×
top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]ghostlynihilist 14.9k points14.9k points  (371 children)

shows evidence Smart person: Ahhh I didn’t think of it like that

shows evidence Dumb person: No that’s just dumb

[–]Acquiescinit 3543 points3544 points  (85 children)

In theory, an argument between two smart people is always a win for both sides, as they should want to learn from one another.

[–]OrangeFreeman 1066 points1067 points  (39 children)

Yep, the goal of civil debate is not to use the opportunity to call each other assholes but to learn from each other and find a common ground

[–]KaiBetterThanTyson 414 points415 points  (20 children)

Fuck you, asshole.

[–]TanJeeSchuan 192 points193 points  (7 children)

Me too thanks

[–]Jalmorei 68 points69 points  (3 children)

Don’t get cocky. I won’t call you an asshole, pisshead.

[–]maoejo 31 points32 points  (2 children)

Fuck you imma pee all up in ur ass

[–]PM_ME_A_PM_PLEASE_PM 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Nowadays it's more of a conversation in which you try to make your opponent appear like an asshole or an idiot. Usually while being vague or failing to be conclusive with your own evidence.

[–]Markcianito 16 points17 points  (3 children)

I have the high ground!

[–]Penetrator_Gator 148 points149 points  (10 children)

The dumb person wants to be right, the smart person wants to be correct.

[–]PM_ME_A_PM_PLEASE_PM 45 points46 points  (7 children)

I often see the dumb person use semantics as their argument rather than actual meaningful evidence.

[–]lilbithippie 16 points17 points  (2 children)

Watch those trashy day time shows

"technically I didn't cheat because I called her and left a voicemail that we needed a break for our relationship."

Aww yes that will clear with the judge

[–]CockGobblin 88 points89 points  (12 children)

I don't know aboot that. I know a lot of smart people that think the Earth is round and it is impossible to teach them why it is flat.

[–]Mlikesblue 54 points55 points  (2 children)

Those are dumb people.

[–]maoejo 12 points13 points  (1 child)

aboot

Give him a break, he's Canadian. He can't use that word.

[–]MinusculeDragon 12 points13 points  (2 children)

Let's just find a common ground and agree that the earth is horseshoe shaped.

[–]MauPow 9 points10 points  (1 child)

Seems pretty pear shaped to me right now

[–]cheated_on_exgf_ama 24 points25 points  (6 children)

in theory, everything sounds a little profound even when it's simply not.

[–]Avantasian538 3981 points3982 points  (126 children)

Really dumb person: That's just what the government wants you to think man.

[–]New__Math 1647 points1648 points  (74 children)

really smart person:thats just what the goverment wants you to think the goverment wants you to think

[–]pls-pm-furry-yiff 605 points606 points  (59 children)

Really really really smart person: ART IS A LIE! NOTHING IS REAL!

[–]LordKranepool 199 points200 points  (30 children)

[–]Bubbles_Da_Kitten 111 points112 points  (29 children)

The greatest rapper ever and he will weather your weather whether you think he is clever or not, think you’re better, your not. Dont need a sweater, he’s hot.

He is the real G shawty that will really find your G spot!

provided you point him in the general direction

Edit: I misspell a lot

[–]bnutbutter78 35 points36 points  (13 children)

What’s a g-spot?

[–]GnarLeeViJanna 19 points20 points  (1 child)

I think my mom has one in her purse.

[–]lrdwrnr 3 points4 points  (0 children)

i think the 'g' is short for 'good'. The good spot.

[–]YourTypicalRediot 58 points59 points  (1 child)

Genius: How can I twist this into a Karma earner?

[–]mrs0x 22 points23 points  (3 children)

Truly wise and smart person : I know nothing

[–]Greg4581 36 points37 points  (5 children)

Really really really REALLY "smart" person: quotes Rick and Morty

[–]andergriff 33 points34 points  (4 children)

Really really really really REALLY "smart" person: quotes Richard and Mortimer

[–]Account324 15 points16 points  (3 children)

Really really really really really REALLY smart person: quotes Jerry

[–]Whopraysforthedevil 12 points13 points  (1 child)

Welcome to postmodernism! Where the rules are made up, and nothing matters!

