Trannies

>>17611230
Why do want your own opinion to be better than hers? She hasn't offended you in any way. Just saying "I'm better than you" is no offence, but what you try is isolating an individual, which counts as bullying. Everyone can be what he wants as long as no one is hurt. The moment she acitvely says that normal humans are shit is the one you have the right to defend yourself. Those people don't want harm, they want acceptance.

>>17611230
Made a bit of a fool of yourself. He reported it ti the Dean and as the poster above said its bullying. I dont agree with transgenderism either, least in the west, but would you not have copped his obnoxious need to force his gender into philosophy suggest he had problems to begin with? I too think
its stupid to accept transgenders like him but let the fool have his bottle because just cause you think you are right wont change anything.

Also I dispute your view with one word: ladyboy.

>>17611256
Don't bother arguing with psychopaths. They're not people.

>>17611256
>Why do want your own opinion to be better than hers?
This is a social and political philosophy class. His shitty opinions have no place here. You dont want a tranny anywhere near the political system.
>She hasn't offended you in any way
I find trannies offensive in general but thats not why Im doing this.
>Just saying "I'm better than you" is no offence, but what you try is isolating an individual, which counts as bullying
Bullying has nothing to do with it. Hes a prime example of a topic in a social and political philosophy class. Did he think he was a normal person. Because hes definitely not and should be prepared for this.
> Those people don't want harm, they want acceptance.
This is exactly why Im doing this. Im not about to give my presentation to you, but basically my stance is they cant be accepted. At least in terms of social and political philosophy. This is a class to argue your ideas about the topics.

>>17611285
>He reported it ti the Dean and as the poster above said its bullying.
This was done at the beginning of the class and I forget the person who sat in on my presentation, but there were in charge of some shit about lgbt. The issue is that now the dean wants to sit in sporadically for the rest of the class. Not just visit like the others. They definitely arent going to cite me for bullying or anything because that would hurt them far more than anything done to me. As the professor said, this class is to speak your ideas about the topics.
My issue is that the rest of the class chickened out. Making the tranny cry isnt gratifying. having the class understand that he is crazy is what made me go to class with a smile on my face.

>>17611303
Honestly sadism is a far more serious mental illness.

>>17611311
definitely not.

>>17611303
Jesus OP you sound arrogant and cruel. Grow up. You can hate transexuals and what they stand for and I would be with you if the transexual wasnt present but he is. I have no doubt we are on the same page, fact is I share many of the same views you do. I hate transexuality in how its manifested in many cultures and see it as a clear failing on the individual.

But I also am aware of common courtesy and etiqquete. Your class is there for debate but not at the expense of another. I would publically treat the tranny fine but I have the restraint to keep my thoughts to myself cause as much as I hate it, its no excuse to treat someone badly.

>>17611328
>But I also am aware of common courtesy and etiqquete.
Im not about to tip toe around someones feelings for being crazy. You wish to hide your thoughts from others. Which is why we have trannies walking around in the first place.

>>17611328

No, OP is correct.


>>17611311

Don't be shaming people's sexuality. In any case, OP isn't a sadist, no sexual pleasure was described, just the satisfaction of having done right.

>>17611288
You're smart noticing that I'm a psychopath.
>>17611289
>my stance is they cant be accepted
In regard of your scientific attempt you should know better than me, that politics and philosophy are no sciences and they are not completely based on logical implications. They basically work in a pattern, that someone states an argument/opinion and another individual tries to use/defend against that. You say his opinion has no place in this argumentation, but at the same moment you try to establish a manipulative chain of arguments, that are influenced by your own opinion. There is no right or wrong for this problem like in mathematics.

>>17611334
Unless you are part of a major government or influentiak organisation, what you are doing is just boosting you own ego and makong a show of yourself. Stimulaye discussion all you want but this short sightedness has warranted attention of the Dean which means you are on the firing range. Get your head down or potentially face expulsion.

>>17611314
The vast majority of serial killers show multiple dark triad traits. They are statistically a danger to society. On the other hand transsexuals are primarily a danger to themselves.

>>17611339
Sadism is not always sexual in nature.

>>17611348
>Unless you are part of a major government or influentiak organisation, what you are doing is just boosting you own ego and makong a show of yourself
Aka you are a sheep who lets others think and make decisions for you. And anyone with a brain could see that trying to stop a discussion about transgender in a class to discuss transgender will hurt any attempt at having transgender accepted. But of course you wouldnt know that. Because you let other people deal with political issues like this.

>>17611353
Yes serial killers are a danger to society. But you cant expect to extend that to sadism in a serious debate about the topic. There are too many logical fallacies in that leap and youll be laughed out of where ever you are.

>>17611343
>There is no right or wrong for this problem like in mathematics.
There definitely is. You just have an underdeveloped idea of it. What you described is arguing for argument sake.

>>17611353

Yes it is, that's what the word 'sadism' means.

>>17611357
1) Sadism is a mental illness as defined by the DSM.
2) Most serial killers are sadists.
3) Sadists have a higher chance of being serial killers.
4) Sadists, on average, are more dangerous to society than normal, healthy people.

On the other hand trannies are primarily a danger to themselves. Sadism is a far more serious illness.

>>17611362

> What you described is arguing for argument sake

What do you think philosophy is, you fucking illiterate?

People as slack-minded as the tranny OP is dealing with have no place in a philosophy seminar.

>>17611356
I am thinking about YOU! If the dean is there its serious and it may put YOUR position as a student at risk. Though yes I concede I do keep to myself.

>>17611382
Not all pleasure is sexual.

ITT: Gender Studies vermin embarrass themselves trying to bandy words with a Philosophy student.

