Negative/toxic people

>>17382080
Pokemon Go is for losers. Go get a life and listen to that guy for once, he´s right about that shit game /thread

>>17382541
>game that makes people go out FOR ONCE is for losers
Fucking useless couch potatoes

>>17382080
Who fucking cares? The dudes an asshole. Those aren't unique or rare. There's no special hidden meaning or deep reasoning.

>>17382541
If you don't get satisfaction from collecting digital monsters, just don't play the game. Why the anger at those who do?

>>17382080
>- do you know accurate resources on those people?
>- can you enlighten me about that subject?
What, people who talk shit? People who hate on shit because it's popular? There have always been people like that, anon. Just don't worry about them.

>>17382541
This.
It is a game for little kids and stupid millennials.
Live your life.

>>17382080
You sound hypocritical for judging him. And so do I for judging you.

How can we stop this cycle of judgement and live in harmony?

Op i think i know what your trying to say..

Everytime i think about that i get emotional really.... Bad

Its like memes came to life

Excuse me

Its like saying that it is to depressing to see them play and reinact...


Im sad again
.i feel loke killing them

Excuse me

Now i want to kill myself

Excuse me

This is were serial killers comes from


:,(

>>17382541
>>17382589

Your life is made of little shits that are stupid. You always like shit that look useless to others.
Eating organic, go drink a beer, calling people and having fun, playing your game (COD, battlefront, wow, LoL, pokemon).
You always have someone to say that's useless.
>>17382554

I care, as i like to convince people, win my arguments without fallacies. I usually do, as i carefully detail my reasonings.
I'd like to be able to convince everyone by calmly discussing, like it's a philosophical goal.
Most of the times, it works.
But this case puzzles me.

>>17382569
I know you always have assholes, but as a semi-asshole myself, i like to rekt them, i like to argue (i have my reasons, that could be described as "maieutics training").

I explained to one that bullying people passionate for shit (brooonies) doesn't make you better, but mostly showed how insecure you were.

But this one is particular, as he throws insults and seems to have a very short attention span.

Didn't Freud study shitposters?

File: 1464531729478.jpg (1MB, 1361x2048px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1361x2048px

>>17382974
If you see in a day three bearded men, each shouting in the street.
Then in the evening you see another bearded man, what do you expect from him?

It is natural to judge, as you will associate some behaviors with observable traits.
Women have a higher pitched voice than men. Shorter men tend to be pricks. Beautiful girls seems more demanding.

And because behavior-appearance are somehow linked, we evolved to notice that and foresee a stranger's possible behavior.

As you meet people, you define your own modelization of a human being.

So you have judgement, you have racism, sexism.

We can't stop that, as it is a innate behavior, that's essential to our survival. We evolved to see animals with canine teeth as potential threats.

Ignore people when they're saying negative things that make you forget eel uncomfortable. If you find that your boyfriend's negativity outweighs the positives of hanging with him then maybe it's time to spend less time with him.

>>17382080
My only question is why do you even bother to start a discussion with someone like that? I personally don't play PokemonGo. But flaming on everyone who does like an angsty teen seems pointless. My advice is end the discussion, spend the energy on something more productive. Like catching a Pidgey!

File: 1469093747067.jpg (48KB, 338x507px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 338x507px

>>17384711

Because i have thoughts or opinions that became a bit too complex to be shared and explained. And sometimes i have to discuss these subjects that are controversial, and challenging the common morality.

It's even more needed in those days of troubles with terrorism, some people around me are like "omg i don't understand what's going on", "why people are so angry suddenly", "why can't people just love?".
I have to explain calmly and concisely that it's how the world goes, why is it happening, and how days to come are going to be dark. But that explanation goes with questioning our own morality, which is hard to accept for most people.

Nowadays, people are conflicted, just look at SJW, facebook opinions, just look at how /pol/tards are permanently creaming themselves those past days.
Living in harmony? Maybe, but not this decade.

I'm trying to know how to explain these in an concise, accurate and argumented manner.

And to be able to convince people, i have to understand them, to understand their motivations.

I know how to end any flaming, you just don't answer for 2 days and it's too late to even answer.

I'm interested in that kind of person.

>>17384802
Well in all honesty. Personally it's not worth my effort. Because I'm not a psychology student, so I could not care less.

>>17382080
Narcissism Borderline and Anti-Social.

File: 1468876942531.jpg (94KB, 768x827px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 768x827px

>>17385039

You do what suits you.
I'd like to learn to understand this funny world to accept it. If you view the world through your fantasies, and see it's not following your model, you become a bit distressed.

