If you don't participate in this bit idea that makes you a big ol doodoo head (that's an ad homimen so you automatically win the argument)
No I got it, sorry if that wasn't clear
But I feel like my naturalistic fallacy bit flopped for real
Appeal to emotions you lose (I don't think I can keep this bit up how the heck do libs do it)
Getting opinions from sucking up the msm trash means spitting them back out is more of a pressure release than something they must struggle to maintain
that's a nice fallacy fallacy. you posted an insult not an ad hominem
EDIT : Wow! I didn't expect this to be my most upvoted comment!
Edit: Thanks for giving
money on my behalf kind stranger
I am a secret lib the way I like the response, "that's a good point, but what's your bench press?"
The real power move is telling them informal logical fallacies aren't real.
Libs cannot understand the difference between ad hominem and an insult
For reference.
Ad Hominem: You're stupid and so your argument is stupid
Insult: Your argument is stupid and so you're stupid.
Or also, Insult: your argument is stupid. On an unrelated note, you're stupid.
I always find it so funny when they call “whataboutism” a fallacy at all. They don’t even seem to know what a fallacy is and yet love the word
I was accused of using a straw man fallacy just last week on reddit because I said someone could go a single meal without eating animal protein and be perfectly fine.
I'm not keen on all the rhetorical fallacies that exist but simply retorting to an argument by screeching "XYZ FALLACY" is no way to live your life. And even if you successfully recognize that someone uses a fallacy, so what? That doesn't win an argument. Like, tell me why someone wouldn't be able to survive a meal without animal protein ffs.
People have no argument against veganism so they will always resort to accusing the opponent of a fallacy or of lying or of being a racist
It's the same energy as the reddit users that go all the way to /r/vegan just to post counterarguments on like any post or say shit like "steak tastes good" in order to own the vegoons. Then they immediately throw a hissy fit about vegans shoving their beliefs down their throat.
Like, I'm still a baby vegan or whatever, but even in the beforetimes, I saw a substantially greater number of non-vegans being aggressive towards vegans than the other way around. Like, we get it Chad, bacon is amazing, and you need cow titty juice because protein is super important to you and there is no other way you could get an adequate amount.
Sorry about the mini rant lol.
I don’t know if I’m still considered a baby vegan since I’ve been vegan for 3.5 years now but I never notice these types in real life. Like even if I talk to Republican family members, none of them seem to be (openly) anti-vegan and I always think these types have to be very very very very terminally online
I can agree they seem more online.
When I originally went vegetarian before going full vegan I got shitty comments from 2 if the people I told but that's anecdotal.
I don't know how long ago you became vegan or vegetarian but my assumption is that this way of thinking (and acting) was more common at some point in the past
My main argument against veganism is I bet grassfed Nazis taste lovely
And grassfed colonizers like the one racist who said "they can eat grass" when native people were starving, then he got killed and grass was shoved into his mouth when there was an anti colonial uprising.
The only problem I have with this is that Nazis don't even deserve to eat grass. If we must feed them, feed them the lowest quality corn leftovers possible.
Additionally, if anyone calls out a fallacy using its Latin name, bully them for being even more insufferable nerds for using Latin.
The concept of an 'informal fallacy' and its consequences have been a disaster for the human discourse.
?