>>17611362
That's true, but what's the objective value of an argumentation, if you found your result on statements, with unknown substance? You would have to set preconditions, which are not given, because everything is based on studies. A "true" conclusion can only be established, if you set certain axioms.

>>17611390

By definition, sadism refers to sexual pleasure. By definiton, you born victim.

>>17611388
>People as slack-minded as the tranny OP is dealing with have no place in a philosophy seminar.
Only a complete idiot would pay to study philosophy formally so I have to disagree.

>>17611402

Only a complete idiot would study philosophy informally. You don't understand the world, do you?

>>17611401
You're wrong. Sadism manifests in multiple ways.

>>17611404
>Only a complete idiot would study philosophy informally.
>Only a complete idiot would study philosophy informally.
>Only a complete idiot would study philosophy informally.
Haha oh wow.
I understand the world well enough to know that any degree in a non-STEM field is utterly worthless.

>>17611413
Second that. Philosophy is an art, not a science. Your argumentations only exist in models, with axioms you set to project it onto this world. Every outcome says nothing about our world unless you believe it. You create parallel dimensions and try to transfer them, while suppressing your own opinion.

>>17611384
The logical fallacies made here are exactly why I said youd be laughed out of where ever you are.

>>17611424
>Fail to refute anything
Your education isn't paying off my senpai.

>>17611407

No, sadism is a sexuality.

>>17611389
>If the dean is there its serious and it may put YOUR position as a student at risk
There is literally nothing they could do without it reflecting negatively on them. My school isnt too big. About 2000 students. Not ivy but top 50. He can afford to sit in on a class.
Im pretty sure the professor is at more risk for managing the class than me.

>>17611428
That's only one manifestation of sadism. Deriving pleasure from inflicting suffering on others, sexual or otherwise, is the broader definition. Not every sadist experiences all forms of sadism.

>>17611400
>A "true" conclusion can only be established, if you set certain axioms.
Which is the point of the class. These are set by the topic we are currently on. In general, for a social and political philosophy class, its about the best implementation of the rules for a society. We guided points given by the philosophers we are contrasting at the time.

>>17611413

Not very well, in other words. Especially if you jump to that reaction from what I wrote. You mistook my meaning - status, influence and career are the reasons to read philosophy. Reading philosophy as a Wal-Mart drone is futile, you'd be better off becoming a spree killer.

>>17611436

Incorrect, sadism is a sexuality.

>>17611447
>status, influence and career are the reasons to read philosophy

>>17611449
Crack open the DSM and see for yourself.

>>17611432
It is something to consider anon. Just be wary.

>>17611426
You are serious arent you. That only makes it more sad.

>>17611444
They why are you fucking caring about the Dean. You are an attempting researcher, I guess. You don't surrender, if your points are valid and consider basic logic. If everyone shits their pants, then that's their problem. Are you living in a state, where science is forbidden?

>>17611456
>Still can't refute anything

>>17611460
Philosophy isn't science.

>>17611464
Yeah, but their is a certain ammount of mathematical logic in it, what makes me care about my bros.

>>17611467
wtf I should really learn spelling

>>17611467
As much logic as there is in gender studies. A useless degree for rich children who don't want to study a proper field but are still expected to go to the university. No real difference.

>>17611460
>They why are you fucking caring about the Dean.
Because as I said in the OP. Everyone else has wussed out and now the discussion is dead and people are just hiding in their shell.

>>17611480
If you cant understand how philosophy is bound by logical rules you dont deserve to breathe.

>>17611493
It is bound by logical rules, just like gender studies and business management.

>>17611508
No, its bound by rules like mathematics. Gender studies just studies genders through the ages and their roles/effects/etc

>>17611490
I don't really see why there is any reason to have that discussion in the first place.

Some dude walking around in a dress doesn't affect anybodys life negatively so where's the issue?

>>17611512
Everything's bound by logic. That philosophy students dabble with formal logic does not grant their liberal art any more value. CS students pick the same shit up in the first three months as part of the intro.

>>17611516
>Some dude walking around in a dress doesn't affect anybodys life negatively so where's the issue?
So youve never thought about it I see.

>>17611528
It just hasn't ever had any impact on the life of myself or any person i know, so no. If you could provide an example or something along those lines maybe i could see where you're coming from.

Logically evaluating a mental illness or "medical condition" isn't sadism.

>>17611490
I don't understand why had to tell us your opinion about trannies in the first place, if your only question is, how to escape this social intimidation.
>>17611508
>>17611480
look at my above comment to understand how logic works in philosophy >>17611421 . It's the same with physics,you don't know if the axioms you set represent the world perfectly, but you try to narrow down, if you face a paradox.

>>17611526
Philosophy studies strict logical implications. Math is literally the same thing only with a smaller scope of given axioms.

>>17611531
>It just hasn't ever had any impact on the life of myself or any person i know, so no.
You do not belong anywhere near a social and political philosophy debate. I dont see why you are in this thread. Only caring about things that affect you is a sign of a sheep.

>>17611537
>I don't understand why had to tell us your opinion about trannies in the first place, if your only question is, how to escape this social intimidation.
Because thats not my question.

>>17611545
Ah, now i can totally see where you're coming from. Thanks for clearing that up for us retards.

>>17611537
But you dont know what philosophy is.

>>17611536
It isn't, but you don't need to read much into OP's post to see that he's taking pleasure in hurting that person.

>>17611540
So strict that half of the philosophers think the other half are nonsensical hacks and there is no way to prove who's right.

>>17611553
I don't care about philosophy in the first place as I am a mathematician, but it annoys me if mass psychology and social intimidation is the reason, that researchers can't do their work.

