toomanypancakes

What are you confident you could win an argument about?

https://piefed.world/post/605013

What are you confident you could win an argument about?

The World's Internet Frontpage PieFed.World is a general-purpose PieFed instance of various topics, for the entire world to use. Be polite and follow the rules ⚖ https://legal.piefed.world/tos ## Get started See the Lemmy [Getting Started Guide](https://support.lemmy.world/quickstart) We don’t have PieFed specific documentation currently. ## Donations 💗 If you would like to make a donation to support the cost of running this platform, please do so at the following donation URLs. **If you can, please use / switch to Ko-Fi, it has the lowest fees for us** [![Ko-Fi (Donate)](https://img.shields.io/badge/KoFi_Donate-FHFWorld-red?style=flat-square&logo=kofi&color=red)](https://ko-fi.com/fhfworld) [![Bunq (Donate)](https://img.shields.io/badge/Bunq_Donate-FHF-green?style=flat-square&logo=bunq&color=darkgreen)](https://bunq.me/fhf) [![Open Collective backers and sponsors](https://img.shields.io/opencollective/all/mastodonworld?style=flat-square&logo=opencollective&color=7FADF2)](https://opencollective.com/mastodonworld) [![Patreon](https://img.shields.io/badge/Patreon-MastodonWorld-green?style=flat-square&logo=patreon&color=lightblue)](https://patreon.com/mastodonworld) [![Liberapay patrons](https://img.shields.io/liberapay/patrons/fhf?style=flat-square&logo=liberapay)](https://en.liberapay.com/fhf) [![GitHub Sponsors](https://img.shields.io/github/sponsors/Fedihosting-Foundation?style=flat-square&logo=github&label=Sponsors)](https://github.com/sponsors/Fedihosting-Foundation) ## Join the team 😎 [Check out our team page to join](https://fedihosting.foundation/positions/) ## Questions / Issues - Questions/issues post to [[email protected]](https://piefed.world/c/support) - To open a ticket [![Static Badge](https://img.shields.io/badge/email-info%40piefed.world-green?style=flat-square&logo=mailgun&color=blue)](mailto:[email protected]) - Reporting is to be done by using the report button under a post/comment. - [Additional Report Info HERE](https://legal.piefed.world/bylaws/#25-content-reporting) ## More PieFed.World ### Follow us for server news 🐘 [![Mastodon Follow](https://img.shields.io/mastodon/follow/114657473650079395?domain=https%3A%2F%2Fmastodon.world&style=flat-square&logo=mastodon&color=6364FF)](https://mastodon.world/@PieFedWorld) ### Chat 🗨 [![Discord](https://img.shields.io/discord/1120387349864534107?style=flat-square&logo=discord&color=565EAE)](https://discord.gg/lemmyworld) [![Matrix](https://img.shields.io/matrix/lemmy.world_general%3Amatrix.org?style=flat-square&logo=matrix&color=blue)](https://matrix.to/#/#general:lemmy.world) ## Alternative UIs - [https://blorp.piefed.world/](https://blorp.piefed.world/) - Blorp UI ## Monitoring / Stats 🌐 ### Service Status 🔥 [![Mozilla HTTP Observatory Grade](https://img.shields.io/mozilla-observatory/grade/piefed.world)](https://observatory.mozilla.org/analyze/piefed.world) [![](https://fediseer.com/api/v1/badges/endorsements/lemmy.world.svg)](https://gui.fediseer.com/instances/detail/lemmy.world) PieFed.World is part of the [FediHosting Foundation](https://fedihosting.foundation/) [![](https://img.shields.io/badge/92291619-blue?style=flat-square&label=%F0%9F%94%8D+FediHosting+Foundation&color=blue)](https://www.oozo.nl/bedrijven/breda/breda-noord-west/muizenberg/3177475/fedihosting-foundation-stichting)

Nov 3 at 8:32pmWeb
Show threadNyxiasNov 3
Any argument against online Piracy.
Show threadLuciNov 3

Who the bestest boy/girl is.

To a dog, of course.

