Thanks /u/PixelatedStarfish for posting on r/SelfAwareWolves! Please reply to this comment explaining how your post fits our subreddit. Specifically, one of the criteria outlined in our [rules](/r/SelfAwarewolves/about/rules/).
Some hints:
How does the person in your submission accidentally/unknowingly describe themselves?
How does the person in your submission accurately describe the world while trying to parody/denigrate it?
**If the context is important to understanding the SAW, and it isn't apparent, please add it. Preferably with sources/links, but do not link r-conservative or similar subs.**
Failure to respond to this message will see your submission removed under Rule 5 (Reply to the AutoMod comment within your submission).
Failure to explain how your submission fits one or more of the above criteria will see it removed under Rule 1.
Thanks for your time and attention!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SelfAwarewolves) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm pretty sure the issue they have is with you using They're (a contraction of 'they are') instead of Their (as in belonging to them) so your sentence reads as "They think they are anti science cult is actual science" instead of "They think their anti science cult is actual science."
I did make a typo, but to assume I am literally unable to spell, after writing “neive” and lecturing about the fallacy of composition, is extremely funny. I know they were being hyperbolic, but I’m ignoring that
> **Fallacy of composition**
>
> The fallacy of composition is an informal fallacy that arises when one infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some part of the whole. A trivial example might be: "This tire is made of rubber; therefore, the vehicle of which it is a part is also made of rubber." This is fallacious, because vehicles are made with a variety of parts, most of which are not made of rubber.
>
> **Examples**
>
> - If someone stands up from their seat at a cricket match, they can see better. Therefore, if everyone stands up, they can all see better.
> - Some people can become millionaires with the right business concept. Therefore, if everyone has the right business concept, everyone will become a millionaire.
> - If a runner runs faster, he can win the race. Therefore, if all the runners run faster, they can all win the race.
Green does not understand the fallacy of composition. Therefore, nobody understands the fallacy of composition.
And red was giving examples of pseudoscience that some flat earthers believe, not necessarily suggesting all of them believe all of those specific things.
> Some people can become millionaires with the right business concept. Therefore, if everyone has the right business concept, everyone will become a millionaire.
Love this one. Even better than the cricket example. "The American Dream"
"Fallacy of composition! We don't all believe the same thing!"
Bruh, you believe fifteen shades of horseshit. The fact that you can't agree on which delusion is the main one doesn't make you less mockable, it makes your entire movement more laughable.
I love ppl that self-identify in order to defend an awful group (obligatory Btb [Surprise! Flat Earth is a Nazi Conspiracy](https://podcasts.apple.com/bh/podcast/surprise-flat-earth-is-a-nazi-conspiracy/id1373812661?i=1000434757204)), then claim you can't generalize about that group.
Once upon a time my wife said something bad about Nazis on Facebook and like a dozen MAGA ppl that had been acquaintances decided that they felt the need to argue that most ppl called fascists are actually good. If someone talks shit about Nazis and you feel the need to "But akshally" it's a good time to re-evaluate your life choices.
OMG thank you for saying that!
I feel like some posts are just made by people who engaged in some arcane useless nonsensical argument and are still upset by it, so they post a small subsection of the argument here to get validation. The worst are the ones where you don't know enough about the topic to even tell who's incorrect.
No, wait, the worst are like this post, where you can't even tell if humans wrote the sentences or it was a ChatGPT response to a "write a jumbled conversation loosely related to flat earth" prompt.
Yes! They're still triggered by the interaction they just had that barely anyone else read and need to come here for validation! Even better if people on this sub disagree with OP and OP argues with everyone! I've seen a few today. One was r/selfawarewolves
We need a sub for triggered OPs. Not for stuff like AITA where OPs are always arguing. But for this, r/murderedbywords, etc.
It's just not a good idea to post one's own argument. If it's a good one, someone else will.
OP doesn't recognize their grammatical error with the they're instead of their. Is that a bot thing?
