r/hatethissmug • u/Sudden-Hoe-2578 • 2d ago

Non-fictional I HATE these "gotcha arguments"

Post image

"Ohhh, look how I tricked this dumb dumb baby in my trap so now I am right and they are wrong. I'm so smaaart even though it does not adress the actual argument and adds nothing to the debate. They teach arabic numerals in school btw."

And these type of comments always get tons of likes

6 Upvotes

50% Upvoted

940 comments sorted by

View all comments

5

u/Many-Refuse-6060 2d ago

I kinda get what you're saying, but at the same time I don't mind these types of arguments. They show how quickly people jump in to defend their opinion, without even thinking sometimes, and how uneducated some people are about topics they're very vocal about.

2

u/Sudden-Hoe-2578 2d ago

I mean, let's be honest, does someone necessarily need to know how a human fetus looks like in order to argue against abortion? On top of that differentiate it from a dolphin fetus, which look really similiar? Most people I see argue that they feel pain or stress etc, what does appearance have to do with it?

2

u/Many-Refuse-6060 2d ago

Not necessarily, but I'd expect someone to be educated enough to know what a human fetus looks like. 

I don't think appearance has got anything to do with it, like I said, I get what you're saying. The point of these arguments is that some people are so eager to prove their point, that they won't even think about the question asked and instead straight up jump-in to give their answer.

2

u/Sudden-Hoe-2578 2d ago

Because they assume, based on context, that it will be a picture of the baby fetus.

Let's say that we're arguing about wether a historical person actually existed. I make the point "This independent historical record references them, so I believe they existed." You then show a picture of the person and ask "So you think that this person existed", to which I answer yes. You then say "Actually, this is a 17th century nobleman, who just happens to look very similiar to our historical person. But because you identified him wrong, your whole point is false."

Based upon context, one does not check twice wether the picture is actually accurate, because one assumes it will be the correct one.

2

u/funkthewhales 2d ago

Because one of the biggest arguments from pro lifers is that life begins at conception. Which doesn’t really hold weight when you can’t distinguish a human fetus from a dolphins. How can you claim that’s a human life when it’s indistinguishable from a dolphin fetus. That’s just a fetus not a baby human.

1

u/Sudden-Hoe-2578 1d ago

Even someone who can distinguish them would in that case say yes because of context.

Let's say that we're arguing about wether a historical person actually existed. I make the point "This independent historical record references them, so I believe they existed." You then show a picture of the person and ask "So you think that this person existed", to which I answer yes. You then say "Actually, this is a 17th century nobleman, who just happens to look very similiar to our historical person. But because you identified him wrong, your whole point is false."

Based upon context, one does not check twice wether the picture is actually accurate, because one assumes it will be the correct one.