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

[megido-rev.M]

You're confusing a rational debate with a contentious verbal or written altercation in which the words are irrelevant. Outside of arguments from emotion, there are arguments of opinion -- these are most of them --in which case one cannot be wrong however vehemently it's implied.

I'm not comparing anything let alone rationality and altercation. There's not much difference between arguing and debating aside from the fact that the latter is regulated in order to abide to strictures.

I hate it when that happens.  Because then there's no way you can "prove" that what they're saying is wrong, they have "evidence" to the contrary.. even if you know why it appeared that whatever they're saying is true works.

Proof needs to be reproducible but people just don't seem to understand that..

They're always so damn smug about it too.

I remember participating in political chatroom discussions during the second Iraq war and its preamble. Some of the more unreasoning anti-war proponents and the hawkish warmongers were treating the WMDs as if they were an article of faith to be accepted or rejected blindly. Every false report of WMDs which came out and every time those reports proved false brought with them a renewed wave and eventual backlash of sickening self-satisfaction and hostility. Each side nodding sagely to one another and pondering what fools these mortals be on the other.

Either way, it was infuriating. The issue was important objectively, and both sides had reasonable grounds for doubt,  but in the end it was just an excuse to be a complete douche to people who didn't share your worldview. These arguments were just window dressing for a deeper personal malignancy coupled with masturbatory tendencies.

I hear you. Weak-minded interests and lacking of desire for true proof => wastes of time.

[NeonFlame]

(click to show/hide)

You're confusing a rational debate with a contentious verbal or written altercation in which the words are irrelevant. Outside of arguments from emotion, there are arguments of opinion -- these are most of them --in which case one cannot be wrong however vehemently it's implied.

I'm not comparing anything let alone rationality and altercation. There's not much difference between arguing and debating aside from the fact that the latter is regulated in order to abide to strictures.

I hate it when that happens.  Because then there's no way you can "prove" that what they're saying is wrong, they have "evidence" to the contrary.. even if you know why it appeared that whatever they're saying is true works.

Proof needs to be reproducible but people just don't seem to understand that..

They're always so damn smug about it too.

I remember participating in political chatroom discussions during the second Iraq war and its preamble. Some of the more unreasoning anti-war proponents and the hawkish warmongers were treating the WMDs as if they were an article of faith to be accepted or rejected blindly. Every false report of WMDs which came out and every time those reports proved false brought with them a renewed wave and eventual backlash of sickening self-satisfaction and hostility. Each side nodding sagely to one another and pondering what fools these mortals be on the other.

Either way, it was infuriating. The issue was important objectively, and both sides had reasonable grounds for doubt,  but in the end it was just an excuse to be a complete douche to people who didn't share your worldview. These arguments were just window dressing for a deeper personal malignancy coupled with masturbatory tendencies.

I hear you. Weak-minded interests and lacking of desire for true proof => wastes of time.

Oh totally.  It's even worse when they start attacking what you're saying when they have no clue what they're talking about.

That always gets me angry and then I can't argue properly and end up having to walk away before I sound like an idiot.. you just can't argue with people like that.

[megido-rev.M]

(click to show/hide)

You're confusing a rational debate with a contentious verbal or written altercation in which the words are irrelevant. Outside of arguments from emotion, there are arguments of opinion -- these are most of them --in which case one cannot be wrong however vehemently it's implied.

I'm not comparing anything let alone rationality and altercation. There's not much difference between arguing and debating aside from the fact that the latter is regulated in order to abide to strictures.

I hate it when that happens.  Because then there's no way you can "prove" that what they're saying is wrong, they have "evidence" to the contrary.. even if you know why it appeared that whatever they're saying is true works.

Proof needs to be reproducible but people just don't seem to understand that..

They're always so damn smug about it too.

I remember participating in political chatroom discussions during the second Iraq war and its preamble. Some of the more unreasoning anti-war proponents and the hawkish warmongers were treating the WMDs as if they were an article of faith to be accepted or rejected blindly. Every false report of WMDs which came out and every time those reports proved false brought with them a renewed wave and eventual backlash of sickening self-satisfaction and hostility. Each side nodding sagely to one another and pondering what fools these mortals be on the other.

Either way, it was infuriating. The issue was important objectively, and both sides had reasonable grounds for doubt,  but in the end it was just an excuse to be a complete douche to people who didn't share your worldview. These arguments were just window dressing for a deeper personal malignancy coupled with masturbatory tendencies.

I hear you. Weak-minded interests and lacking of desire for true proof => wastes of time.

Oh totally.  It's even worse when they start attacking what you're saying when they have no clue what they're talking about.

That always gets me angry and then I can't argue properly and end up having to walk away before I sound like an idiot.. you just can't argue with people like that.

Fortunately I never need to run into such situations. Although at one point which I did, I rerouted their words against them and then preemptively countered nearly everything else: fun stuff.

[Verslie]

Anyone who watches anime is usually impossible to reason with.

[NeonFlame]

Anyone who watches anime is usually impossible to reason with.

I see what you did thar.

[vicious796]

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

Women

Any and all of them. I don't know why the thread continued after this.

[F1ForFun]

Theists.

[Nikkoru]

I've decided, after much debate.

The worst person to get into an argument with is yourself.

[megido-rev.M]

I've decided, after much debate.

The worst person to get into an argument with is yourself.

"I am thou, and thou art I"

[fohfoh]

Generally people who don't listen at all as harpy said oh so long ago... Girlfriends fall into the category.

So Sherlock Holmes... who would just argue cordially with you and likely get you in a situation that will almost kill you
Gordon Ramsay... someone who would just yell at you. (He still listens and if you say something stupid he'll tell you to go away)
Sheldon... who would just annoy the fuck out of you. He won't actually listen to you.
House... who will just reply in a string of sarcastic remarks...

It's about your personality I guess.

[gamesfreak26]

Generally people who don't listen at all as harpy said oh so long ago... Girlfriends fall into the category.
...

So do boyfriends as I so recently found out...

Also, people who, when you're explaining something, keep asking you questions about things you've just explained to them.  That gets really annoying - fast...

[i-cypher]

I would say psyren, and how I wish he was still around, but that's just me.

[Fatsopunk]

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

I would skip the first one myself, but religious people and fanboys, oh my...

[IzzyData]

Just don't be opinionated and hold onto false ideas and it doesn't matter who you get into an argument with. Only argue for things that you can prove/verify and then you can't ever be wrong.

It's worse to belief something that isn't true than to not know.

The reason these 4 people are hard to argue against is just because they are right. So it isn't really the person, just what you are arguing for.

[Antares16M2]

The really religious and dont know what they are talking about and dont know about christian history but continue speaking their fallacies.

[kitamesume]

a stone.

[Ixarku]

a stone.

How so?  I've always managed to dazzle rocks with my wit and logic.  Can't you do the same?

[kitamesume]

^ its like talking to a hand LOL.