauce for mao's "struggle sessions". Basically, the situation by shadowy figures is "set" but the idea of "debate" is dangled before the population. Each time you win an argument and shit happens anyway will notch away at your desire to argue with the.
Dude the narricisr connection with jews liberalism and communism is kind of crazy I'm glad you pointed it out but at the same time capitalism corporations and our govermenr also act very similar to narricist...
Learning about narricism should be mandatory teaching in middle school to help kids deal with them the goverment and shit like communism and to fucking identify the demon narrist and I would say try to help them but from everything I've experienced and read they can't be helped unless there is a godly intervention involved.
from everything I've experienced and read they can't be helped unless there is a godly intervention involved.
Pretty much. I have found that narcissists will mimic to fit in, but don't actually have anything (or what non-narcissists have) going on morally. They're the equivalent of the Alex DeLarge character, from A Clockwork Orange.
In my life I manage narcissists by holding them to VERY TIGHT contracts. If they can't comply, they don't get more chances until they renegotiate past any previous unmitigated transgressions. That said, I am finding that the overall solipsism people who are distracted (this is what I meant by "enchanted") seem to become is functionally similar to a narcissist and similar management techniques work.
Other "godly intervention" could be as simple as never doing business with them ... but if they have somewhere to go for affirmation then they never learn to change. The sea of affirmation people are living through often makes them addicts of it, and they functionally act the same as a clinical narcissist. This is (for example) the major reason we don't allow smartphones in our home.
Dude the narricisr connection with jews liberalism and communism is kind of crazy I'm glad you pointed it out but at the same time capitalism corporations and our govermenr also act very similar to narricist...
Learning about narricism should be mandatory teaching in middle school to help kids deal with them the goverment and shit like communism and to fucking identify the demon narrist and I would say try to help them but from everything I've experienced and read they can't be helped unless there is a godly intervention involved.
a) Hetero (different) + sex (divided) contradicts society (together)...any suggested norm tempts consent together, hence hiding the implication of differentiation (hetero) and division (sex).
b) No sex implies no division, hence no beings to think; consent to norms or fill up a society.
best argument
Both best or worse tempts ones mind (ment) to argue against the opposite.
shift toward no sexual norms pertaining to orientation
TOWARD implies a) an orientation and b) a sexual division of that which moves towards, and that which is being moved towards.
imagine you're debating
Debating implies imagination aka a conflict of reason about a suggested artificial representation of perceivable reality.
[ - ] CHIRO [op] 1 point 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 13:07:42 ago (+1/-0)
I had this conversation with him back during the Poal migration. There are bits and bops in his posts that seem intelligible, but on the whole, they're just incoherent. Take your time to make your points clear, or don't bother. But he hasn't changed his behavior one iota since then. It's the same thing, over and over again. Normally, if you post something you believe, and someone says it's unclear, the thing to do would be to explain yourself in terms that bridge the gap. I want to give him the benefit of the doubt, but it's not something I can do when there's no indication from his end that he even wants anybody to understand him.
[ + ] DitchPig
[ - ] DitchPig 13 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:10:20 ago (+13/-0)
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO [op] 3 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:18:54 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] Anus_Expander
[ - ] Anus_Expander 3 points 4 monthsDec 8, 2024 20:19:06 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 3 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:50:58 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO [op] 2 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:55:48 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 1 point 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 13:05:41 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Dingo
[ - ] Dingo 1 point 4 monthsDec 8, 2024 13:50:45 ago (+1/-0)
Very well articulated.
[ + ] Portmanure
[ - ] Portmanure 3 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:06:56 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO [op] 0 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:24:14 ago (+0/-0)
In an indirect way, you see how Person 2's case is going to weave together with environmentalism. In order for a society to shirk the value of promoting its own continuity into the future (by having babies), you have to think either (i) this continuity is just guaranteed regardless of our sexual norms or (ii) we shouldn't continue into the future.
[ + ] Sector2
[ - ] Sector2 0 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:42:44 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Portmanure
[ - ] Portmanure 0 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:48:23 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] texasblood
[ - ] texasblood 0 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 13:21:38 ago (+0/-0)
Engaging in sex acts with the same gender is homosexuality.
[ + ] Theo
[ - ] Theo 0 points 4 monthsDec 8, 2024 13:54:14 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Moravian
[ - ] Moravian 2 points 4 monthsDec 8, 2024 17:38:26 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] con77
[ - ] con77 2 points 4 monthsDec 8, 2024 14:26:06 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] KosherHiveKicker
[ - ] KosherHiveKicker 2 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:22:47 ago (+2/-0)*
- How many faggot tolerant cities-states-countries have become AIDs, Herpes, Monkey Pox, Child sex-trafficking epi-centers?
- L.A.
- San Franshitsco
- Hawtlanta
- Jew York, Jew York
- Portland
- Hiafa
- Paris
- London
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO [op] 0 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:30:05 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] KosherHiveKicker
[ - ] KosherHiveKicker 2 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:40:56 ago (+2/-0)
Use the spread of the recent Faggot-only Monkey_Poxx as an example.