[–]____404____ 39 points40 points  (5 children)

Really really smart person: pee is stored in the balls.

[–]altered_nutsack 45 points46 points  (1 child)

Pull that up for me Jaimie

[–]jroddie4 6 points7 points  (3 children)

10000 IQ play: I bet you still think the moon is real

[–]Anonomonomous 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Really dumb person in government: Here, I think I can make it worse.

Yep.

[–]Rafaigon 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Exceptionally dumb person: "Fake news"

[–]backfire10z 121 points122 points  (30 children)

Honestly, I do the first one so I guess you could say I’m smart, but the fact that I do it way too often probably implies that I’m dumb...

[–]Greg4581 149 points150 points  (22 children)

Or maybe you're just ignorant, which is better than being dumb

[–]diamond 68 points69 points  (13 children)

Absolutely. We're all ignorant. No matter how much you know, that is absolutely dwarfed by the quantity of things you don't know. There's no shame in being ignorant. The only shame is in failing to acknowledge your ignorance.

[–]GreenMirage 7 points8 points  (1 child)

You get less dumb the more often it happens though

[–]antman75 10 points11 points  (1 child)

Well, there are basically 2 schools of thought...

[–]just-a-traveler 8 points9 points  (3 children)

what if you are making a dumb argument?

[–]MandelbrotsInHeaven 91 points92 points  (43 children)

shows evidence Dumb person: No that’s just dumb fake news.

FTFY

[–]doobied 35 points36 points  (41 children)

I don't live in the states. Do people actually say 'fake news'?

I thought it was like a meme

[–]hypercube42342 57 points58 points  (15 children)

Yes. I’ve heard it used unironically with some frequency, and I’m not even in a particularly conservative area. Our president and his defenders also use it all the fucking time.

[–]cheekygorilla 33 points34 points  (0 children)

Dumb person that doesn’t research their evidence: Here’s some fake news to show why it’s not fake news

[–]Greg4581 57 points58 points  (24 children)

Very smart person: Actually the evidence you presented explains phenomenon X but is merely correlated to phenomenon Y. Therefore additional evidence is required for your assertion.

[–]Syllellipsis 2986 points2987 points  (61 children)

It's easier to get a smart person to admit you won an argument them.

It's easier to get an objective third-party viewer to decide you won an argument with a dumb person.

[–]The_mango55 890 points891 points  (45 children)

Very true. That's why I don't take arguments to PMs on the internet. If nobody is around to see me win, there's no point arguing.

[–]Singing_Sea_Shanties 329 points330 points  (18 children)

Yes there is! Send me a PM to continue this out of the thread. Please don't actually.

[–]ThePr1d3 69 points70 points  (16 children)

What will we do with the drunken sailor ?

[–]Flacid_Fun69 57 points58 points  (15 children)

Put em in the brig until he's sober

[–]RogueryNight 47 points48 points  (14 children)

Put 'em in the bed with the captain's daughter.

[–]bertiewooster_swgoh 44 points45 points  (5 children)

Shave his balls with a rusty razor.

[–]tmThEMaN 27 points28 points  (4 children)

Put ‘em in a pool full of salty water

[–]Seebass802 29 points30 points  (2 children)

Early in the mornin!

[–]chaser456 11 points12 points  (1 child)

Way hay! Up she rises

[–]vastowen 6 points7 points  (7 children)

That sounds like very, very bad advice

[–]MedvedFeliz 25 points26 points  (6 children)

It's actually nickname for a torture device.

"A sailor would be beaten with the cat o' nine tails, rinsed down with salt water, then put to bed in agony. The 'cat' was kept in the Captain's cabin and called "The Captain's daughter." Hence, "Put him to bed with the Captain's daughter."

