Skip to main content

Using Insults and Personal Attacks to Win an Argument When "Trust Me Bro" Fails

 

Granted, I'm not a fact checker and I'm just here to blog on facts over gossip. I've noticed that dealing with idiots on Facebook can be tiresome. I'll confess I've lost my cool many times when it comes to insults. What I foolishly never realized is that if people start to be disrespectful and throw insults--it could be a clear indicator of being a disgraceful loser. That kind of behavior is very common in the Trust Me Bro crowd. When asked for a source, they're most likely to say, "Just trust me, bro." If they feel they're losing the argument--they start getting disrespectful and start making insults. They can go from name calling or any form of Ad Hominem or personal attack.

I remembered how often I lost my cool. I could remember whining, crying, or acting like a child. However, if there's one thing worth thinking about, shouldn't I be laughing instead that my opponent is insulting me? It's because if my opponent starts insulting me like calling me names, saying I'm this or that, then the ground is very shaky. Their position is rather shaky when they start to hurl insults at me. It's because they feel threatened. They start throwing insults at me like a cornered cat. They want to win, and they want to feel to win, but deep within, they know they're cornered so they act like cornered cats.  

There were many arguments I could read on Facebook. I could remember a certain political science graduate. Another was a withered dancer in his early 60s (he was 24 in 1986, do the math). Both still insisted that the Marcos Regime in the 1970s was parliamentary. I kept citing the benefits of the parliamentary system. The political science graduate called me stupid and an animal. The withered dancer kept saying I was crazy and I should get my injection. I asked for empirical evidence. Instead, they gave me insults in hopes that they could "win" the argument.

This is the classic case of cognitive dissonance. The whole issue of using insults to win an argument is because they lost the argument. One of those fools I've argued with even said, "I'm just here to expose to people how stupid you are. Hahahahahahaha!" Does the hahahahahaha at the end even validate the argument? I wanted to punch the person. Instead, I was told why not laugh it off? Why not let the person enjoy his blunder?

We also have the classic case of the Duning-Kruger Effect. This is where people of low ability have the tendency to overestimate their ability. Being stupid is one thing. Not knowing you're intellectually stupid is another. That's why there's a proverb that says, "The empty container makes the most noise." The constant use of insults and personal attacks from such people can be empirical evidence of one's own foolishness. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What It Felt Like Entering the National Museum of the Philippines in Cebu City

National Museum As a man in his late 30s, I can really miss the memories of the 1990s and the early 2000s (which included my college years ). I miss a lot of people who are no longer with us too. I'd like to share my experience at the National Museum of the Philippines-Cebu . I haven't gone to a historical site in like, forever . Maybe, I could talk about some "historical sites" I "visited" a short time after the pandemic such as Bonsu Temple (a Buddhist temple in Pasil) and the Colon Chinese Temple (which I heard is no longer lived by anyone, if I'm not wrong). I wanted to go to Casa Gorordo, to relive some of my college days. Going to the NMP-Cebu made me feel like a student again.  Entering meant I had to get my ID. I presented my UMID ID as a registration. It was composed of two floors. It's spacious so getting lost (at first) can be expected for a first-time visitor. The first floor contained artifacts. That would remind me of the days at the Un...

Nirvana Fallacy and the Die-Hard Defenders of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines

IMGUR The philosopher Voltaire (real name  François-Marie Aroue ) was said to have said, "Perfect is the enemy of good." To define the Nirvana fallacy, we can look at Logically Fallacious to help us define it: Description: Comparing a realistic solution with an idealized one , and discounting or even dismissing the realistic solution as a result of comparing to a “perfect world” or impossible standard, ignoring the fact that improvements are often good enough reason . Logical Form: X is what we have. Y is the perfect situation. Therefore, X is not good enough. Example #1: What’s the point of making drinking illegal under the age of 21?  Kids still manage to get alcohol. Explanation: The goal in setting a minimum age for drinking is to deter underage drinking, not abolish it completely.  Suggesting the law is fruitless based on its failure to abolish underage drinking completely, is fallacious. Example #2: What’s the point of living?  We’re all going to die anyway. Ex...

Rare Interview Footage of Ninoy Aquino and Doy Laurel in Japan, Reveal Marcos Years Were NEVER a Legitimate Parliamentary System

People who are afraid of shifting to a parliamentary system tend to use the Marcos Years as proof. Fearmongers on Facebook are still up to their old tricks, using the Marcos Years to say, "No to cha-cha!" Never mind that a new constitution had to be written after 1986. If anything, Article XVII was inserted in the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines because it was never meant to be set in stone. Also, the 1973 Constitution of the Philippines was illegal .  Here's a video of the late Benigno Simeon "Ninoy" A. Aquino Jr. and the late Salvador "Doy" Laurel. The words of Laurel here show the problem of Marcos' "parliament". Marcos' "parliament" lacked legitimacy . Where was the sporting chance of the Opposition? If it was a real parliamentary system, Ninoy would've been leading the Opposition in weekly debates against the Marcos-led government. That is if the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. was the prime minister. If Cesar Vir...