>>17611545
>WAKE UP SHEEPLE

>>17611564
>Philosophy "researcher"

>>17611561
>So strict that half of the philosophers think the other half are nonsensical hacks and there is no way to prove who's right.
The fact that you dont understand how philosophers prove whos right shows you dont understand what philosophy is.

>>17611564
You cant be a mathematician and not know what philosophy is. I guess you could be one of those modeling "mathematicians" though

>>17611557
It looks more like he's enjoying being the center of attention. He'll say anything he knows will get a reaction.

What i'm saying is he's probably baiting.

>>17611578
Its not baiting when you are right.

>>17611570
Oh, I understand: they don't. You have realists and anti-realists and radical empiricists and radical rationalists and ultimately philosophy as a field is nowhere close to crowning any one group as right. These are not new problems, yet there are no actual answers because philosophy can't provide them. Every faction claims that the evidence is on their side.

>>17611577
That's called applied mathematics.

>>17611578
It is not as if being a troll excludes being a sadist..

>>17611582
But what if you are wrong?

>>17611584
>yet there are no actual answers because philosophy can't provide them
You keep proving you dont know what philosophy is.

>>17611593
Then someone whos right probably will say something

>>17611600
Oh really? Then please do tell philosophers world wide that you've solved the whole realism vs anti-realism thing. I'm sure they'll be thrilled to see your definite proof.

>>17611608
Its two approaches to the same problem. If you dont understand how there is an answer you just dont know what philosophy is. Having the answer and there being an answer are two different things. The fact that you believe that not knowing the answer and there not being an answer makes me feel like your are wasting my time.

>>17611619
Pro tip: You're wasting your own time posting a thread about gender issues on 4chan.

>>17611623
>implying 4chan isnt a waste of time

>>17611619
What is your purpose of telling us that? You simply rejected my comments. Don't you think every mathematician knows such basic shit? Don't feel high and mighty, because of some definition.

>>17611619
There are answers. Philosophy just failed to find them, just as it has failed to answer anything of significance. It fundamentally lacks rigor, unlike mathematics.

>>17611624
>implying 4chan isnt a time of waste

>>17611638
> Philosophy just failed to find them, just as it has failed to answer anything of significance.
This is just bad. Philosophy has not found all of the answers, just as mathematics and physics have not found all of theres either.
Galileo's proved the weight of an object doesnt effect its fall speed with a philosophical argument. You just dont know anything about philosophy so you are coming from a very uneducated stand point.

>>17611652
I don't think you understand what philosophy is. Galileo's proved, the weight of an object doesn't effect its fall speed with a logical argument. Logic is an own branch as there is philosophic logic and mathematical logic. Philosophy in general is the analysis of the used methods and the logical implications.

>>17611672
So you dont know what philosophy is. As Ive been saying.

>>17611682
Oh, I know what philosophy is. Philosophy is shit, that has no universally applicable definition. This isn't even a lie and you know that.

>>17611682
>Trying to co-opt logic into being the exclusive purview of philosophy
>Presenting science as philosophy
>Arguing that philosophy is rigorous
Anon..

>>17611692
>>Trying to co-opt logic into being the exclusive purview of philosophy
Logic is literally one of the first classes any philosopher has to take.
>Presenting science as philosophy
Youre such an idiot. The difference between science and philosophy is in their approach. The scientific method is what makes science stand apart from philosophy. What galileo did was a philosophical argument. Reductio ad absurdum.
>Arguing that philosophy is rigorous
Why do you believe otherwise.
>>17611691
So you dont know what philosophy is.

>>17611703
Give an explicit definition of philosophy, that is worldwide approved.

>>17611723
No Anon that's not how philosophy works see it has no answers but the answers exist so it's legit.

>>17611723
Lets google it
>the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline.
That was easy

>>17611723
Seriously bro STOP alright?! You DON'T know what philosophy is so just shut the FUCK up

Anyone else think its hilarious that a "psychopath" is upset that people in his super important college philosophy class don't give a shit?

Of course they don't care, its a college philosophy class and your some boob who has an issue with a different fuckwad, and neither of you are worth anything to them. Why should your classmates care about which of you is right about a topic as pointless as "how I feel and you should feel about this one group of people". They don't care and will do whatever causes less drama. As long as the dean is watching, they aren't going to risk getting into trouble just because you don't like trans folk.

Also in my experience the people who causes the upper staff to get involved are always viewed as dickbags. Bet thats the case here since you two fucks turned what should have been a class with actually potenial to have real discussions into potentially getting in trouble with the dean because you're both stuck on the topic of dick removal. Nice, I bet if you cook them so food they start listening to you again and won't just think of you as "one of those two faggots who got the dean involed" the from now on.

Short answer to your question; you can't because they don't share your obsession and its not worth investment when its easier to say "sure whatever the crazy person says"
I think you're wasting your time.

Also in my mind this is community college, which makes it funnier.

>>17611732
*TRIGGERED*

I dont get anti-trans people.

The fact that trans people are now seen as acceptable in western society doesn't mean suddenly a large part of the population will decide they want to be trannies. It doesn't work like that, just like anti-gay and anti-trans laws don't make a society and saner.

The parents that encourage their kids to be trans because they picked a barbie over a toy car are fucking retards though. They should be locked up and sterilized.

>>17611726
I quote the german wikipedia as there is written:

>„Philosophie“ lässt sich nicht allgemeingültig definieren, weil jeder, der philosophiert, eine eigene Sicht der Dinge entwickelt.

Philosophy is not universally applicable definable, because everyone, who philosophizes, developes an own way of looking at things.

