You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
1
Maskurbator on scored.co
1 month ago1 point(+0/-0/+1Score on mirror)1 child
The goal is to win over the audience. You do that usually by catering to the dumbest common denominator. This means simple concepts. Five cent words with few syllables. It means ask rhetorical questions or questions that can't be concisely answered.
Good practice: don't use their framing. Challenge their framing itself. Use the audience as a bludgeon. "Can you define the Holocaust for the audience and me?"
Put your opponent on tilt. Best advice ever. Get them mad. Get them flustered. But at the same time always keep your cool. The more relaxed you look, the better. Ask rude/pointed questions in an innocuous/innocent way.
> "Can you define the Holocaust for the audience and me?"
I'd say "Holocaust? I've never heard of it. Do you mean the "Holodomor"?" - "Or perhaps the gulag system created by the jewish Bolsheviks, which enslaved and murdered tens of millions of White Christians?"
> Get them mad.
Yes. I see it as an art - two people debating, doing their best to make the other look stupid. There is no way I would ever fall into anger - in fact I'd rather look baffled, laugh, look at them bewildered as they say something nonsensical. But I wouldn't let them get away with it.
I saw so many debates, and none of them were truly satisfying. They required some indirect understanding of something - but I want them to go by having them deal devastating punches to the face. "I can prove that you are an idiot based on what you said here."
> You do that usually by catering to the dumbest common denominator.
I don't think that's the key, as that would make you sound stupid as well. Jordan B. Peterson in his prime wasn't about expressing stupid ideas - in fact people appreciated the profound way he expressed himself, and he did it in a way that properly conveyed the information without needlessly "over-intellectualizing" it (aka make it incomprehensible).
I personally prefer abstractions to be guided by the concrete, otherwise people might have varying interpretations of it. And I dislike obtuse combinations of words. If I give something a title, I want it to be expressive in itself rather than requiring explanation.
Good practice: don't use their framing. Challenge their framing itself. Use the audience as a bludgeon. "Can you define the Holocaust for the audience and me?"
Put your opponent on tilt. Best advice ever. Get them mad. Get them flustered. But at the same time always keep your cool. The more relaxed you look, the better. Ask rude/pointed questions in an innocuous/innocent way.
I'd say "Holocaust? I've never heard of it. Do you mean the "Holodomor"?" - "Or perhaps the gulag system created by the jewish Bolsheviks, which enslaved and murdered tens of millions of White Christians?"
> Get them mad.
Yes. I see it as an art - two people debating, doing their best to make the other look stupid. There is no way I would ever fall into anger - in fact I'd rather look baffled, laugh, look at them bewildered as they say something nonsensical. But I wouldn't let them get away with it.
I saw so many debates, and none of them were truly satisfying. They required some indirect understanding of something - but I want them to go by having them deal devastating punches to the face. "I can prove that you are an idiot based on what you said here."
> You do that usually by catering to the dumbest common denominator.
I don't think that's the key, as that would make you sound stupid as well. Jordan B. Peterson in his prime wasn't about expressing stupid ideas - in fact people appreciated the profound way he expressed himself, and he did it in a way that properly conveyed the information without needlessly "over-intellectualizing" it (aka make it incomprehensible).
I personally prefer abstractions to be guided by the concrete, otherwise people might have varying interpretations of it. And I dislike obtuse combinations of words. If I give something a title, I want it to be expressive in itself rather than requiring explanation.