>>17385206

In that order?
I see it mostly as more narcissism symptoms are checked from wikipedia page.

Thanks for the answer. ;)

>>17385313
Honestly, it depends much on the age of the person I just assumed he was young on account of you saying, "this game was only for kids" implying he believed he was not a kid. The narcissism is obvious however some symptoms such as a superiority complex can arise as a defense mechanism for poor self image. The old, since I'm not one of them I'm better than them. Other than the borderline, Anti-social in conjunction with Narcissism would explain why he rejects your attempt at having a sound debate argument. His beliefs on the game which could have stemmed from a borderline personality feeds into his narcissism fueling an anti-social compulsion.

Talking shit can build social connections. Person A complains about something that happened to them, person B replies with "omg I know! that happened to me too!". Person A generalizes that to a group of people, person B agrees again. A and B have now built a set of positive social experiences that are now the foundation of a new friendship.

This person might have a long history of making friends by complaining. It's positive re-enforcement for being a dick, and it just grows over time. This person doesn't see or downplays the social connections that are hurt by this behavior, partially as justification to keep behaving the only way he knows how.

Also, bullying is fun for the bully.

>>17382080
Maybe he doesn't see the point in playing a game that constantly needs to know your location.
Maybe he doesn't see the point in playing a game that runs on temperamental servers
Maybe he doesn't see the point in playing a game that always needs to be active and results in you buying a power bank because it drains your battery
Maybe he doesn't see the point in trying to revisit nostalgia through a mediocre game

I wouldn't call it empty criticism, the game is mediocre at best and people only get behind it because it is pokemon, any other brand would be ignored.

While I can see that people going out and about is never a bad thing, nobody is paying attention to the world around them, today I saw a kid walk into the road, fortunately the oncoming car saw him, swerved and beeped, the kid stepped back then went back to his phone.

It isn't about insecurities, some of us can just dislike things because they are bad, not everyone dislikes things just because they are popular, maybe he thought better of the people he sees running around chasing virtual pokemon, I think you might need to stop taking your enjoyment of an app so seriously, people can dislike things you like without being bitter, toxic and insecure.

I have abysmally low self-esteem and self-worth
Does that make me a negative/toxic person?

>>17382080
Sounds very one sided, and if you can't bother to present the argument of the other side objectively, you're as much as a problem as "toxic people". How did the entire thing start?

>this game is only for kids
That's given, pretty much every video game is.

>>17382548
People go outside to buy alcohol too, just because a pointless or a harmful thing requires a positive action, doesn't meant the thing in question is good.

>>17384802
> i have thoughts or opinions that became a bit too complex to be shared and explained
That's a good sign that you don't understand them well enough yourself.

>>17385882
If you push your negative feelings onto others and/or blame them for these, yes.

>>17385898
>If you push your negative feelings onto others
What does this mean? Can you give me an example of this?

>>17382548
u realize the same argument can be thrown around for anything of the sorts
eg football
'football is for jocks and losers haha'
-'BAGDAJHDB IT MAKES U GO OUTSIDE FOR ONCE U COUCH POTATO SGAJAVSK'
it doesnt really make pokemon go inherently special because its a video game

>>17385915
>be kiss-less virgin
>see happy couple kissing
"Fucking whores"

>be poor
>see somebody in a nice car
"Hope somebody steals it"

Or something more subtle like hating on that one popular outgoing kid even thought his/her action doesn't affect you.

Being overly simplistic here, hope you can see my point.

>>17385915
By trying to bloat your ego up and putting others down to make yourself feel better desu senpai

>>17384802
>I'm trying to know how to explain these in an concise, accurate and argumented manner.

I understand exactly what you're saying OP. In fact I'd say we're almost the same person but you haven't yet realized that most people are dumb and/or do not care. The masses don't know what they want most of the time and latch onto and swing from hobby to hobby, belief to belief, fad to fad. All in an effort to continue being happy and not have to think introspectively because thinking introspectively is scary and humans are hardwired to avoid scary.

There has, is, and always will be, the masses of folks like your fellow in the OP who do not give a shit about discussing anything rationally because it does not further their goal of remaining happy.

video games are entertainment for children and the mentally stunted

>>17385942
>>17385929
Yeah i don't ever do that. If there's anyone i'll rag on, it's myself.

>>17385945
>All these dumb and happy sheep never think, unlike me, an unhappy intellectual!