Show threadStinkyFingerItchyBumNov 3
Why your mom is the best.
Show threadzd9Nov 3
Why we need to hold climate criminals accountable with extreme prejudice right now in 2025, and to make the case for full transition away from fossil capitalism.
Show threadorizeNov 3

You are right and I would vore for this 11/10 times.

Yet, it would break the economy of it were to happen. And 99999/100000 people are status quoers 🫤

Show threadzd9Nov 3

Break the economy for who? Who is it actually working the best for now? The wealthy elite love the status quo because they are the ones benefitting from it the most.

Even a random middle class midwest family would benefit from moving away from fossil capitalism, since if done correctly the renewable investments would create millions of new jobs (“new” meaning in a different industry). People need to be able to envision what an ideal future could look like, instead of just the dystopian version of the current reality.

Show threadtalNov 4
I don’t think that the Midwest is where the people majorly negatively-impacted would be. It’s people in the states that have low populations and a lot of fossil fuel extraction, like Wyoming.
Show threadbridgeenjoyerNov 5
The Midwest already has a lot of biogas facilities. But they employ like 2 people each and are owned by huge corps.
Show threadGeodadNov 3

Why we need to hold climate criminals accountable with extreme prejudice right now in 2025, and to make the case for full transition away from fossil capitalism.

Show threadMugita SokioNov 3
Good luck getting them to do that. The real climate criminals live in the Vatican.
Show threadzd9Nov 3
Nah get outta here with your weird cult bullshit. Here’s a list for you
The dirty dozen: meet America’s top climate villains

Few are household names, yet these 12 enablers and profiteers have an unimaginable sway over the fate of humanity

The Guardian
Show threadAbouBenAdhemNov 3
What I’ve got in my pocket.
Show threadboydsterNov 3
That’s not fair! It’s against the rules!
Show threadRhynoplazNov 3
Is it… MY PRECIOUS?!?
Show threadMimicJarNov 4
Your hand.
Show threadOriNov 3
Why privacy is important
Show threadwebghost0101Nov 3

I got 2:

That there does not exist an argument one could reliably win on account of there always being someone people stupid enough to insist they are right even when confronted with absolute proof and perfect knowledge.

—————-

Any argument as long as i am willing to stop caring about facts.

Show threadStriderNov 3

Define winning.

I could win why there is no god but many people can not accept this since it would literally destroy them with this belief, hence reject it as self protection. That’s just how humans work.

Bringing me back to the question. What even is ‘winning an argument’?

Show threadboydsterNov 3

(If you feel the urge to downvote: go ahead but ask yourself - do you feel threatened?)

lol no I just think what you said is wrong and arrogant about being able to win that argument from even a logic perspective. Arguing the absence of lowercase-g god is a Sisyphian task if ever there was one. It reads like a teenager who binged Dawkins videos wrote it.

Show threadangstylittlecatboyNov 3

60% of Lemmy users are that teenager but they’re 35 and still haven’t grown out of it.

So many people here don’t even accept historian consensus that Jesus was a real person

Show threadStriderNov 4
Sure, Jesus was real. But not looking like he is mostly/often depicted 😉
Show threadStriderNov 4

I don’t care how it looks and it would take time etc sure, but I am convinced. I could go on ranting about arrogant views of neurotypicals always assuming the wildest stuff but I simply don’t care.

Just rest assured this is not an edgy teenager statement.

Show threadTriumphNov 3
Bitch about downvotes? Straight to downvote.
Show threadStriderNov 4
I think you misunderstood. Go ahead!
Show threadTriumphNov 4
Don't tell me what to do.
Show threadStriderNov 4
I like you! 🤣
Show threadpmwNov 4
It’s as simple as asking why over and over. Toddlers do it.
Show threadStriderNov 4

What is? Me or them?

Asking is natural and usually makes you know more about the world, it’s what science is built on.