[–]Renegadeknight3 6 points7 points  (0 children)

That’s actually really interesting. TIL!

[–]GoabNZ 14 points15 points  (4 children)

That's why I let people be stupid publicly. I don't call it out really at all. The dumb person isn't going to be convinced at all, but a third party is going to see the underhanded tactics, fallacious reasoning, and resorts to insults and decide for themselves.

[–]jeffdujour 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Thanks for letting me be publicly stupid.

[–]GreyJolly 19 points20 points  (2 children)

If 2 people on the internet are arguing but nobody sees them, are they really arguing?

[–]swng 20 points21 points  (0 children)

no one around to see The_mango55 lose

[–]LawlessCoffeh 11 points12 points  (4 children)

I mean I've had people be wrong, flame me while the bystanders take his side and the downvotes speak.

You can't take internet arguments seriously I guess.

[–]hanizen 52 points53 points  (6 children)

more like don't ever start an argument with someone stupid because by the end of it anybody looking on won't be able to tell you apart

[–]Efreshwater5 77 points78 points  (2 children)

Never argue with stupid people. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

-Mark Twain

[–]TrilobiteTerror 4 points5 points  (0 children)

more like don't ever start an argument with someone stupid because by the end of it anybody looking on won't be able to tell you apart

You only have to argue long enough to make the flaws in their argument clear and/or clearly make a counter argument to what they said for third-party viewer to see.

It's important to challenge and correct erroneous views and arguments when they are presented publicly. Letting them go unchallenged is how misinformation spreads.

In the same way that "the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing", I'd say the only thing necessary for the triumph of erroneous arguments and misinformation is for the informed to remain silent.

[–]nameanxiety 1086 points1087 points  (70 children)

I’ve found that dumb people can be impossible to argue with. They discredit your evidence and use their ignorance as a shield.

Source: I’ve argued with a flat Earther in person.

[–]retrorhythms 324 points325 points  (33 children)

Some dumb people just used their relation with you, or even "experience" as evidence. "Because you didn't experience it, you're wrong." Or your evidence is always invalid just because.

Source: My dad thinks you shouldn't eat fruit when you're sick. I bring up 12 articles and three sentence summaries of each. Dad says "why do you always have to talk back to me?" and "You have to know, I know from experience. I lived longer than you. You don't have experience. Stop believing everything you see on the internet."

Later on...

Dad: "See? This article on facebook says you be sleeping from 11:00 PM to 1:00 AM because that's when your liver cleans itself. No wonder you had a [five minute] stomach ache yesterday."

[–]lycanreborn123 165 points166 points  (12 children)

Me: But see, isn't it more logical and efficient to do it this way? We'll save money and everyone's happy about it!

Mom: How dare you talk back to me! Why are you so rude these days?

[–]yoptgyo 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Internet

is the cause of all evils

  • Mahatma Buddha

[–]kamarer 46 points47 points  (7 children)

With parents, it is better to be polite to win their argument in my experience. Also, using people of authority to convince. Quote a passage from Bible/Quran/Torah, quote Dr Oz (or other doctor they looked up). Talk with a normal tone, respect them by not belittling them even if it is annoying and most importantly, you dont have to win the first time round.

It took my family 3 months to convince my mom to get help with her arthritis. We get the rapport throughout this time but not attacking her as much as using compassion and politeness, But it is worth it at the end

[–]pupypup 16 points17 points  (1 child)

Yeah you live with someone every day you can find it pretty freaken easy to disrespect them bc they can't just disown you and stop talking to you forever, unlike with other people.

[–]HideAndSeekChampion 81 points82 points  (1 child)

There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.