>>17385967
If you read my post you'll notice I didn't actually criticize the masses for being happy or dumb. I was simply stating a fact.

I don't rag on people for their virtues or their vices, unless the latter of which is causing harm to themselves or others around them.

>>17385976
If you're stating a fact, it should be easy to provide a link to a study supporting it. I wonder how it looks "Study proves that masses are dumb" certainly sounds catchy.

>>17385987
Again you're lacking in reading comprehension. I stated they are either dumb, or do not care, and that they do not know what they want. The idea of the general population not knowing what they want has been something intrinsic to advertising agencies since their inception. If you deny this you are a fool. Some people simply do not care, take nonvoters for instance or the person in the OP. And some people are dumb, like certain voters. Don't be such a pedant and a fool to try and deny any of this.

File: 1469147543006.jpg (715KB, 2250x2500px) Image search: [Google]

715KB, 2250x2500px

>>17385438
He assured he was a person with a certain age, when i called him "kiddo".

On the first answer, i told him why he would believe those. Then shit escalated, i told him he had comprehension issues and lacked reading skills.
His last answer "omg you play pokemon, you're so shit and useless, only shit nerds play pokemon...".
(I'm not particularly playing it, i installed it and tried it, but i defended the player's side against thrown affirmations)

Thanks for the explanation, i don't understand everything, but i will make researches about those pathologies.

>>17385635

Well, with the internet, since most "abnormal" people go hide in cesspools/circlejerks, they autocongratulate themselves in their shit talking habit.
This polarizes people's opinions, whatever your opinion, there will be people to acknowledge you.
For me, that explains why we saw the rise of extreme groups, like ISIS, racists, SJW.

>>17385703
>Maybe he doesn't see the point in playing a game that...

The problem is that i can reason with most people, whatever their opinion is, when you ask questions, this starts a debate and show flaws in both parties' reasoning.

Ideally, it goes like
- this game is shit
- have you tried it? why do you say that?
- nope, i didn't, but i'll try
etc.
Then you have a sane debate.

Here, it was
- this game is shit
- have you tried it? why do you say that?
- suk my dik, that game is shit

That's why i called that empty criticism.

You will notice that you didn't just threw shit, but you explained your point as well, which is very far from what that guy wrote.

I like to say that i'm ready to listen and believe ANY opinion, as long as there's a solid reasoning behind it. You can tell me that murdering kittens is a good thing, i could believe it and follow you, as log as you can explain why.

>>17386002
> I stated they are either dumb, or do not care,
Which is quite a huge claim that needs support.

>and that they do not know what they want.
A pretty big claim too, advertising relies more on "Buy our product X vs their product Y" or introduces innovation, where it's given that the people don't know the benefits of it.

> take nonvoters for instance
Not caring is a small part of it. Some are resigned that however they vote, they'll get the same shit and don't want to waste the time. Some don't vote out of protest, which is stupid but not related to not caring. Some simply lack the time and energy. Then there are registration requirements, etc, etc.

>And some people are dumb, like certain voters.
In a way they qualify for dumb but even Trump voters tend to have more reasons, frustration, protest, wanting to see what happens and whatever else. If the take US as an example, there is also the whole camp thinking, which is dumb overall but simply explaining it with "lol they dumb" is way too simplistic.

The person OP describes seems pretty much the contrast of apathy either way, since he/she obviously cares about this dumb game.

>>17384670
>shorter men tend to be pricks

As a really short guy, I did not know that was a thing. Maybe I am a prick. This thread is useful.

>>17382080
seeing as you are interested in argument, are you more of a deontologist or a consequentialist?

Do you choose to argue and correct an opinion because you believe it's right to do so or out of your own personal enjoyment or needs?

If it's the former, you might fall into the trap of continually arguing against people like some sort of Sisyphus, where each time you provide an argument the people around you just reset back into creatures that are seemingly incapable of reason. Then you start again.

If it's the latter, then you fall into the trap of turning into your opponent and essentially becoming a counter-troll, which doesn't seem more or less different than a regular troll.

>>17384670
Short guy here and I'm a total prick.
With that said, 90% of short dudes that I met were very nice. Maybe they didn't got bullied, who knows.

>>17386075
Maybe us short guys are just doomed to have some sort of complex. It's probably something to do with being insecure about aesthetics.

Either way, increasing my height is pretty impractical, so I'm trying not to get mad over it.

File: 1468618634527.jpg (329KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 1000x1000px

>>17385945
>you haven't yet realized that most people are dumb and/or do not care.

