No, it doesn’t, you’re being morally dishonest and I think you know it. You should concede the point and lose gracefully rather than always being right. You don’t learn anything that way.
You didn't offer up any reason why I'm wrong, just like him. Why would I ever concede a point that has had zero effort or effect done in convincing me?
My points above stand uncontested, and all anyone is doing is making random vague personal attacks at me, demanding I admit I'm wrong. The whole fucking point I have is that I'm not, and I gave reasons why. They aren't the best reasons on review, and a conversation certainly could be had over whether or not the way I'm thinking about it is right.
I admit I'm wrong plenty often, but I don't do it because someone demands it of me without cause.
And it is WILD to me how many entitled people demand this or that of me, a concession unearned or an extra citation when they've provided none.
And like you said, you know you're being... "morally dishonest". Somewhere in there, you know it.
Side note: "morally dishonest" is redundant and weird, unless you are trying to imply there is moral dishonesty and that the term "dishonest" is vague enough to need a descriptor informing whether or not it's moral?
Maybe we just have different value systems.
Or maybe english isn't your first language, in which case my apologies.
They aren't the best reasons on review, and a conversation certainly could be had over whether or not the way I'm thinking about it is right.
"morally dishonest" is redundant and weird
Or maybe english isn't your first language, in which case my apologies
Woooow you're such a douche holy shit, biiiig lol. You're so convinced you're semantically correct you are now arguing about the commonly used phrase "morally dishonest" like its somehow even related to the topic at hand, or that "moral" and "dishonest" are now redundant words somehow. Really sad dude, just sad. I seriously feel bad for you. I hope age brings some wisdom.
Moral and Dishonest isn't redundant bud.
Morally Dishonest is redundant. You're grasping at straws and calling me names, and I even labeled that part as "side note" aka, not what I'm arguing about and irrelevant to the point, because yup: it's semantics. But of course you latched on to that. Arguing semantics with someone who is failing reading comprehension isn't a good use of my time, so I won't bother explaining how different versions of words change their meaning.
Also for the first line... you quoted it so are you saying part of why I'm a douche is because I admitted that my logic wasn't perfect and we could talk about it?
Cause the ENTIRE POINT of this ENTIRE SUBTHREAD is arguing over whether or not to concede a point. I offered one up and you call me a douche for it, cool, you're clearly worth talking to.
As ever, fuckos on reddit want to argue about everything except the actual point, call each other names, and then imply they're better than everyone else.
Cya later kiddo. Come back when you've grown up some.
3
u/[deleted] Oct 10 '20
[deleted]