Newsweek: “A Cult of Ignorance” by Isaac Asimov, January 21, 1980, p. 19

[–]LaurieCheers 65 points66 points  (3 children)

Right, I like Joe Rogan's analogy: if you're better than someone at wrestling, you can prove it by getting them in a hold and waiting until they tap out. But in an intellectual argument some people will never tap out, because they're too dumb to understand they lost. (or too dishonest to admit it.)

[–]leeman27534 17 points18 points  (1 child)

or it starts to feel like a personal attack, so instead of being about facts, its about whether they did something right or wrong.

[–]dcrothen 96 points97 points  (5 children)

It's called invincible ignorance.

[–]H3LLRAI5ER 28 points29 points  (1 child)

Currently dealing with a similar person in work. Believes dinosaurs are a lie, there are dead babies in pepsi and there were 30ft giants to name a few. Its driving me insane, because logic, reason and fact based evidence are useless against her powers of ignorance.

[–]Emeraldis_ 24 points25 points  (0 children)

You should drink a tall glass of Pepsi while looking him dead in the eyes to see his reaction.

[–]tgrote555 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Same results when you argue with anti-vaxxers

[–]pupypup 9 points10 points  (2 children)

What I've found is that a majority of people (incuding myself at times) fall in the catagory of dumb more than smart.

[–]Chikitiki67 4 points5 points  (0 children)

My favorite are the ones that use stories to prove a point that have nothing to do with what you're talking about.

[–]thekngofharts 564 points565 points  (26 children)

A smart person will see fact and accept it, a dumb person will see fact and deny it ever happened.

[–]KickstandJ 83 points84 points  (6 children)

That's the best way to put it

[–]Between_the_Green 97 points98 points  (5 children)

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

-Aristotle

Edit: quotation marks

[–]Sto0pid81 33 points34 points  (4 children)

"Talk sense to a fool and he shall call you foolish."

-some other greek dude

Edit - I actually used this in a football match (soccer) one off my team mates was arguing with the village idiot on the other team. He was getting annoyed taking to him so I said 'you can't talk sense to a fool mate' I still remember the look he gave me, half impressed, half suprised. The surprised bit was probably because my normal comment would be 'shut up dick head' but I had read a book that week and I guess it stuck...

[–]bananabreadvictory 14 points15 points  (0 children)

A smart person will see a fact a question it, a dumb person will just accept it as a fact particularly if it already fits into what they believe.

[–]Ethanlac 1639 points1640 points  (95 children)

You cannot be reasoned out of a position that you didn't reason yourself into.

[–]KolaDesi 45 points46 points  (3 children)

IIRC psychology said it: belief generated by feelings have to be corrected with a sentimental argument, while that one generated by reason can be corrected with a reasonable argument.

[–]ANGLVD3TH 19 points20 points  (2 children)

There is another option. The best way to argue that is to first get the person to understand why they believe that thing. After they can see that context, generally everything changes. It usually allows them to disentwine the idea from their identity, which is the real core problem. When an idea is tied to their view of themself, any attack on the idea, no matter how logical or emotional, is percieved as an attack on their character, which will usually just drive them to cling to it harder. Sever that connection to their sense of self worth, and boom, people instantly become infinitely more reasonable.

[–]TurnQuack 268 points269 points  (89 children)

That's a cute colloquialism, but I think its false. I wasn't reasoned into my belief in Santa Claus, but I was reasoned out of it.

Edit: ask yourself the following: if belief in Santa qualifies as a belief held through faulty/lower reasoning (which I concede), then what beliefs aren't come to by way of reasoning?

If all beliefs we hold are the product of some reason, however faulty, then what's the point of saying that you can't be reasoned out of a belief not arrived at by reason?

[–]Green_Toe 465 points466 points  (69 children)

You were reasoned into your belief in Santa Claus. Trusted authorities and all popular media established and reinforced your reasoning. As your reasoning capabilities grew, you ultimately reasoned yourself out of the belief.

