meta intellectual dishonesty
i just realized that the one person”s ‘criticism” of me actually counts as met-intellectual dishonesty.
person replying to me: fallacious statement
me: that”s a fallacy
person: oh. you don”t have a rebuttal and you sound young.
me: ur intellectually dishonest
person posting in my tag after i blocked them: zomg! they blocked me bc they can”t handle a ‘friendly” debate. u can”t just say ‘that”s a fallacy” and accuse ppl of being intellectually dishonest. u don”t even know what words mean.
me: wow. now ur being intellectually dishonest about being intellectually dishonest. 🙂
i”ve written before how i”m kind of ‘meh” about fallacy. however, if ppl do want to treat this like a fucking ~debate~ then, yeah, i”ll point it out.
asking me to nonetheless engage and ‘rebut” your fallacious argument is intellectual dishonesty.
why? bc you”ve already lost. ur inability to enter the ~debate~ in good faith has defeated you. then, piling on other fallacies isn”t really going to make me think “hey, this person actually wants a discussion!”
to remind ppl, i don”t owe anyone:
- my time
- my attention
- or anything else