Who's the worst person to get in an arguement with?

[Semnae]

Found this on my Facebook news feed today.

It's a shame TV shows and movies don't do crossover specials like comic books do. If you could pick anybody, real or fictional, who would be the most difficult person to win an argument with?

[Proin Drakenzol]

I would be, because I'm never wrong.

[Tatsujin]

I would be, because I'm never wrong.

Perfect human! .... Not.

[kitamesume]

wouldn't it be god? since hes absolute and all...

[Semnae]

wouldn't it be god? since hes absolute and all...

Yes, but he never argues back, so it would be about the same as arguing with a brick.

[AceHigh]

If you could pick anybody, real or fictional, who would be the most difficult person to win an argument with?

Women

[Alyssian]

Honestly, a tiger mom. eg-mostly asians and a few europeans/ rare americans.

Sicne they give out 10 hours piano practise as punishments if you lose, and if you win, they give you 20 hour punishments.

[Nikkoru]

My mother.

She doesn't even have to argue at this point, a glare is sufficient.

[SirSkyRider]

1. My mother.
2. Religious dumbfags.
3. Fanboys.

[kitamesume]

an over-blown egoist professor would be one of the hardest persons to argue with, or rather its suicide to argue with them.

[harpy]

..
2. Religious dumbfags.
..

I would have put them as first

and people who just do not listen what other are saying to them

[Pentium100]

Conspiracy theorists (everything you say against them will be interpreted as "the man" trying to silence them).
Fanboys
The really religious.

What do they have in common? Simple, they believe their idea so much that they will not listen to any argument against it.

Also criminals or violent drunks - you'll get punched for not agreeing with them.

[Scudworth]

Arguing with anybody is a tiring proses that I usually try to avoid.
Mostly because the majority of people think you win an argument by being the loudest or having the last word.

The only true way to win an argument is to win the person over to your side of thinking. Anything less and it's just a heated debate with no resolution.
And winning people over to your side of thinking is seldom worth the effort or even possible depending on the person e.g. Religious dumbfags.
Most of the time I'll just let people be wrong, as long as it doesn't adversely effect me.

[Proin Drakenzol]

As a counterbalance I'm going to throw this out:

The zealously atheist, they're like some sort of unholy combination (haha, I crack myself up) of religious nutjob and conspiracy theorist. And they're generally really, really stupid; like don't actually understand history, politics, the religion they hate (usually Catholicism), the religions that have nothing to do with the religion they hate, or science for that matter.

Semnae is (was?) a good example. Didn't understand that not all religions are the same, not all religious people want to convert him, didn't understand that "string theory" was actually nothing more than a loose collection of semi-related internally consistent mathematical models, etc.

[NeonFlame]

As a counterbalance I'm going to throw this out:

The zealously atheist, they're like some sort of unholy combination (haha, I crack myself up) of religious nutjob and conspiracy theorist. And they're generally really, really stupid; like don't actually understand history, politics, the religion they hate (usually Catholicism), the religions that have nothing to do with the religion they hate, or science for that matter.

Semnae is (was?) a good example. Didn't understand that not all religions are the same, not all religious people want to convert him, didn't understand that "string theory" was actually nothing more than a loose collection of semi-related internally consistent mathematical models, etc.

So true.  In fact I'd say it's the zealously anything.  I hate arguing (or half the time even talking to) anyone who's so stuck in their ways that they won't even concede the possibility that they could be wrong.  Especially when it's something super opinion-based like the religion/atheist argument.  People who super strongly believe anything (even science can be wrong and need to be changed) tend to either be naive or not very smart.  That's my experience anyway.

[bork]

People who believe that the Star News, World weekly news,or Sun is an actual reliable source and worth using in a argument with you.

---
When you're arguing with a fool, make sure he isn't doing the same thing.

[Ixarku]

People who believe in the right wing anti-Obama conspiracy theories and any other related propaganda.  Unfortunately, I have a couple of people like this in my family, who are absolutely rabid in their hatred of Obama, and I finally had to tell them to stop sending me anything whatsoever about politics.  They seem to have this vision that if you're not a gung-ho pro-Republican, then you must be a liberal nutjob who supports Obama's purposeful destruction of the American way of life.
 
OK, I might be exaggerating just a little bit, but there's still no reasoning with them.  I told them on several occasions that I'm not even an Obama supporter, and I don't think they believe me.  At least they stopped emailing me political crap.  But I'm sure I'm going to hear about it the next time I see them at a family get-together.  <sigh>

[shabutie]

I voted for Gordon Ramsay

Because he isn't fictional and I wouldn't have to wait for a writer to come up with a response.

[rostheferret]

The only true way to win an argument is to win the person over to your side of thinking. Anything less and it's just a heated debate with no resolution.

I disagree. I mean, sure that would be the ideal outcome, but since that happens so rarely the objective for me usually rests on mutual empathy; an understanding of why they hold values different to mine. The result with religious nutjobs is the same, they usually can't articulate why they hold their beliefs, nor comprehend why someone else wouldn't.

[bangbus]

i guess you don't wanna argue with someone who burns people forever for a the silliest reasons.