[–]TurnQuack 140 points141 points  (52 children)

I guess if we expand our definition of 'reason' then yeah you're right. But that would render the saying kinda pointless because then people are 'reasoned' into every belief that they hold

Edit: that -> they

[–]Green_Toe 173 points174 points  (44 children)

The major difference is that you were not indoctrinated into your belief in santa. When your only data points were those presented by your parents and others you had no reason, or even capability, to distrust you had an understanding of Santa Claus moreso than a belief. An entirely reasonable one at that. As that understanding changed you ultimately reasoned that it was actually a baseless belief so you altered your understanding to conclude nonexistence

[–]Neetoburrito33 39 points40 points  (1 child)

How are people not indoctrinated into Santa? Parents, school, and media all push the belief of Santa at early ages of our lives. With your definition I don't think there is any belief someone could have that doesn't fall under having been "reasoned" into

[–]juggernaut8 17 points18 points  (6 children)

What understanding? Kid is told santa exists, kid believes it. The kid doesn't understand anything. He merely held a belief. Later in life he examined that belief using reason which caused him to stop believing in it. His parents taught him to believe in Santa uncritically so of course it's indoctrination, just becuase only his parents did it does not mean it isn't indoctrination.

[–]im_dead_sirius 15 points16 points  (13 children)

What beliefs do you think I wasn't reasoned into, if that is the case?

[–]Green_Toe 39 points40 points  (11 children)

In trying to craft a response I realize your original point was pretty much right. You're ultimately reasoned into any "belief" you ever hold. My demarcation would be that it's more of an understanding than a belief as long as it fits observed data. It becomes a belief when it's held in absence of corroboration or in spite of contradictory information

[–]37899920033 5 points6 points  (2 children)

I think the issue here is the difference between it being reasonable to have a belief and reasoning oneself into a belief.

The first case is applicable to very young children; they soak in and accept information almost without regard to how reasonable it may be because they have extremely limited ability to even begin to measure how reasonable something is. But that's how teaching works at such a young age: we show kids what and how to do things and they accept it. They're sponges and it's entirely reasonable for them to believe just about anything they're taught.

Reasoning oneself into a belief on the other hand, requires the ability to meaningfully reason in the first place. The ability to reason is contingent on being able to think logically. The ability to think logically is in turn contingent on having a basic set of rules and assumptions. At the earliest it's a basic understanding of physical properties of our world/self (ex: if I drop this it will fall, if I touch fire I get hurt, etc.). Once those basics begin to be established, children then turn to accepting rules governing slightly more complicated concepts such as the existence of objects and people that they aren't currently observing. They're told about these things and they accept what they're told, after all there's literally no reason to distrust those words (with caveats for when what they're told displeases them in some way). At a young enough age children are still developing these rules and as such aren't able to meaningfully reason themselves into believing anything, including Santa Claus.

EDIT: Though at what point we can say a person is capable of meaningfully reasoning and no longer simply reacting to the basic assumptions they learned is a bit muddier. I'd guess around the first time they question one of their beliefs.

[–]Green_Toe 6 points7 points  (1 child)

To my point I'd like to caveat on the back of this

...I'd guess around the first time they question one of their beliefs.

Children question Santa Claus extensively and for quite a while before they're disabused of the notion. There is a culture wide conspiracy to maintain the reasonability of Santa for children. Millions in entertainment and advertising in addition to adults maintaining the lie. N.O.R.A.D. even tracks the sleigh. A belief in Santa Claus as a young person is actually the only reasonable conclusion and requires a significant amount of critical reasoning to break away from at an early age.

[–]lameexcuse69 26 points27 points  (11 children)

That's a cute colloquialism, but I think its false. I wasn't reasoned into my belief in Santa Claus...

You got presents, right? That's evidence. Your parents say it wasn't them who did it, so it must have been ol' St. Nick.

[–]fenix_L 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Haha, thats why ur dumb. santa is real.

[–]silverbullet42 358 points359 points  (18 children)

no u

[–]Brandinisnor3s 124 points125 points  (10 children)

I have a friend who says this to everything against him. Its the worst.