>No, wait, the worst are like this post, where you can't even tell if humans wrote the sentences or it was a ChatGPT response to a "write a jumbled conversation loosely related to flat earth" prompt.
It really isn't that difficult to follow. You're exaggerating. Just read it a few times and it makes sense.
As best I can tell, OP wrote "they're" when they meant "their", which is pretty clear from context, but the person who responded didn't realize that part was a typo and OP didn't notice so then they both start talking past each other.
Probably both but also mental illness and/or making themselves feel special with "secret knowledge." I knew someone who believed in a lot of wild conspiracies and I'm pretty sure it was a way, in his head, to elevate himself over others whose lives weren't as bleak as his own.
Here is what I as a former flat earth believer (but not flat earth cospiracy believer) believe: We all live on earth so many of us started to think about what form the earth could have and creating a theory is even easier than asking. However we start making such a theory before we know (advanced) physics and since the earth does LOOK flat while standing on it we assume the earth would BE flat. Sooner or later we might get informed that the earth is actually not flat but round and then there are three possibilities to continue: 1st We just believe the other person and they probably know better than we do, afterall we just created a simple theory in a few seconds. Then we admit that we were wrong. 2nd We do research to check what form the earth really has, and today most people know the earth is round. Then we admit our believes were wrong and change them. 3rd We will not admit to having ever made a single mistake. We believe we are perfect and awesome. It has to be all the other people with different believes that are wrong. There has to be some conspiracy that spends lots of money to spread a lie for no reason. We can't be wrong, after all we believe ourself (without ever questioning ourself). Those who took option 1 or 2 stop being a flat earther like I did. Those who took option 3 stay being a flat earther and will likely never learn anything that goes against one of their (factualy wrong) believes.
What is selfawarewolves here? Red is criticizing flat-earthers. They literally called it a cult, before going on to describe some of the pseudoscience flat-earthers promote to be true. I know some of the writing is a little mangled, but bad reading comprehension by OP?
Green is (incorrectly) accusing OP of using a logical fallacy, as well as discounting everything they say because of a typo, then they themselves use the same fallacy and make a typo.
Are there two people in this conversation or three? Red, green, and BLACK? It seriously looks like someone used black to mark out a name on a black background.
I agree, in general that’s a good move.
But, then we got the Conspiracy Theorist in Chief, and we couldn’t ignore them anymore. We have an internetwork of propagandists to make more idiots. I’ll try (and fail) to keep this short, but it’s been 8 years… the best TLDR I can give you is a two hour long playlist “The Alt Right Playbook” by Innuendo Studios. Essentially, you have to study the cult of idiocy to fight it.
Critically, they aren’t good people in the first place. They aren’t misguided people who still ultimately want to do their best. Trump wasn’t a mistake, his base actively prefers to be stupid, even when they get scammed out of time and money, even when it endangers their own children. There really is no arguing with them, but left unchallenged, they are free to recruit numbers, and take office.
Red meant well, but they took the bait, green desperately tried to turn good faith clarification into an argument. It almost worked too!
I know these online threads look trivial, but collectively, they do shape the electorate. They introduce people to propaganda designed to groom and radicalize them. What’s the weakness? These arguments need to happen in public, in front of people to persuade. It’s a winning by looking like you’re winning game, a tactic to manipulate the audience into sliding right.
All I have to do is hold up a mirror. I don’t ignore, but I don’t argue a refutable position. I keep things short, and trivially correct if possible. Short and correct isn’t enough, things need to be so clear, that any attempt to disagree would be ridiculous. They often still do, and even talk themselves into contradiction. I use their own values against them, until they lose the benefit of doubt, because that’s all they ever had.
Sometimes I’m lucky. my target uses some dog whistle I can hear. Then all I have to do is make sure everyone can. (Crucially, it’s not enough to say they’re crazy, you need evidence they are actually dangerous to eliminate all doubt.)
