Opinion What's the consensus on Ben Shapiro around here?

[Greco_Wiz]

They disagree on a lot of stuff. Sam isn't nearly as right as Shapiro. Also I think Shapiro is a piece of shit. A profiteer of the current political divide nothing more.

Harris isn’t “right” at all. He’s not even center. His criticisms of Islam have just made him a favorite target for social justice enthusiasts.

 

[Raksas]

Harris isn’t “right” at all. He’s not even center. His criticisms of Islam have just made him a favorite target for social justice enthusiasts.

He isn't left either.

 

[Tiny]

Those people are not liberals. They do not support liberal principles. They are marxist cunts.

They would likely disagree with you.

 

[DickSarp]

Why is this thread about a diminutive puke practiced in the art of straw arguments still going on? Now that other total fraud, Sam Harris, is being addressed.

What passes for scholarship or informed opinion these days is sickening. Both of these pukes Shapiro and Harris deserve each other and their degenerate fan bases.

 

[Greco_Wiz]

He isn't left either.

He would disagree

 

[M3t4tr0n]

You do too sugar.

Except my posts are better.

I wonder what his original accounts name was.

 

[hillelslovak87]

They would likely disagree with you.

And I would murk those dipshits with logic, like anyone else.

 

[Pickle Rick]

this guy smacks Ben down HARD

 

[icecoldvovchanchyn]

Cenk Uygur...LMFAO

didnt watch

 

[Bob Gray]

I dont really want to go back through the thread, but I remember it being mentioned something along the lines of Shapiro either never being able to debate someon one the level of Sam harris or how Sam Harris is a much more effective debater. Anyway, they had a bit of a discussion. Feels like he kinda danced circles around Harris, honestly. But I admit I am not a big fan of Harris.



Words Sam Harris actually spoke:


"But even that picture suggests a wider context of minds more powerful than our own that could have evolved or our own future minds."

 

[Viva]

this guy smacks Ben down HARD

Cenk harbors viewership from mental midgets because he portrays himself as an intellectual while using debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous.

Not saying I like Shapiro, but he's more honest than anyone at TYT.

 

[meauneau]

Cenk harbors viewership from mental midgets because he portrays himself as an intellectual while using debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous.

Not saying I like Shapiro, but he's more honest than anyone at TYT.

Can you give us an example of these "debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous"?

Or is your post an example of a debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous?

Please respond.

 

[Viva]

Can you give us an example of these "debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous"?

Or is your post an example of a debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous?

Please respond.

Sure. There are a myriad of tactics he uses that I find dishonest including blatant and plentiful ad homs, shameless strawman'ing, refusing to answer his counterparts questions, and constantly interrupting which is flat out dickish. These are just a handful of examples.

Satisfied? Or would you like me to continue?

 

[meauneau]

Sure. There are a myriad of tactics he uses that I find dishonest including blatant and plentiful ad homs, shameless strawman'ing, refusing to answer his counterparts questions, and constantly interrupting which is flat out dickish. These are just a handful of examples.

Satisfied? Or would you like me to continue?

I would need a concrete example because mentioning a few fallacies and a description of his behaviour as if it were evidence for your claim is itself a debate tactics that even high school students know is disingenuous.

You still haven't given us any reason to accept your claim. For all we know you are using debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous.

 

[Viva]

I would need a concrete example because mentioning a few fallacies and a description of his behaviour as if it were evidence for your claim is itself a debate tactics that even high school students know is disingenuous.

You still haven't given us any reason to accept your claim. For all we know you are using debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous.

You're more than welcome to surf the web to find these examples. Although the Shapiro debate is a good example of this, as well as the Jared Taylor debate. And no, it is not a debate tactic, it's a cut and dry observation.

I've provided reasoning for my opinion, if you disagree that's fine, however the counter arguments you're presenting are a bit of a mess.

I'm not engaging in a debate, or attacking Cenk, or misrepresenting his arguments. I'm merely observing the fallacies he so commonly perpetuates.

 

[meauneau]

You're more than welcome to surf the web to find these examples. Although the Shapiro debate is a good example of this, as well as the Jared Taylor debate.

You could have spared us all of this and just made this suggestion so we could judge ourselves and find out.

Did you know that you can state your opinion about something without arguing by using debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous.

And no, it is not a debate tactic, it's a cut and dry observation.

It is not merely an observation, you adduced to it as evidence for your claim that "Cenk harbors viewership from mental midgets because he portrays himself as an intellectual while using debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous" and that Shapiro is "more honest than anyone at TYT".

I've provided reasoning for my opinion, if you disagree that's fine, however the counter arguments you're presenting are a bit of a mess.