[–]dion_o 116 points117 points  (9 children)

Make him an ex-friend

[–]Brandinisnor3s 43 points44 points  (7 children)

I've considered it, but he's like one of the only people I know that have common interests. (Like 4) I just tend to ignore the rest of him.

[–]TheOnePucnhMan 28 points29 points  (5 children)

Do you mean you only have 4 friends with common interests or that you only share 4 common interests with him?

[–]Hosiris42 1905 points1906 points  (62 children)

Yeah the smart dude will accept that he's wrong.. nice shower-thought

[–]AffordableTimeTravel 318 points319 points  (9 children)

Yeah exactly. Yep.

[–]inkBrain 121 points122 points  (7 children)

This is a good comment.

[–]aceintheplace805 77 points78 points  (6 children)

Your opinion is correct

[–]DelTac0perator 49 points50 points  (5 children)

I disagree and nothing you say can change that

[–]YourTypicalRediot 28 points29 points  (2 children)

I'm the devil incarnate and yet I've come to offer you salvation.

[–]edups-401 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Mhm, indeed

[–]backfire10z 94 points95 points  (28 children)

No. The shower thought is wrong and is horrible. I’ll have you know my IQ is a distinct 78, so don’t even try to argue with a genius like me

[–]MizchiefKilz 112 points113 points  (6 children)

Hard to win an argument with a smart person. Impossible to win an argument with a stupid person.

[–]throwawayplsremember 48 points49 points  (3 children)

And the genius creates a platform for people all over the world to argue with one another, then sells advertisement space

And the average just try to make some witty comment and rake in internet points

Can I have some internet karma?

[–]Rand0mName13 246 points247 points  (16 children)

Dumb people usually aren't smart enough to know/admit any wrongness. Excellent shower thought.

[–]89bBomUNiZhLkdXDpCwt 47 points48 points  (14 children)

Case in Point: The Etymology of the word, “Sophomore.”

[–]Rand0mName13 24 points25 points  (13 children)

Enlighten me? Not sure of the etymology here.

[–]89bBomUNiZhLkdXDpCwt 51 points52 points  (12 children)

In Greek, a ‘Sophomore’ is literally a ‘wise fool.’

From ‘Sophia’, meaning Wisdom and ‘Moros’ which is the root for the English word, ‘moron.’

[–]89bBomUNiZhLkdXDpCwt 64 points65 points  (7 children)

The reason why I think that the term Sophomore is perfect for second year university students is because they know just enough to think they are informed/learned but not enough to know how ignorant they still are.

[–]YourTypicalRediot 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Ugh. You idiot. Why do you have to go making sense of things?

[–]Kimbernator 15 points16 points  (2 children)

When you say "wise fool", I think of a person who doesn't know a lot but is wise in the sense that they recognize gaps in their knowledge and remain pliable.

I say this because it sounds like what you're referring to is a person who is foolish but is convinced that they are wise, and I recognize that as a valid interpretation of "wise fool" as well, but it is quite different than my interpretation. What I'm curious about is whether there is something in the etymology of the word "sophomore" that implies one interpretation over the other.

[–]ITookYourGP 124 points125 points  (6 children)

Only when they're wrong.

Plot twist: you're the dumb one.

[–]jbourdea 85 points86 points  (2 children)

Came here to say this. Smart people often bow out of the argument once they realize you are an idiot making you think you won.

[–]X0AN 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I will often just say, that's interesting I hadn't thought of that.

Then I can just walk away from them.

[–]bananabreadvictory 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Fuck yeah, that is how I lose all my arguments, I just don't care if they don't.

[–]nullstring 26 points27 points  (1 child)

And... Please for the love of God, consider this.

The dumb one never knows they are the dumb one. Are you rejecting their perspective because it's illogical or because you're unwilling to reconsider an ingrained principle.

If the person you're arguing with discounts your "facts" then make sure you're not the one being blind.