I do, the problem is that people don't have opinions on several subjects, because they are dumb, they don't have time to read, or whatever; and society expects them to have an opinion.

"Are you for or against abortion?" It's not a Y/N/IDGAF question.

I'm ok with most of your reasoning, but i still believe that questioning people, rustling their unquestioned beliefs can ultimately have some influence if you can convince people.

And to convince people, you have to understand them.

>There has, is, and always will be, the masses of folks like your fellow in the OP who do not give a shit about discussing anything rationally because it does not further their goal of remaining happy.

I discussed many times on many subjects, but this guy is very odd. I can see when people get angry and won't change their mind, but they still answer to your attacks and give (shitty) arguments to back up their position, they still justify their opinion.

>>17385967
How do you distinguish the truly intelligent person that genuinely sees people as dumb, and the one who believes he's better than others and treat people like dirt?

Well, for me, you can believe the person if he can back up his opinion with a good reasoning. And one way to do that is to use the Socratic method, which is basically questioning the person to see if he's full of shit or not.

>>17386082
I don't even get mad anymore, since I've already heard all jokes that can be made about height.
With that said, I can joke about literally everything, since I needed to have ammo to counter the bullies.

>>17386039
>Which is quite a huge claim that needs support.

True enough. If I were you I'd also be asking me for support. Anecdotal evidence doesn't hold up at all, but I know in my bones that what I said there is true thanks to my life experiences.


>A pretty big claim too, advertising relies more on "Buy our product X vs their product Y" or introduces innovation, where it's given that the people don't know the benefits of it.

Now who's making a claim without support!


>Not caring is a small part of it. Some are resigned that however they vote, they'll get the same shit and don't want to waste the time. Some don't vote out of protest, which is stupid but not related to not caring. Some simply lack the time and energy. Then there are registration requirements, etc, etc.

True, I should've specified some like I did for the other thing.

>is way too simplistic.

True/

>The person OP describes seems pretty much the contrast of apathy either way, since he/she obviously cares about this dumb game.

They're dumb for caring that much as well as being unable to reason like an adult.

>>17386084
>but i still believe that questioning people, rustling their unquestioned beliefs can ultimately have some influence if you can convince people.

Agreed. Though I don't run into too many people like your feller in my daily life so I don't have the opportunity you have with this guy to try and get to the bottom of it. Will be monitoring the thread though.

>>17382080

> :3

as if we needed more proof pokemon go players are all faggots. that guy is right, and you should kill yourself.

sometimes you're wrong just because you're wrong, anon, and no further explanation is necessary.

File: 1468863828506.jpg (40KB, 628x387px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 628x387px

>>17386045
>>17386075
I might have used the wrong word.
But as a french, i had a short teacher and a short president that were really dicks.

But that doesn't apply to all of short people i know. One of them is quite sad and resigned, but he's a kind person.
It's also related to women, and why they like men who are taller,stronger, more intelligent than them (linked to hypergamy).
I heard women saying harsh words about these guys, like "oh no, he's too short, i'll never date him".

They know they have less chances, and will compensate. Sarkozy is a great example of an overcompensating dwarf.

Again, not all are pricks, but some noticeably are.

>>17386084
>How do you distinguish the truly intelligent person that genuinely sees people as dumb
I doubt this is even possible. Holding such a strong view about billions of individuals one has never met is just not very intelligent, of course the person can still be intelligent when it comes to other things but this would be their blind spot. Which is perfectly fine too, nobody can be knowledge able about everything.

The former method seems favorable, specially if we add facts to the reasoning. If a person can reason and prove that the sun is bigger than the earth, I don't think it should matter whether they are full of shit or not, since it doesn't affect the fact in question.

>>17386091
>Now who's making a claim without support!
Somebody who studied it as part of a business related major.

While "people not knowing what they want" is obviously a factor it can only help you so much and a very risky approach most companies can't afford. You could invest billions into marketing ice cream that tastes like literal shit; it's still very unlikely that the idea will take off and survive beyond a short fad of people trying it out. Coca Cola showed it pretty well with their "New Coke", and remember that we talk about a huge company that can take the risk. Most can't.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Coke

>They're dumb for caring that much as well as being unable to reason like an adult.
Sure, though reading further posts about their argumentation, they might be just trolling OP and not giving any fucks about it.

File: 1468969970783.jpg (115KB, 409x516px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 409x516px

>>17386153
>I doubt this is even possible. Holding such a strong view about billions of individuals one has never met is just not very intelligent, of course the person can still be intelligent when it comes to other things but this would be their blind spot. Which is perfectly fine too, nobody can be knowledge able about everything.