>>17611762
So one german philosopher is the world now.
Ill go with Hardys definition of mathematics then. Only math that has no application is real mathematics

>>17611753
>The fact that trans people are now seen as acceptable in western society doesn't mean suddenly a large part of the population will decide they want to be trannies
First thing. Its not accepted. Only in small isolated bubbles is it okay.

>>17611770
I don't know what you try to achieve. Go play in your little bubble made out of your own thinking. Simply denying comments by saying "So you dont know what philosophy is." is the argument of a 5 year old. I hope you get cuckolded by a trannie.

>>17611776
maybe accepted is not the right word, but at least being openly transphobic is frowned upon now. tolerated is more accurate.

>>17611787
Being transphobic is more accepted than being a tranny

File: 1456734559192.jpg (229KB, 627x720px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 627x720px

>>17611753

>I dont get anti-trans people.

Me neither. I couldn't give less of a shit. I have hardly formed an opinion on it because it has nothing to do with me.

OP just sounds like a bully. Replace the word "trannies" in his entire speech with "interracial couples" or "immigrants" or "women" and you've got yourself some handy dandy universal hate speech.

The fact that he goes out of his way to make it his personal mission to belittle and terrorize someone for having opposing viewpoints, regardless of what the viewpoint is, says more about OP than it does the other person.

>>17611820
>I only form opinions about things that Im involved in.
Why not have a sticker saying your opinion is trash

>>17611826
Why not have a sticker saying you're a fag, that will never earn money for being useful to society.

>>17611833
>I only think about money
I can make you that sticker

>>17611841
That doesn't make you useful to society.

>>17611452

Why would I endorse their sadophobic slur?

File: 1467889510279.png (203KB, 411x409px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 411x409px

>>17611826

>Why not have a sticker saying your opinion is trash

That's not what I said. Don't assign me an inferior ideology because you don't have the intelligence to read between the lines and absorb even a modicum of nuance.

I haven't formed an opinion on whether its right or wrong because I don't believe that making personal decisions that don't affect anyone but you can be quantified into right or wrong.

It seems to me the only thing that transgendered people seem to be doing that actually affect others is challenge their comfort. People, to my observation, are most vehemently against those things that challenge their idea of what the world is and should be. Any change to the landscape that you've painted for yourself can often times be perceived as an assault on your values when in reality the only thing the opposing party has done is dare to do something that wasn't included in the curriculum, so to speak, of your upbringing.

I've developed an opinion on Israel vs. Palestine. I've developed an opinion on Black Lives Matter and the war in Iraq. I've developed an opinion on those things that I am not involved in because people are being hurt and killed.

No one is being hurt or killed by walking into OP's political philosophy class dressed in women's clothing and promoting ideas that offend him. I don't think anyone is obligated to do or think anything simply because the thing they do or think is difficult for others to swallow.

Wanna dress like a woman? Wanna change your name and wear a toaster as a hat? I don't give a shit. I am not obligated to like or to socialize with these people but going out of my way to terrorize someone for the sake of validating my own belief system is the hallmark of a shitty, insecure person. No one is calling for OP to agree with everyone's views, just to stop being such an asshole.

File: frodo.png (214KB, 400x399px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 400x399px

>Philosophy, Psychology, Sociology, etc.
>More than a thousand years (to say the least) building a glimpse of what it means to be human, man, female, wise, whole, good, etc.
>Living in an age where self-doubt is the order of the day
>Trying to cling to reality and find a blueprint for integrity
>Even a regular citizen can fall in an identity crisis
>Conceal these faults in an effort to find oneself the meaning of being and grow as a person
>People who dress up as the opposite sex because their are troubled want the whole world to change for them because somehow the feelings of a deviant are more important than respecting the line between objectivity and subjectivity

>>17611490

Arrange to meet with each member of the class socially who expressed themselves well on the subject, and return to it, mentioning the chilling effect of the Dean's presense. The main thing is not discussing it in class, but knowing that everyone still thinks what they think and isn't afraid to think it.

>>17611895

That didn't make much sense.

>>17611230
Adolf, is it you?

>>17611909
If you wear a crown and call yourself king that is not my problem, but if you want others to call you "your majesty" I don't believe people are at fault for not playing into your fantasies.

>>17611885
>I don't believe that making personal decisions that don't affect anyone but you can be quantified into right or wrong.
This is completely irrelevant and wrong. But irrelevant more importantly.
>No one is being hurt or killed by walking into OP's political philosophy class
If you think it only matters if people are being killed your opinion is also trash.

>>17611909
>If you wear a crown and call yourself king that is not my problem, but if you want others to call you "your majesty" I don't believe people are at fault for not playing into your fantasies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1s6aNjJRbrA

>>17611896
This sounds like a good idea. Organizing outside of the class and planning ahead. So that you can direct conversation in the direction you want. Would take a lot of pressure from the other students if they knew what was coming.

>>17611885
>I haven't formed an opinion on whether its right or wrong because I don't believe that making personal decisions that don't affect anyone but you can be quantified into right or wrong.
Transgender effects society. Not you. You have no excuse for not having an opinion

>>17611885

People like you always say 'going out of [your] way'. We haven't gone out of our way: they are up in our shit. In the situation described by OP, the trans person is trying to crowbar their 'journey' into every single discussion. This faggot needs discipline.

File: 1474138643297.jpg (49KB, 540x672px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 540x672px

>>17611936

>but if you want others to call you "your majesty" I don't believe people are at fault for not playing into your fantasies.

I'm not sure if just asking not to be killed, discriminated against and tossed into mental asylums is equivalent to asking to be called "your majesty"

I think you're mistaking equality for superiority. If you take the temperature of the loud, angry few and equivocate it to the movement as a whole then you're just being purposefully ignorant to support your narrative because MOST transgendered people aren't asking for anything ridiculous.