Also consider that there can be 2 smart people in arguement... But there can be two dumb people too.

[–]xReNi 32 points33 points  (2 children)

I think that one does not win arguments but both involved parties benefit from it somehow. If winning arguments is a priority then the persons involved dont want to give in or "lose".

[–]SquiddySalad 112 points113 points  (15 children)

Pigeon chess

Refers to having a pointless debate with somebody utterly ignorant of the subject matter, but standing on a dogmatic position that cannot be moved with any amount of education or logic, but who always proclaims victory.

Origin:
"Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon; it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory." -- Scott D. Weitzenhoffer (From an Amazon.com book review)

[–]kappakeepo1230and4 32 points33 points  (9 children)

i wonder what it's called when both parties are utterly ignorant on the subject matter

[–]theseus12347 120 points121 points  (8 children)

Politics

[–]PatricksPub 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Fucking perfect. And each one has an endless gaggle of followers ready to blindly accept whatever garbage their marionette of a leader is spewing that day, even if its something they thought they were 100% opposed to the day before.

[–]OrangeClyde 31 points32 points  (2 children)

Someone can be smart but very stubborn.

[–]Uncoolx2 24 points25 points  (9 children)

I want to agree due to sentiment.

The problem, however, is summed up with a Michael Shermer quote:

"Smart people believe weird things because they are skilled at defending beliefs they arrived at for non-smart reasons."

In terms of argument or debate, a skillful defense of your (sometimes non-smart) stance is a display of intelligence.

[–]UpvoteParty2018 24 points25 points  (6 children)

Haha, this whole topic is "Lol, srsly, as a fellow smart person, all these dummies never admit their wrong! Someday, if I'm ever wrong, I'll readily admit it...."

I get why people agree, in general it's probably true. But in my experience even most smart people don't really admit defeat in the instance of argument. Usually absolute best you'll get is "hmmm, I dunno...". They maybe next time you talk about it they'll have come around.

[–]Metalbruhhh 5 points6 points  (2 children)

Yea but even hmm I dunno is something you will NEVER hear a dumb person say.

[–]Sylvester_Scott 51 points52 points  (20 children)

Well, there are basically 2 schools of thought...

[–]OneGuy82 53 points54 points  (15 children)

Fact: Bears eat beets.

[–]sendmeyourdadjokes 18 points19 points  (13 children)

which bear is best?

[–]TheJenkinsComic 19 points20 points  (12 children)

What kind of question is th-- "False."

[–]PapikeRWF 18 points19 points  (11 children)

Black bear

[–]sendmeyourdadjokes 19 points20 points  (6 children)

well thats debatable

[–]Cyber_Kiran 14 points15 points  (2 children)

Bears, beets, battlestar galactica

[–]justAguy2420 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Identity theft is not a joke Jim

[–]mochigames59 3 points4 points  (1 child)

there are basically two schools of thought

[–]Aperture_Creator_CEO 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I suppose that is at least one

[–]Unkleruckus86 22 points23 points  (3 children)

1 shower thought followed by 100 comments explaining why it's true.... I like it.

[–]xXStarupXx 38 points39 points  (2 children)

An argument is a team effort, you are working together to find the correct answer, not fighting against the other person.

[–]Fjornen 6 points7 points  (0 children)

beats eachother senseless I NE'd a bit thinking of that reality.

[–]open_door_policy 40 points41 points  (13 children)

My all time favorite argument was with a very smart ex:

Me: "We should get a bidet."

Other: "I think bidets are silly."

Me: "Ok, imagine this scenario. You've gotten poop on your arm. You have a roll of toilet paper but no running water. How many wipes would it take before you'd consider your arm clean?"

[Thinking]

[Furious Thinking]

Other: "We should get a bidet."

[–]Tetrisaur 24 points25 points  (0 children)

If you're getting it on your arm I think toilet- training is required over a bidet.