Ask him why and how he came to that conclusion.

Sure, he overgeneralized his view, and this is wrong, but when you are more intelligent, or at least you care more about your opinions and other people's, you'll see that most opinions are flawed, and if you dig these opinions, you'll see that most are just empty.
He can't know everything, but he can still be in the top 10%; so 90% of people he met were dumber, and extrapolating from that, he can say that most people have dumb opinions.
This is justified and explainable.

Now why can't YOU believe that he can possibly be better?
I recently read stuff about Nietzsche, when he argued that we wer living under "slave morality" that praises weak people's traits, and criticizes strong people's traits.
Your default view might be linked to this. Modern morality sees being humble as a virtue, and being successful, more intelligent, having confidence as defaults.

>If a person can reason and prove that the sun is bigger than the earth, I don't think it should matter whether they are full of shit or not, since it doesn't affect the fact in question.

The reasoning is important, because some things can sound true, but are actually false.

So someone in France says that americans are all fat and uneducated. Well, you see some pictures of US population from FatCity, see some cherrypicked examples on how dumb they are, and conclude that americans are really fat and dumb. It sounds good and true.

How do you know if it's true or false, when you have no experience of being in the US?
The same applies to conspiracy theories, or hollow earth. You have to check them (opinions).

>>17386205
>Now why can't YOU believe that he can possibly be better?

Not him, but I think it's because you can't really say one person is truly better than the next unless they're retarded or something extreme like that. You ever read that essay Isaac Asimov wrote on intelligence? You should read the whole thing, it's not very long, but this particular bit.

"Consider my auto-repair man, again.

He had a habit of telling me jokes whenever he saw me.

One time he raised his head from under the automobile hood to say: 'Doc, a deaf-and-mute guy went into a hardware store to ask for some nails. He put two fingers together on the counter and made hammering motions with the other hand.

'The clerk brought him a hammer. He shook his head and pointed to the two fingers he was hammering. The clerk brought him nails. He picked out the sizes he wanted, and left. Well, doc, the next guy who came in was a blind man. He wanted scissors. How do you suppose he asked for them?'

Indulgently, I lifted by right hand and made scissoring motions with my first two fingers.

Whereupon my auto-repair man laughed raucously and said, 'Why, you dumb jerk, He used his voice and asked for them.'

Then he said smugly, 'I've been trying that on all my customers today.' 'Did you catch many?' I asked. 'Quite a few,' he said, 'but I knew for sure I'd catch you.'

'Why is that?' I asked. 'Because you're so goddamned educated, doc, I knew you couldn't be very smart.'

And I have an uneasy feeling he had something there."

>>17386205
>Sure, he overgeneralized his view, and this is wrong
Which is why I just couldn't take the person serious or see them as intelligent (when it comes to the topic at least). Generalization tends to be a good indicator that the person pretends (or really believes) to know more than they do.

>10%; so 90% of people he met were dumber,
Dumber is some ways, smarter in others and them not realizing it or not showing enough attention to that, seems rather ignorant. It's explainable and very human but I don't think it's justified.

>Now why can't YOU believe that he can possibly be better?
Probably the most interesting question; the experience that if you take the time to pick their opinions apart and follow to the source of how they are formed, you'll get to a completely irrational core made of bits that are simply false, at least it was my experience so far.

>Modern morality sees being humble as a virtue, and being successful, more intelligent, having confidence as defaults.
I don't see anything wrong when somebody recognizes that they are smart and all the fake humbleness is fucking annoying; but pretty much all of the smart people I talked to or read about, knew about their limits too. Humbleness is pretty worthless outside of situations where you need a diplomatic approach.

>The reasoning is important
Focus on PROVE, mate. Reasoning is indeed pretty tricky and philosophyfags or anybody else good in rhetorics can make the most inane claim sound good.

In the example, the person falling for such shit would be the dumb one. Now if the person actually links decent studies about the average weight and educations/belief in each country, one could come to the conclusion that on the average Americans are fatter/dumber, but even then going from averages to every single Murican would be a pretty good example of ignorance.

you're gonna have to come with something significant. there might be something wrong with his personality, but the fact that he is shitty when it comes to discussing pokemon go is not a sign of a major defect.

>>17382589
>live your life
hehe xd im high on life guyz xDD look at me IM BETTER THAN YOU IM LIVING MY LYF
xd

>>17382974
Damn wish I knew