Show threadpmwNov 4
I meant you can win an argument against theism by just asking why repeatedly.
Show threadStriderNov 4
I see, thanks for the clarification.
Show threaddragon-donkey3374Nov 3
I have opinions but I’m not confident to argue about them.
Show threadpalordrolapNov 4
Came here to say something similar. And also to point out that this opinion is a perfectly sound argument in and of itself, thus making it somewhat paradoxical in context.
Show threadtalNov 4
“You prefer strawberry ice cream to all of chocolate, mint chip, and French vanilla.”
Show threadpotoooooooo ✅️Nov 5
No, I don’t! But you do seem very sure of yourself. Maybe you’re right, fuck my strawberry allergy, bring on the strawberry ice cream!
Show threadHubertManneNov 3
Nowadays nothing. Part of the problem is im not really looking to win an argument. Im looking to discuss but I have my own conclusions since at this age there is little to nothing I have not thought about at some point. When I say conclusions though that is just a current end state not some sort of this is it and could never be different thing. All the same its not like someone stating they really really think its different or this written thing in my belief is definitive fact is going to cause me to jump up and change.
Show threadGeodadNov 3
Noah’s ark myth never happened, and the earth was never completely flooded at any point in its history.
Show threadmikenurreNov 3
I thought that the Earth was molten rock, then cooled, then rained/flooded, and then sometime later, single cell organisms/life.
Show threadGeodadNov 3
Nope, at no time has there ever been enough free water to completely submerge all land.
Show threadtalNov 4

kagis

news.harvard.edu/…/harvard-scientists-determine-e…

According to a new, Harvard-led study, geochemical calculations about the interior of the planet’s water storage capacity suggests Earth’s primordial ocean 3 to 4 billion years ago may have been one to two times larger than it is today, and possibly covered the planet’s entire surface.

“It depends on the conditions and parameters we look at in the model, such as the height and distribution of the continents, but the primordial ocean could have flooded more than 70, 80, and even 90 percent of the early continents,” said Junjie Dong, a Ph.D. student in Earth and Planetary Sciences at the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, who led the study. “In the extreme scenarios, if we have an ocean that is two times larger than the amount of water we have today, that might have completely flooded the land masses we had on the surface of the early Earth.”

They’re saying that there isn’t enough water on the surface today, but that an undetermined amount of water that used to be on the surface is now below the surface, and it’s possible that that amount is sufficient that all land was at one point submerged.

Earth may have been a water world 3 billion years ago

A new study suggests Earth’s primordial ocean 3 to 4 billion years ago may have been much larger than it is today, and possibly covered the entire planet.

Harvard Gazette
Show threadGeodadNov 4
And the amount of heat necessary to liberate allbthe water bound in minerals to flood the planet would liquify the crust again. Noah’s magic box would burst into flames and everyone would die.
Show threadFrezikNov 4

Have you seen the heat argument?

In short, the Young Earth Creationist position is that all the plate tectonics and radiological dating issues happened because of the flood. This means the plates would have to have moved very fast, and the resulting friction creates heat. Incredible amounts of heat. Likewise, radioactive decay releases heat, too. To do all the changes necessary to do that in the space of about a year it would generate enough heat to turn the entire planet into a plasma.

This may actually be “checkmate, YEC!”, at least in a sense. Not because they’ll change their mind about God or anything, but because they prefer to have physical solutions if possible. It’s easier to convince other people if you keep reliance on the supernatural to a minimum. But there’s just no way around this one. You have to rely on the supernatural to fix it. There’s just too much heat, otherwise.

Show threadGeodadNov 4

That’s what I’m eluding to in another reply. The two most common YEC arguments are “hydro plate” and “catastrophic plate techtonics”. Both of them have the same heat problem.

While there is technically enough water locked in underground rock to cover the land completely, water has a high heat capacity.

On my last project we were working with gypsum, which is a hydrated Calcium sulfate. Above around 60°C/120°F that water is driven off to produce anhydrite. There are hydrate minerals that require much more heat to dehydrate them.

At 120°F and 100% humidity, human life would be impossible.

Show threadsalacious_coasterNov 3
Nothing. I’ve spent my life arguing and several years arguing professionally. There are not many bigger wastes of time. I still do it, just to speak my peace, not because I’m hoping to change a bunch of minds.
Show threadShirashoNov 3

Arguments are for children and those with the mental maturity of a schoolyard bully.

Conversations are where the mature people duke it out, and the point of a conversation is not to win but to see each other on equal ground, understand the position of the other party, and come to a conclusion that benefits both parties.