I went on a road trip with a couple friends, one of which is gay and we were told (and I quote) "you and the fag get out of here" at SEVERAL establishments on our way through Texas and Idaho so lets just stop pretending like people who are different are just waltzing through life unassaulted and perfectly accepted because thats a fucking fantasy in its own.

For the most part they just want to be left alone. Everyone is living in a reality of their own making; I think its quite hypocritical for anyone to come down on someone else just because their perception of themselves has an outward manifestation.

Some of the most outspoken anti-this and anti-that politicians in the world go home after a long day of hate speech and choke themselves while they masturbate or cheat on their wives or do heroin down at the park and suck dicks through holes in bathroom stalls so I'm personally of the ideology of not casting stones just because others choose not to hide their eccentricities like the rest of the world. We're all hiding some secret, fucked up predilection.

I honestly just don't care. If the person isn't an asshole, thinks with their brain and isn't annoying to be around I couldn't care less what is in their pants or what they want me to call them.

>>17611895
Are you high?

File: 1461826269308.jpg (19KB, 550x397px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 550x397px

>>17611958

>Transgender effects society. Not you. You have no excuse for not having an opinion

Am I not a part of society? When I leave my house and encounter hundreds of different kinds of people every day, transgendered included, does this not fall under the umbrella of "affected"? Why am I obligated to care about other people's personal choices? Why am I obligated to deem someone else's sense of self valid or invalid? From what high vantage or place of knowledge must I come from to make that kind of judgement about what a different person with a different brain and different upbringing is allowed to think of themselves? What if I just choose to let people do what they want with their lives and not interject myself into the process?

Isn't that, in and of itself, an opinion?
>>17611963

>This faggot needs discipline.

You sound like every disastrous hate spewer who justifies attacking people by saying "THEY ATTACKED US FIRST". The only thing of yours that has been attacked is your ignorance.

Sorry that someone on this planet dare to do something that doesn't fit into your narrow view of what is and isn't acceptable.

Like I said a million times, I'm not saying anyone NEEDS to accept anyone or socialize with them or like them or seek them out and bring them into the folds of your life. If you don't agree with someone just find some people you do agree with and hang out with them.

I just don't understand why its so important to you that people live only the way you find acceptable that you make it your mission to take every possible opportunity to attack someone who disagrees with you. I don't understand why it needs to be so personal. Thats just me.

>>17611982
>What if I just choose to let people do what they want with their lives and not interject myself into the process?

>Isn't that, in and of itself, an opinion?
Yes, the opinion of a sheep. The opinion of someone whos ideas can never lead a nation, or even a small group of people. Because you only care about yourself. Letting people do whatever they want in society has never worked and never will and it requires you to actually think about someone more than yourself to decide whats best for society.

>>17611966
>I'm not sure if just asking not to be killed, discriminated against and tossed into mental asylums is equivalent to asking to be called "your majesty"
If you are crazy you get locked up. No one wants to be put in a mental asylum. But you gotta put the crazies somewhere.

>>17611966

>discriminated against

Interesting how you throw the only thing that's happening, and which is perfectly just, between two melodramatic things that aren't happening.

The rest of your post includes further indications that a 'moderate' trans person still isn't really moderate.

>equivocate

That doesn't mean what you think it means.

>through Texas and Idaho

Good. Why were you there, when you know you'll be hated? This sounds like the martyr complex we've become used to hearing.

> Everyone is living in a reality of their own making

No, we are all living in an empirically measurable reality, and millions of us don't like it because of capitalism. Our pain is inescapably real, we feel it and cannot escape it. Your self-indulgence is not wisdom, your pseudo-aristocratic obliviousness to real, non-self-inflicted suffering is not insight. Smoke more dope, you failure.

>We're all hiding some secret, fucked up predilection.

No, the majority of people are not.

>If the person isn't an asshole,

= agrees with me.

>thinks with their brain

=agrees with me

>and isn't annoying to be around

- by disagreeing with me.

>I couldn't care less what is in their pants or what they want me to call them.

= am actively excited by and supportive of delusional behavior.

>>17611738
Why did it take this long for somebody to post these exact words?

Are you a closeted tranny afraid to transition?

>>17611982

>Why am I obligated to deem someone else's sense of self valid or invalid?

Because you have a brain, and suppressing your faculty of reason won't make it go away. If it's defective, as it seems to be in your case, then we aren't talking from agreed premises, and should probably stop talking to each other.

>The only thing of yours that has been attacked is your ignorance.

Why are you incapable of learning? Nobody is going to listen to this kind of strident insolence.

>I'm not saying anyone NEEDS to accept anyone

Yes you are. That's all you have been saying.

You're absolutely right. Because we let people do whatever they want, there are people like you, that will end as wellfare queens, shitpost their whole day, hurt other people and aren't useful in any aspect. You're worthless trash. You seek your answers in philosophy, while you don't even notice, that you are a sick autist, that will never find any answer and instead die in pile of shit.

>>17612005

We can see you're the same person, tranny.

>>17611997
Best for society, or most fitting the vision you have for it in exclusion of those you despise?
How do you know what is best? By what metric?

>The opinion of someone whos ideas can never lead a nation
Before you go and lead nations maybe you should get the hang of using apostrophes.

>>17612003
A tranny is infinitely more sane than any theist. Are you going to lock up the vast majority of humans on Earth?

>>17611230

They have rejected the crazy, they're just keeping quiet about it now, but don't worry - getting the Dean involved, the tranny just confirmed the rightness of what you were saying. He's had to get non-academic staff involved to silence discussion - that speaks for itself. If they're paying attention, this is a lesson they'll never forget.