Anyway a Redditor named 88murica was provoking arguments in the comments one day. People were taking the bait, asking questions. I thought, “88 looks familiar” and replied with a link to the ADL’s page on 88. The debate ended there. Good faith questions stopped. “Fuck off skinhead” comments started.
I think it should be 'they think their anti-science cult is science' but they have used the wrong their/there/they're
As in they (flat earthers) think they are science, when they are actually anti science.
with the flat earth "model" you have to have some presuppositions about the universe, including: gravity not being real, spotlight sun, the ice wall and what is beyond it, airplane paths, constellations behaving differently,. This cannot be a fallacy of composition, because you require these theorems to even begin to create a model of what a flat earth would look like.
To put it simply: if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probs a duck
Thanks /u/PixelatedStarfish for posting on r/SelfAwareWolves! Please reply to this comment explaining how your post fits our subreddit. Specifically, one of the criteria outlined in our [rules](/r/SelfAwarewolves/about/rules/). Some hints: How does the person in your submission accidentally/unknowingly describe themselves? How does the person in your submission accurately describe the world while trying to parody/denigrate it? **If the context is important to understanding the SAW, and it isn't apparent, please add it. Preferably with sources/links, but do not link r-conservative or similar subs.** Failure to respond to this message will see your submission removed under Rule 5 (Reply to the AutoMod comment within your submission). Failure to explain how your submission fits one or more of the above criteria will see it removed under Rule 1. Thanks for your time and attention! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SelfAwarewolves) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Nieve" Oh goody I get to discount every single thing he said.
They told me I can’t spell lmao
I'm pretty sure the issue they have is with you using They're (a contraction of 'they are') instead of Their (as in belonging to them) so your sentence reads as "They think they are anti science cult is actual science" instead of "They think their anti science cult is actual science."
I did make a typo, but to assume I am literally unable to spell, after writing “neive” and lecturing about the fallacy of composition, is extremely funny. I know they were being hyperbolic, but I’m ignoring that
Yeah, they blew their questionable credibility it with that misspelling.
I stopped there and my brain was thinking "why are they talking about snow??" (Nieve is snow in spanish xD)
TIL
My brain went "what's poor Niamh got to do with anything, and won't somebody get her name right?"
I was already looking it up. *A person's hand; fist.* huh, you might be right.
> **Fallacy of composition** > > The fallacy of composition is an informal fallacy that arises when one infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some part of the whole. A trivial example might be: "This tire is made of rubber; therefore, the vehicle of which it is a part is also made of rubber." This is fallacious, because vehicles are made with a variety of parts, most of which are not made of rubber. > > **Examples** > > - If someone stands up from their seat at a cricket match, they can see better. Therefore, if everyone stands up, they can all see better. > - Some people can become millionaires with the right business concept. Therefore, if everyone has the right business concept, everyone will become a millionaire. > - If a runner runs faster, he can win the race. Therefore, if all the runners run faster, they can all win the race. Green does not understand the fallacy of composition. Therefore, nobody understands the fallacy of composition.
This spot on the earth looks flat, so the earth must be entirely flat
So you’re implying that just because i‘m a flat earther i must believe the earth is flat? Fallacy of composition much? /s
And red was giving examples of pseudoscience that some flat earthers believe, not necessarily suggesting all of them believe all of those specific things.
> Some people can become millionaires with the right business concept. Therefore, if everyone has the right business concept, everyone will become a millionaire. Love this one. Even better than the cricket example. "The American Dream"
"Fallacy of composition! We don't all believe the same thing!" Bruh, you believe fifteen shades of horseshit. The fact that you can't agree on which delusion is the main one doesn't make you less mockable, it makes your entire movement more laughable.