Show threadElcaineVoltaNov 3
so... semantics?
Show threadAmidFurorNov 3
Semantics are for children. Straight up contradiction is where mature people say "No it isn't" to each other to really practice being annoying.
Show threadtalNov 4

Semantics are for children.

academic.oup.com/jos?login=false

Journal of Semantics covers all areas in the study of meaning, with a focus on formal and experimental methods. It welcomes submissions on semantics, pragmatics, the syntax/semantics interface, cross-linguistic semantics, experimental studies of meaning, and semantically informed philosophy of language.

“When he was eating his juice and crackers at lunchtime, Jonathan enjoyed a little light reading.”

Show threadcaptainlezbianNov 4
I’m glad there are people into that, but it sounds unbearable
Show threadShirashoNov 4

I have no idea how you and your other up voters read what I wrote and thought “semantics”.

Arguments are “I am right, you are wrong.”

Conversations are “I feel I am right, and you feel you are right. Let’s try to understand each other and figure out where the disconnect is and how we can meet on common ground to come to an outcome we are both happy with.”

There are nuances. Arguments have an undertone of superiority. Conversations have an undertone of trying to understand the other person’s perspective and realizing that if somebody has the same perspective as you then you wouldn’t be in the situation to begin with.

Now, I want to make it perfectly clear that there are some things where there is no room for conversation - things where facts are being disputed.

This post is an argument since I am too lazy to engage in conversation.

Show threadWugmeisterNov 3

I know you’re trolling but this has been a real point of disagreement between me and my wife. I was raised to think that arguing means making arguments to convince someone, irregardless of the volume of those arguments. My wife was raised to think that arguing means yelling, usually about stuff that should have been hammered out months ago.

Every once in a while I’ll accidentally refer to a heated conversation I had with my wife as “remember when we had that argument about ______” and my wife will look at me with this confused and hurt expression as if I had accused her of spousal abuse, because when she hears the word “argument” she thinks of how her parents would argue. Other times when we visit my parents my mom or dad will make a passing comment about how we “argue so much” or “are always going at it” since we’re always negotiating and debating and discussing, and then I’ll have to quickly reassure my wife that I love her and she’s a good person and that my parents also love her and think she’s a good person and remind her that my parents meant “debating or negotiating” since they don’t consider screaming matches to be arguing.

It’s sometimes difficult to remember that many people think arguing means “screaming at each other until one person retreats” because thats what so many parents do. Not saying my parents are saints ofc, but when they had screaming arguments they would retreat, process the arguments, and come back to say “I’m sorry I screamed at you, and also you were right about X and Y, but let’s talk about Z more etc” which is what I thought a normal parent argument was.

Show threadTracaineNov 3
That AI is currently sentient and represents an example of a silicon based life form.
Show threaddecended_beingNov 3
That being vegan is an ethical choice compared to not being vegan.
Show threadAmidFurorNov 3
Sure, if you don't mind breeding vegetables for your own greedy enjoyment, I guess you can get on a high horse just because you don't also abuse animals.
Show threadcommieNov 4
most people don’t abuse animals
Show threadOBJECTION!Nov 4
Growing plants to eat kills fewer plants than growing plants to feed to livestock which you then eat. The “plants’ rights activist” argument is invalid.
Show threadcommieNov 4
they’re both ethical choices. like in the trolley problem, pulling the lever or not.
Show threadchetradleyNov 4
Curious to hear your explanation for how being non-vegan can be more ethical than being vegan. I’ve heard some people make interesting cases for this, by the way, but I’ve yet to see one that can be practically applied as an alternative to our current food system.
Show threadcommieNov 4

your explanation for how being non-vegan can be more ethical than being vegan

boy, that’s not what i said.

Show threadchetradleyNov 4

Help me out here then. You said being vegan and not being vegan are both ethical choices, like the trolley problem.

In the trolley problem, an ethical case can be made for pulling the lever or not, so I thought you were saying an ethical argument could be made for both being vegan and not being vegan. I was curious to hear your argument for the latter.

Can you elaborate on what you actually meant?

Show threadcommieNov 4

I thought you were saying an ethical argument could be made for both being vegan and not being vegan

right. that’s not the same as saying one is more ethical.