You accused Cenk of "using debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous." When challenged to provide evidence for this you simply clarified your accusation by stating which debate tactics he uses in particular, but never provided the evidence. If anyone is in a mess I'm afraid that is you.

I'm not engaging in a debate, or attacking Cenk, or misrepresenting his arguments. I'm merely observing the fallacies he so commonly perpetuates.

That is not what you are doing. You made an accusation for which you couldn't present evidence. You called him less honest than Shapiro (no evidence for this) and you accused him of arguing fallaciously (no evidence for this/is he the only one?).

You are guilty of what you accuse Cenk of. You made yourself look dishonest and ignorant about argumentation.

Leave Cenk alone.jpeg

 

[Viva]

You could have spared us all of this and just made this suggestion so we could judge ourselves and find out.

Did you know that you can state your opinion about something without arguing by using debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous.


It is not merely an observation, you adduced to it as evidence for your claim that "Cenk harbors viewership from mental midgets because he portrays himself as an intellectual while using debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous" and that Shapiro is "more honest than anyone at TYT".


You accused Cenk of "using debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous." When challenged to provide evidence for this you simply clarified your accusation by stating which debate tactics he uses in particular, but never provided the evidence. If anyone is in a mess I'm afraid that is you.



That is not what you are doing. You made an accusation for which you couldn't present evidence. You called him less honest than Shapiro (no evidence for this) and you accused him of arguing fallaciously (no evidence for this/is he the only one?).

You are guilty of what you accuse Cenk of. You made yourself look dishonest and ignorant about argumentation.

Leave Cenk alone.jpeg

MentalGymnastics.jpeg

Your attempts at pointing out hypocrisy are nonsensical.

I haven't attacked his character, nor am I engaging in a debate, so these assertions are absolutely farcical.

And those debate tactics I, as well as many others, have observed make it difficult to take Cenk seriously.

You're overthinking something quite simple. This is not debate format, so your criticisms aren't valid. You asked for elaboration and you received it. If you disagree, fine. But my statements are in no way a parallel to Cenk's.

 

[meauneau]

MentalGymnastics.jpeg

Your attempts at pointing out hypocrisy are nonsensical.

I haven't attacked his character, nor am I engaging in a debate, so these assertions are absolutely farcical.

And those debate tactics I, as well as many others, have observed make it difficult to take Cenk seriously.

You're overthinking something quite simple. This is not debate format, so your criticisms aren't valid. You asked for elaboration and you received it. If you disagree, fine. But my statements are in no way a parallel to Cenk's.

So you are arguing without knowing that you are arguing... and then you have the balls to claim that "Cenk harbors viewership from mental midgets...". How ironic.

This here is an argument and an attack on his character: "Cenk harbors viewership from mental midgets because he portrays himself as an intellectual while using debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous".

How is it an argument? The word "because" is a premise indicator, it comes after conclusions. If we have a premise and a conclusion we have an argument.

This here is an attack on his character: Not saying I like Shapiro, but he's more honest than anyone at TYT.

 

[Viva]

So you are arguing without knowing that you are arguing... and then you have the balls to claim that "Cenk harbors viewership from mental midgets...". How ironic.

This here is an argument and an attack on his character: "Cenk harbors viewership from mental midgets because he portrays himself as an intellectual while using debate tactics that even high school students know are disingenuous".

How is it an argument? The word "because" is a premise indicator, it comes after conclusions. If we have a premise and a conclusion we have an argument.

This here is an attack on his character: Not saying I like Shapiro, but he's more honest than anyone at TYT.

Again, this grandiose deconstruction of something so simplistic is absurd. You asked a question, and I answered. What about that is so difficult to follow? You're desperately trying to pull the "gotcha" card that you're forgetting this is merely a casual conversation.. not a debate.

And frankly not an attack on his character if it's objectively true.

You really don't believe that TYT spreads misinformation? Because I find that very hard to believe.

 

[meauneau]

Again, this grandiose deconstruction of something so simplistic is absurd. You asked a question, and I answered. What about that is so difficult to follow? You're desperately trying to pull the "gotcha" card that you're forgetting this is merely a casual conversation.. not a debate.

Nothing grandiose or complicated here. It is very simple and obvious, you are guilty of exactly what you accuse Cenk of.

And frankly not an attack on his character if it's objectively true.

But if not true, then it is an attack on his character. And since you provided no evidence to support your claim that he is less honest than Shapiro this itself is a disingenuous tactic, an attack on his character.

You really don't believe that TYT spreads misinformation? Because I find that very hard to believe.

What I believe about TYT is irrelevant to what we are discussing now which is your argument and your attacks on his character to make Shapiro look better than Cenk and anyone from TYT.