[ + ] Dingo
[ - ] Dingo 0 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:59:40 ago (+0/-0)
For example, have THEM provide and articulate the basis like at the level stated (like the problems with being homosexual). Have them articulate WHY more gay children is better for the children, and society.
[ + ] i_scream_trucks
[ - ] i_scream_trucks 1 point 4 monthsDec 9, 2024 00:13:48 ago (+1/-0)
"Do a backflip, faggot"
[ + ] bosunmoon
[ - ] bosunmoon 1 point 4 monthsDec 8, 2024 16:11:07 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Dingo
[ - ] Dingo 1 point 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:39:36 ago (+1/-0)
Keep the conversations QUANTITATIVE (avoid QUALITATIVE) and have them give you the STATISTICAL basis.
Note that the first "person 1" statement was also a QUALITATIVE OPINION. Try a more "cutting" first statement like so:
See, in this case, the problem isn't "homosexuality" (NPCs have been programmed to attack if this is stated) but the problem for them to rebut is (either):
1. young people are lost
2. people are turning to homosexuality BECAUSE they are lost
Any rebuttal they provide requires data. Have them provide it and show you the proper argument. When it gets heated, start asking them to articulate (like the questions above).
Also, I want to provide an important quote:
-- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf - Dalton Translation.
Note that the above is about "jews" but actually is about anyone that is "jewed up". Your tranny-allied aquantances are the same as the marxist-jews that Hitler was talking about.
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO [op] 1 point 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:47:05 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Dingo
[ - ] Dingo 1 point 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:53:06 ago (+1/-0)
It is all very similar to learning to deal with "clinical" narcissists. You may find the term "flying monkeys" handy. This is essentially the secret sauce for mao's "struggle sessions". Basically, the situation by shadowy figures is "set" but the idea of "debate" is dangled before the population. Each time you win an argument and shit happens anyway will notch away at your desire to argue with the.
[ + ] Doglegwarrior
[ - ] Doglegwarrior 1 point 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 13:27:19 ago (+1/-0)
Learning about narricism should be mandatory teaching in middle school to help kids deal with them the goverment and shit like communism and to fucking identify the demon narrist and I would say try to help them but from everything I've experienced and read they can't be helped unless there is a godly intervention involved.
[ + ] Dingo
[ - ] Dingo 0 points 4 monthsDec 8, 2024 13:47:45 ago (+0/-0)
Pretty much. I have found that narcissists will mimic to fit in, but don't actually have anything (or what non-narcissists have) going on morally. They're the equivalent of the Alex DeLarge character, from A Clockwork Orange.
In my life I manage narcissists by holding them to VERY TIGHT contracts. If they can't comply, they don't get more chances until they renegotiate past any previous unmitigated transgressions. That said, I am finding that the overall solipsism people who are distracted (this is what I meant by "enchanted") seem to become is functionally similar to a narcissist and similar management techniques work.
Other "godly intervention" could be as simple as never doing business with them ... but if they have somewhere to go for affirmation then they never learn to change. The sea of affirmation people are living through often makes them addicts of it, and they functionally act the same as a clinical narcissist. This is (for example) the major reason we don't allow smartphones in our home.
[ + ] Doglegwarrior
[ - ] Doglegwarrior 1 point 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 13:27:19 ago (+1/-0)
Learning about narricism should be mandatory teaching in middle school to help kids deal with them the goverment and shit like communism and to fucking identify the demon narrist and I would say try to help them but from everything I've experienced and read they can't be helped unless there is a godly intervention involved.
[ + ] Sal_180
[ - ] Sal_180 0 points 4 monthsDec 9, 2024 13:43:38 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] ImplicationOverReason
[ - ] ImplicationOverReason -1 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:10:56 ago (+0/-1)
b) No sex implies no division, hence no beings to think; consent to norms or fill up a society.
Both best or worse tempts ones mind (ment) to argue against the opposite.
TOWARD implies a) an orientation and b) a sexual division of that which moves towards, and that which is being moved towards.
Debating implies imagination aka a conflict of reason about a suggested artificial representation of perceivable reality.
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO [op] 2 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:19:52 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] ImplicationOverReason
[ - ] ImplicationOverReason 0 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:45:11 ago (+1/-1)
b) What was ones state of mind before choosing a side within an argument? What happens to ones state of mind when choosing to argue?
c) Norm/gnōmōn - "carpenters square"...https://www.etymonline.com/word/norm#etymonline_v_9797 Who utilizes compass and square as a logo?
[ + ] Dingo
[ - ] Dingo 0 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 12:55:17 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] ImplicationOverReason
[ - ] ImplicationOverReason 2 points 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 13:00:47 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO [op] 1 point 5 monthsDec 8, 2024 13:07:42 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] texasblood
[ - ] texasblood 0 points 4 monthsDec 8, 2024 18:56:43 ago (+0/-0)