File: there we go, fedora.png (67KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1366x768px

>>17612022

>>17612022
Theist take the stance of believing in an unfalsifiable claim on a fairly unfalsifiable but real question. Saying they are wrong is just as bad as being a theist.
Id argue they are definitely more sane than a tranny. If you are talking about the crazed christian though who knows.

>>17611966

>I'm not sure if just asking not to be killed, discriminated against and tossed into mental asylums is equivalent to asking to be called "your majesty"

I get it, the example wasn't into a context of authority, could it be a teen who believes he is a wolfkin or whatever.

To clarify, I don't condone violence, abuse or punishment against an individual that it's a good person and has done no crime, I think that the problem is that it's so easy to categorize people (by race, by sexual orientation, etc) in groups and judge them that way that it has become a custom. I'm sorry for the bad experience you and your friend had.

The solution of extreme intolerance or the illusion of extreme intolerance is not extreme tolerance, there is a point of balance where we all can stand, but today is the gold fever of moral superiority so judges will look for something to judge, maybe the bigot of yesterday is the social justice warrior of today just because they have the backup now to point fingers and belittle people who think different than them, I think these kind of people are the most dangerous because their are followed by extremists that don't have any other emotional output than violence and abuse.

>>17612020
>Best for society, or most fitting the vision you have for it in exclusion of those you despise?
Definitely best. Despising people takes too much effort.
>How do you know what is best? By what metric?
By the ramifications and implications of the option along with implementations.

>grammar rules are needed to lead a nation
Opinion into the trash

>>17612015

You can't even compose a sentence, tranny. Bye now.

>>17612028
Wow you don't seem to know how 4chan works.

>>17612029
It is not a real question exactly because there is no evidence for it. Whether or not an invisible undetectable demon is currently fucking your ass is unfalsifiable but you don't take an agnostic position on it. You assume that it is false until proof is brought forth that it might be true. There is an infinite number of such claims and the only logical position is to assume them to be wrong until shown otherwise.

Theists believe in literal, actual magic. That's miles ahead of thinking you're neurologically intersexed.

>>17612037
>By the ramifications and implications of the option along with implementations.
Why is one state better than another? What is your answer to Hume's Is-Ought problem? How do you derive an ought?

Post an overview of your presentation.

go to a therapist

I am a 24 years old heterosexual man.
I am a friendless, dateless, kissless virgin.

I never had a crush on anyone. Is this normal?

>>17612052
Its a question of the first mover. If you cant understand that you might be more crazy than they are.

File: there we go, fudgepakor.png (67KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1366x768px

>>17612052

>>17612068
>If I stick my head in the sand I won't have to respond..!
Employing the SJW defense, I see. Good choice.

OP doesn't want advice
/thread

>>17612055

Legalized child abuse is pretty clearly non-optimal, Pontius Pilate. The world won't wait for you to understand this, so get adult, faggot.

>>17612072
That people hold to a delusion for a long time does not make it any less of a delusion. There was a time before god as an idea. It is not different from our dear demon, except that humanity has chosen to arbitrarily believe in it for thousands of years.

>>17612080
That's not an argument. Do you believe in moral facts? Why?

>>17612082

>There was a time before god as an idea.

'Ancient atheism' is the biggest kek outside of Druidry. No, atheism is a recent development.

>>17612092
Animals do not believe in gods, and man was once an animal. Do you think that the moment we developed abstract thought we immediately came up with God, and furthermore, with a god in any way similar to the jewish one?

>>17612087

This is about reason, not philosophical sophistries. Philosophy isn't going to help you when your tranny head is exploded all over the inside of one of your bathroom stalls.

>>17612055
Why would you ask extremely vague unguided questions that dissertations could be written for.
Try adding some context.

>>17612096
In other words you have no argument and this is just how you feel. Very well. Know that society as a whole feels differently. Know that you are on the losing side. Know that history will not treat you kindly.

>>17612094

What the fuck is this fedora shit doing on this thread?

>>17612076
Only advice Ive seen is >>17611896
and its pretty good

>>17612100

>Know that

Ah, all trannies love this. No faggot, you don't get to use imperatives. Society as a whole is repulsed by you. You're going to be killed in every red state. History will be written by us.

>>17612099
I do not believe in moral facts. That person seem to be claiming that moral facts exist. I'd like them to back that claim up. A heavy burden, I realize, but not one I placed on them.

>>17612111

No-one cares what you believe, tranny.

>>17612109
So far you're losing, just as you lost when it came to gay rights, black rights, slavery..

>>17612113
>I have no argument.. gotta change the subject
You definitely do though. You keep asking.

>>17612103
Facts before feelings friend.

Fact: You're all wasting your time.

>>17612111
And you ask this with extremely vague unguided questions?
Pretty sure Im the guy you are talking to and I never mentioned morals. But I appreciate the freud slip.

>>17612122
Actually I'm enjoying myself.

>>17612123
Any ought statement made in a vacuum is innately about morality; that's what morality IS - what one OUGHT do.

>>17612114
>gay rights
You realize the country didnt choose this and when given the choice voted no. No one likes gays

>>17612133
>Any ought statement made in a vacuum is innately about morality
No
Secondly this isnt a vacuum.

>>17612135
Enough people - enough of the right people - voted yes. If the other side was more powerful then the result would have been different.

>>17612144
>Enough people - enough of the right people - voted yes
No, the populace literally voted no. It was done anyways by a handful of people. Do not pretend as though it was the will of the people.

