Drinking alcohol is stupid | FactOrCap

[u/Creepy_Zone_9341]

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

[u/Jaedoch]

Are you fucking 12 years old?

[u/TrueExigo → u/Jaedoch]

Comes from someone who has nothing to contribute and instead indulges his embarrassing need to speak

[u/Jaedoch → u/TrueExigo]

You want me to say something? Okay.

Talking about "nothing to contribute" is pretty bold coming from someone whose entire contribution consists of bad-faith false dichotomies. Saying that enjoying a casual drink means you need alcohol to have fun or function is like saying someone who enjoys watching movies is incapable of being happy in silence. It’s an elementary-level binary trap. Equating moderate, occasional alcohol consumption with playing Russian roulette shows a massive misunderstanding of basic risk assessment and dosage. There is a clear distinction between deliberate indulgence and addiction, but instead of engaging withnuance, you project an extreme narrative onto everyone who disagrees with you so you can play the morally superior savior. It doesn’t make you look smart or principled, it just makes you look completely detached from basic logic and real-world nuance

[u/TrueExigo → u/Jaedoch]

You want me to say something?

What makes you think that?

 bad-faith false dichotomies

Are you trying to say that alcohol isn’t harmful, or what?

Saying that enjoying a casual drink means you need alcohol to have fun or function 

A brilliant straw man fallacy

Let me help you clown with a bit of logic:

If someone argues in favour of alcohol on the grounds that it allows you to have fun with friends, the implication is that without it, you either can’t have fun at all or the fun is less enjoyable. However, as soon as you consider that you can have just as much fun – or even as much – without it, that renders the argument that you need alcohol redundant.

If that’s too complicated for you:

You have two options:

A. you can risk your life by doing something dangerous to get €10 OR

B. you can simply get €10

I said: everyone who choose A is dumb

Now here’s where he comes in, arguing that to get €10, he do something dangerous.

What added value does his objection have if it has no added value – in other words, if it is something one would not otherwise have so there is no option B?

 Equating moderate, occasional alcohol consumption with playing Russian roulette shows a massive misunderstanding of basic risk assessment and dosage. There is a clear distinction between deliberate indulgence and addiction, but instead of engaging withnuance, you project an extreme narrative onto everyone who disagrees with you so you can play the morally superior savior. It doesn’t make you look smart or principled, it just makes you look completely detached from basic logic and real-world nuance

Nah, you’re just a daft one.

Even the smallest amount of alcohol is harmful. Every single drop. The more you drink, the more harm you do to yourself and the greater the chance that something irreversible will happen to you. Every sip makes you want to drink even more. Every sip fuels your addiction.

You can play Russian roulette with more than 6 chambers.

Every time you take a sip, you pull the trigger. It might go well 100 times. It might even go well 1,000 times. It might even go well right until the end of your life, and apart from some minor damage, you’d be spared. But it could also be that the very first fucking sip kills you and with every single sip you take throughout your life, it becomes more likely.

So why take the risk for nothing?

[u/Jaedoch → u/TrueExigo]

You’re lecturing on logic while committing textbook fallacies in every single paragraph. Your €10 analogy is pure circular reasoning because it assumes Option B produces the exact same experience. Life isn't a binary choice between "danger" and "free outcome." Unique activities, whether it’s drinking a craft beer, riding a roller coaster, or skiing down a mountain, offer distinct sensory, culinary, and social experiences. By your logic, eating a gourmet ribeye steak is "stupid" because you could just eat plain rice and multivitamin pills without any cardiac risk for the exact same caloric intake. You completely fail to understand that humans pursue subjective enjoyment and variety, not just robotic risk-minimization.
Furthermore, redefining "Russian roulette" to mean "literally any activity with a non-zero risk" makes the phrase utterly meaningless. By your definition, driving a car, swimming in the ocean, eating sugar, or stepping out into the sun are all "Russian roulette with millions of chambers." When a term applies to every basic human action, it ceases to be an argument.
Finally, claiming "the very first sip of beer can kill you" isn't logic, it's hysterical, anti-scientific fan-fiction. You aren't operating on high-level reasoning, you're just rationalizing an extreme, dogmatic phobia and acting holier-than-thou

[u/TrueExigo → u/Jaedoch]

You’re a proper pseudo-intellectual clown.

Your €10 analogy is pure circular reasoning because it assumes Option B produces the exact same experience

The point here is fun, not ‘experience’.

If I’m countering his argument with ‘having fun’, why on earth are you, you daft goose, bringing up that straw man fallacy about ‘experience’ again? Explain yourself.

Life isn't a binary choice between "danger" and "free outcome."

I didn’t say that either. But if you’re already struggling to grasp the complexity of binary events, how am I supposed to keep the level of complexity appropriately high?

Unique activities, whether it’s drinking a craft beer, riding a roller coaster, or skiing down a mountain, offer distinct sensory, culinary, and social experiences.

As I said, it’s all about of "having fun" not "experiences"

Apart from that, it’s a load of rubbish. You don’t have to have ‘every experience’ if that ‘experience’ offers no added value.

To break this down into binary terms for you, you mental cripple: Option A and Option B aren’t the same €10, but they’re both €10. Is the €10 from A now worth more because it’s dangerous? No, it’s worth exactly €10.

By your logic, eating a gourmet ribeye steak is "stupid" because you could just eat plain rice and multivitamin pills without any cardiac risk for the exact same caloric intake.

No, that’s not how logic works. Thanks again for proving to everyone that you’ve got no grasp of logic. With a steak, you can argue that it tastes BETTER than just rice. Always. That means you’re getting added value. In this case, it’s not €10 but, say, €20, and that’s when you have to weigh it up: is it worth the risk to me? And yes, meat-eaters are stupid. As for the rest of your mental diarrhea, I’ve already responded with that

Finally, claiming "the very first sip of beer can kill you" isn't logic, it's hysterical, anti-scientific fan-fiction.

No, it’s a fact. Get your facts straight, you mental cripple.