[–]Mr_Italics_Man 3 points4 points  (4 children)

Ok ive heard this exact argument from no less than 3 people now. This has to have been from something.

[–]314GeorgeBoy 4 points5 points  (1 child)

The fat cats at BidetTM are.trying to take control of the worlds toilets, but we won’t let them. #toiletsriseup

[–]tree_fitty513 195 points196 points  (29 children)

Einstein: Never argue with a stupid person. They will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

[–]Slick_Willy42 140 points141 points  (20 children)

That's either Mark Twain or George Carlin. Not Einstein.

[–]SirHerald 127 points128 points  (6 children)

George Einstein

[–]yourkidisdumb 50 points51 points  (4 children)

Pretty sure it was Mark Carlin.

[–]NotObviousOblivious 37 points38 points  (3 children)

It was Michael Scott you fools

[–]Slick_Willy42 23 points24 points  (1 child)

Let's post this on r/DunderMifflin for a whole 45 karma

[–]YourTypicalRediot 6 points7 points  (0 children)

And/or let's just chill on this.

[–]VidE27 16 points17 points  (6 children)

Mark Twain quote. Also Einstein was quite humble and I have never read anywhere where he refer someone as stupid

[–]Oriolous 15 points16 points  (3 children)

"Two things are infinite: The universe and human stupidity. And I am uncertain of the universe." -Albert Einstein

[–]VidE27 2 points3 points  (2 children)

That has never been conclusively proven that he said that

[–]AllTimeLoad 11 points12 points  (1 child)

Twain id also credited with saying, "It is easier to fool a man than to convince a man he's been fooled."

[–]BAC_Sun 4 points5 points  (1 child)

It was definitely Abraham Lincoln’s first tweet

[–]redhighways 23 points24 points  (9 children)

Reddit life lessons. The amount of times I’ve tried to have a debate on here, it always descends into weird babbling about how I don’t understand logic, or name calling. I’m not trying to change anyone’s mind. But I think a calm dialectic can teach both people, without even reaching any conclusions. Cognitive dissonance is a bitch, though.

[–]folxify 19 points20 points  (0 children)

I would imagine it's easier to win an argument with a smart person if you are objectively right, otherwise I'd think the smart person would argue their point through. What if with people are smart? More shower thinking required.

[–]jay_emdee 8 points9 points  (1 child)

It’s definitely a lot more fun to argue with someone who is intelligent.

[–]SoulsBorNioh 8 points9 points  (6 children)

Nah. I know some smart people against whom it's impossible to win arguments even when they're totally in the wrong. Likewise, I know some people who are dumb as a nail but still admit it when they're shown how they're wrong.

[–]Picaronaut 20 points21 points  (10 children)

Disagree: a smart person(or person who thinks they are smart) who likes to argue will rarely give in. A dumb person will let you know you've won by resorting to violence

[–]Small_Bang_Theory 19 points20 points  (3 children)

A person’s opinion of their own intelligence is not an accurate depiction of it.

[–]Pedurable_potato 12 points13 points  (0 children)

It's easier to repost an incredibly old, overused showerthought than come up with your own.

[–]E_Chihuahuensis 11 points12 points  (2 children)

Person A: What about X?
Person B: Explains X
Person A: Ok then but what about Y?
Person B: Explains Y
Person A: Oh okay... but what about X?

[–]-aurelius 4 points5 points  (0 children)

"Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"

[–]wewlad11 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Sort of, but sort of not. A dumb person may be more difficult to convince, but a smart person is likely not going to bring an argument with such obvious holes in it as the dumb person. The easiest may in fact be an average person

[–]Lancalot 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The point of an argument is to get to the truth, not put forth your agenda

[–]JackVowles 5 points6 points  (2 children)

Neil "Ya Boi" DeGrasse Tyson even said: "If you argue with someone for longer than 5 minutes, youve both lost.".

[–]Sportsman1984 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Does anybody ever really win an argument?