>>17612140
What is morality, then? Prefering any state of the world to any other ultimately depends on feeling that one is preferable to the other. There is no logical reason to prefer a certain state. You must first have a certain state you prefer, arbitrarily, to be able to derive any oughts from it, and those oughts are only tools to reach the state you arbitrarily prefer.

For there to be a "good" for society, as that poster (or you) implied, there must be a moral ought defining good.

>>17612147
The will of the people who matter i.e. those who have the power.

>>17612163
lol that mentality is just sad. But Im glad you let a handful of people decide your morals.

>>17612173
As opposed to letting the majority decide my morals? Who's the sheep now?

>>17612157
Its like you arent trying to follow the conversation. Good is considered to be that which flourishes or enables flourishing. Its a classic definition not really up for debate. If you dont agree with it then you are arguing about a different concept. The general role of things is to fulfill their role as best as possible. Vague answers to vague irrelevant questions.

>>17612182
>Its better to let a handful of people decide my morals than the general populace
sure thing

File: Sartre.jpg (71KB, 834x1283px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 834x1283px

>>17612189
>Good is considered to be that which flourishes or enables flourishing. Its a classic definition not really up for debate.
It's absolutely up for debate, and has been for centuries. Who defines what counts as flourishing? Deontologists and utilitarians might have utterly different conceptions of what that involves presuming the former's duties do not align with the latter's values.

>The general role of things is to fulfill their role as best as possible
Why do you presume humans have roles?

>>17612195
That the general populace believes something grants that thing no increase in credence. Every other human could believe something I think is moral is immoral and it wouldn't matter.

>>17612208
No, arguing about what is defined as flourishing is not the same as arguing about whether or not whats good is flourishing. You arent following the conversation and just side tracking for no reason. Or trying to stall or derail without having to answer the original question.

>>17612213
Never said it did. But it seems that you are under the impression that society has chosen to accept homosexuality when it has never done so. You are simply ill informed.

>>17612216
I know nothing about what Flourishing is except that you say it is Good, so by asking how you define Flourishing I'm actually asking how you define Good. Flourishing is an empty label that could mean many different things until you attach a specific meaning to it. You could have written any random string of letters and it would make no difference. Disambiguate.

>>17612223
Enough people of influence did to force said values, and the masses always fold eventually.

>>17612235
>I know nothing about what Flourishing is except that you say it is Good,
You have to be intentionally doing this. I said whats good is to flourish. Classic definition given by plato and is used as the basis for philosophical ideas to follow. Otherwise the word as no meaning.
>Flourishing is an empty label that could mean many different things until you attach a specific meaning to it
You arent even trying. To flourish has a literal definition that is applicable to many things.
>Why do you presume humans have roles?
Never mentioned humans. Thats just you not being able to follow a conversation. Seeing as though you are determined not to though I might not continue this.

>>17612244
Many different philosophers define the word differently. To assume that it has one definition hints that you only know one. You could have saved us all some time and just said you use Plato's.

To which I say: why? Why favor this definition and not, say, Nietzsche's definition of good?

>>17612265
When I said whats good is to flourish, if you didnt know that is Platos definition of the good you dont know enough. Secondly I never said anything was good. I said best. More of you not being able to follow a conversation.
Your second half is bait to derail but Ill say Nietzsche is a hack and no one takes him seriously. Secondly his definition is about morality which I never mentioned but youve been trying to derail to the entire time.

>>17611230
Google "gender critical"

>>17612279
>When I said whats good is to flourish, if you didnt know that is Platos definition of the good you dont know enough.
Plato is not the only one to use the very common term flourish.

>Secondly I never said anything was good. I said best.
Best implies that you know one state is better than another i.e. you know what is Good.

>Your second half is bait to derail but Ill say Nietzsche is a hack and no one takes him seriously
Except for the many, many branches of philosophy who do.

>Secondly his definition is about morality which I never mentioned but youve been trying to derail to the entire time
We've been over this. To say that something is for the best for society is to make a moral claim.

>>17612317
>Plato is not the only one to use the very common term flourish.
Not following the conversation I see. Plato is the first to define whats good as to flourishing.
>Best implies that you know one state is better than another i.e. you know what is Good.
If thats how you want to define best as good fine. But the issue is you cant follow a conversation and tried to use the definition of good in terms of morality. AKA good/evil instead of good/bad.
>To say that something is for the best for society is to make a moral claim.
No its not. You didnt address criticism to your claim here either. Instead you tried to derail in hopes that no one would notice. Classic tactic for making a weak argument. Best and morality are not related.

Ive only been responding to you as an idle game for other people to reply. But since its just you and me, and you cant follow a conversation Ill stop. Not entertaining.

>>17612334
You accuse me of doing what you yourself have done and continually refuse to advance the argument, endlessly deflecting instead. I, too, argue for the sake of bystanders - so that they can see that you are ridiculous.

>>17612363
Youve never stated one attempt Ive made at deflecting. If it is not some off topic derailment attempt like the one youve been doing to conflate the terms best with morality through a series of logical fallacies I would address it.

Show him this site
https://sexandgenderintro.com

File: 1471896423008.png (176KB, 203x341px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 203x341px

>>17611230
This was painful and embarrassing to read. I know this is a troll, but seriously, what's wrong with you dude?

>>17612463
Nothing embarrassing about arguing for what you believe in.

>>17612474
It's your beliefs that are embarrassing.

>>17612500
I understand why you would feel this way. I feel the same about you

>>17611230
itt: things that never happened

>>17611997

>Letting people do whatever they want in society has never worked and never will

You're operating at very high levels of silly.

>>17612004

>Good. Why were you there, when you know you'll be hated? This sounds like the martyr complex we've become used to hearing.