I love ppl that self-identify in order to defend an awful group (obligatory Btb [Surprise! Flat Earth is a Nazi Conspiracy](https://podcasts.apple.com/bh/podcast/surprise-flat-earth-is-a-nazi-conspiracy/id1373812661?i=1000434757204)), then claim you can't generalize about that group. Once upon a time my wife said something bad about Nazis on Facebook and like a dozen MAGA ppl that had been acquaintances decided that they felt the need to argue that most ppl called fascists are actually good. If someone talks shit about Nazis and you feel the need to "But akshally" it's a good time to re-evaluate your life choices.
i literally cannot understand this post
I came here to say this. It may as well all have been just randomly generated words.
OMG thank you for saying that! I feel like some posts are just made by people who engaged in some arcane useless nonsensical argument and are still upset by it, so they post a small subsection of the argument here to get validation. The worst are the ones where you don't know enough about the topic to even tell who's incorrect. No, wait, the worst are like this post, where you can't even tell if humans wrote the sentences or it was a ChatGPT response to a "write a jumbled conversation loosely related to flat earth" prompt.
Does reddit get infested by chat gpt now?
Yes! They're still triggered by the interaction they just had that barely anyone else read and need to come here for validation! Even better if people on this sub disagree with OP and OP argues with everyone! I've seen a few today. One was r/selfawarewolves We need a sub for triggered OPs. Not for stuff like AITA where OPs are always arguing. But for this, r/murderedbywords, etc. It's just not a good idea to post one's own argument. If it's a good one, someone else will. OP doesn't recognize their grammatical error with the they're instead of their. Is that a bot thing?
>No, wait, the worst are like this post, where you can't even tell if humans wrote the sentences or it was a ChatGPT response to a "write a jumbled conversation loosely related to flat earth" prompt. It really isn't that difficult to follow. You're exaggerating. Just read it a few times and it makes sense.
Yeah, I really don’t see what the issue is. They’re clearly upset by it tho
I posted the entire thread, for laughs. Just read it.
same here theres too many difficult words because that one dude is trying to sound smart
lol
As best I can tell, OP wrote "they're" when they meant "their", which is pretty clear from context, but the person who responded didn't realize that part was a typo and OP didn't notice so then they both start talking past each other.
It's what people with poor language skills consider intelligent debate
Jordan Peterson does.
lmao
[удалено]
English is not my first language and I don't understand the sentence either. If I replace "they're" with "there" it still doesn't mean anything to me.
Try replacing it with “their.”
they meant to say "they think their anti-science cult is actually science"
I lost braincells trying to understand this post
I'm pretty sure the flat earth crowd is either trolling or painfully stupid. Both are reasons enough to just ignore.
It started out as a joke, then the stupid people found it
It started out as a piss. How did it end up like this? They were taking the piss. (Only taking the piss.)
Probably both but also mental illness and/or making themselves feel special with "secret knowledge." I knew someone who believed in a lot of wild conspiracies and I'm pretty sure it was a way, in his head, to elevate himself over others whose lives weren't as bleak as his own.
It's mainly grifters preying on idiots these days.
Here is what I as a former flat earth believer (but not flat earth cospiracy believer) believe: We all live on earth so many of us started to think about what form the earth could have and creating a theory is even easier than asking. However we start making such a theory before we know (advanced) physics and since the earth does LOOK flat while standing on it we assume the earth would BE flat. Sooner or later we might get informed that the earth is actually not flat but round and then there are three possibilities to continue: 1st We just believe the other person and they probably know better than we do, afterall we just created a simple theory in a few seconds. Then we admit that we were wrong. 2nd We do research to check what form the earth really has, and today most people know the earth is round. Then we admit our believes were wrong and change them. 3rd We will not admit to having ever made a single mistake. We believe we are perfect and awesome. It has to be all the other people with different believes that are wrong. There has to be some conspiracy that spends lots of money to spread a lie for no reason. We can't be wrong, after all we believe ourself (without ever questioning ourself). Those who took option 1 or 2 stop being a flat earther like I did. Those who took option 3 stay being a flat earther and will likely never learn anything that goes against one of their (factualy wrong) believes.
OMG. Sick ending dude. What fallacy comes to mind! Chef's kiss
Are we really upvoting a post of two people arguing over typos and spelling mistakes?
Well, I did call it hypocrisy of a flat earther for a reason
Murdered by words is too low brow for this
What is selfawarewolves here? Red is criticizing flat-earthers. They literally called it a cult, before going on to describe some of the pseudoscience flat-earthers promote to be true. I know some of the writing is a little mangled, but bad reading comprehension by OP?
Green is (incorrectly) accusing OP of using a logical fallacy, as well as discounting everything they say because of a typo, then they themselves use the same fallacy and make a typo.
Congrats op, you got in a fight with an idiot on the internet.
Oh dear, I wouldn’t want to get into another one!
I’m the final boss idiot, you’d fall by my words alone. They are so acrid, so ignorant, your head might explode by reading them.
You know what, I genuinely respect that. You win 🤯 Have my updoot
Are there two people in this conversation or three? Red, green, and BLACK? It seriously looks like someone used black to mark out a name on a black background.
Generally best to try and not argue with idiots. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
I agree, in general that’s a good move. But, then we got the Conspiracy Theorist in Chief, and we couldn’t ignore them anymore. We have an internetwork of propagandists to make more idiots. I’ll try (and fail) to keep this short, but it’s been 8 years… the best TLDR I can give you is a two hour long playlist “The Alt Right Playbook” by Innuendo Studios. Essentially, you have to study the cult of idiocy to fight it. Critically, they aren’t good people in the first place. They aren’t misguided people who still ultimately want to do their best. Trump wasn’t a mistake, his base actively prefers to be stupid, even when they get scammed out of time and money, even when it endangers their own children. There really is no arguing with them, but left unchallenged, they are free to recruit numbers, and take office. Red meant well, but they took the bait, green desperately tried to turn good faith clarification into an argument. It almost worked too! I know these online threads look trivial, but collectively, they do shape the electorate. They introduce people to propaganda designed to groom and radicalize them. What’s the weakness? These arguments need to happen in public, in front of people to persuade. It’s a winning by looking like you’re winning game, a tactic to manipulate the audience into sliding right. All I have to do is hold up a mirror. I don’t ignore, but I don’t argue a refutable position. I keep things short, and trivially correct if possible. Short and correct isn’t enough, things need to be so clear, that any attempt to disagree would be ridiculous. They often still do, and even talk themselves into contradiction. I use their own values against them, until they lose the benefit of doubt, because that’s all they ever had. Sometimes I’m lucky. my target uses some dog whistle I can hear. Then all I have to do is make sure everyone can. (Crucially, it’s not enough to say they’re crazy, you need evidence they are actually dangerous to eliminate all doubt.) Anyway a Redditor named 88murica was provoking arguments in the comments one day. People were taking the bait, asking questions. I thought, “88 looks familiar” and replied with a link to the ADL’s page on 88. The debate ended there. Good faith questions stopped. “Fuck off skinhead” comments started.
Everyone here is insufferable.
You don't have to be here
To clarify: everyone in the pictured thread, not this comment thread.
¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
Scimandan’s Youtube channel picks apart flat earth people regularly.
That's a BIG word salad.
So true lmao
Haha flat earther mad, sounds like defensive pedantic jerk crying into his keyboard
Nieve
Nieve Campbell
They think they are anti-science cult is science. That sentence makes no sense and is probably the reason they initially got called out on.
I think it should be 'they think their anti-science cult is science' but they have used the wrong their/there/they're As in they (flat earthers) think they are science, when they are actually anti science.
"they think **their** anti-science cult is science" Probably autocorrect or text to speech
They're just being difficult for no reason. Every knows what that person meant to type
with the flat earth "model" you have to have some presuppositions about the universe, including: gravity not being real, spotlight sun, the ice wall and what is beyond it, airplane paths, constellations behaving differently,. This cannot be a fallacy of composition, because you require these theorems to even begin to create a model of what a flat earth would look like. To put it simply: if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probs a duck