Oh, ok. So its OUR fault for traveling through areas of ignorance. The ignorance itself is not at fault at all and should we of been jumped, attacked or even killed we have only ourselves to blame.

>Interesting how you throw the only thing that's happening, and which is perfectly just, between two melodramatic things that aren't happening.

I'm pretty sure its not up to you to deny the existence of discrimination. If you actually get out of your comfort zone and explore areas of society you don't typically frequent you might discover exactly how little you actually know about what you're talking about.

>No, we are all living in an empirically measurable reality

= my reality


>Your self-indulgence is not wisdom

= self indulgence into things I deem unwise

>your pseudo-aristocratic obliviousness to real

= the things I deem real

>No, the majority of people are not.

I feel like you're really stretching the limits of logic to fit into your narrative you're trying to spin here. You contradicted yourself probably a dozen times in your cute little rebuttal here yet you still haven't done anything but say "you're wrong I'm right"

Your ignorance has actually proven my point that we all live in our bubbles of what we feel reality is and that anyone suggesting otherwise is typically met with anger and vitriol, much like you're doing now.

File: tumblr_inline_o5j54kK3aq1rap2ar_540.png (152KB, 241x264px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 241x264px

>>17612567
kek

>>17612579
>ignorance
In what way are they ignorant.

>>17611303
Gj op.
As for your classmates, I'd say it's a lost cause to try and rally support in any college or university against anything liberal-ish. Those places are usually teeming with libcucks and sjws, so anything you or anyone might say that critiques their way of thinking will result in you or anyone else getting shunned out. It isn't as bad when you graduate though, as people won't be pressured by the school walls or (un)spoken rules

File: 1468288704539.jpg (75KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1024x768px

>>17612583

>In what way are they ignorant.

Listen. In no way am I saying people don't have a right to feel the way they feel. People who are raised christian or conservative or liberal or whatever are programmed to think the way they think and its not my place to change that.

For example, we stopped at a little gas station somewhere around Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. My friend filled up while my other friend and I went inside just to grab some snacks. He isn't flamboyant at all and dresses rather conservatively but its very obvious that he's gay.

While inside the station we walked around checking out the snack isle, talking amongst ourselves and I noticed the two guys behind the counter eye balling us pretty hard. I'm black, by the way

As we finish up our shopping we can't help but overhearing the two guys laughing and looking over at us. As I walked up to the counter I ask quite calmly if there's something on their minds and the burlier one immediately gets aggressive and chimes up "you faggots might wanna consider shoppin somewhere else"

My friend and I set our stuff on the counter and drove out of town without looking back or saying anything to each other

Do I think that man didn't have a right to think homosexuality is wrong? No. He can think whatever he wants, but going out of your way to attack us, verbally or physically, is a hallmark of ignorance. It wasn't enough that we just bought some snacks and moved on. It wasn't enough that we just lived differently lives. He felt it ABSOLUTELY necessary to belittle and intimidate us because of our differences

That is ignorance. I hardly see how driving through a state and stopping to get gas has anything to do with the "martyrdom" complex that this poster >>17612004 stated before. We didn't come in asking for trouble

I don't see how thats asking for harassment at all. My point is that discrimination happens all over all the time and just because you don't see it or aren't exposed to it doesn't mean it doesnt exist

>>17611256
>Denying reality because you're mentally ill is an equal opinion to not being mentally ill and addressing reality head on.

Go cut your dick off faggot.

>Hey, don't point out mental illnesses! That's mean!
What in the fuck kind of world do the people ITT live in? Is this really the state of America these days?

>>17612583

And the strangest part of the whole thing is I encounter people like this frequently. The other month I went to the hospital for a twisted ankle to get it checked out and asked for something for the pain and the doctor told me he doesn't give out THOSE pain meds in the ER. Ten minutes later a white lady comes in with the same thing comes into the room next to mine with the same problem and the first thing he does is offer her something for the pain. I overheard the whole thing.

The other day at the bank I walked in to deposit a check. The older white guy in front of me finished his transaction and left. He was wearing a college football hat and sunglasses. When I walked up the first thing the teller did was ask me to take off my hat and sunglasses. I asked why she didn't ask the other guy to take them off when she asked me and she just said "its bank policy".

Last year I went to park in a parking lot behind the bar I work at and two white guys with flashlights walked up to my car and informed me that my "nigger ass" wasn't allowed to park there.

The whole point of this is to say that I encounter people all the time like people in this thread who are trying to tell me that discrimination is "made up" or that I'm just trying to be a victim or that I'm trying to martyr myself for the sake of playing the race card and they have no clue what its like to actually be someone on the receiving end of hate and ignorance. I experience little tiny things like this every day and even though most of them aren't threats to my safety or person, they still happen and after awhile it hurts. On top of that, someone has the balls to tell me that because of their perspective, I'm just making it all up and that everything I've been through is all in my head.

My point is that it isn't over and until people start putting themselves in other people's shoes we will always have this militant disagreement that drives people to hate and violence.

>>17612674
>That is ignorance
You don't know what "ignorant" means.

>>17612693
>>17612693

I don't think mental illness means what you think it means.

>>17612700
Being a tranny is as defining a mental illness as I can think of. Being really sad is a mental illness, but wanting to be an entirely new person to the point where you actually convince yourself that you were born in the wrong body and need to be pumped full of chemicals and have parts of your body chopped off, that isn't? Fuck right off.

>>17612698

The fact that this is the only wrong thing you gathered from my entire post says to me that you yourself are pretty ignorant.

>>17612674
>He isn't flamboyant at all and dresses rather conservatively but its very obvious that he's gay.
If you can tell someone is gay they are flamboyant.
but going out of your way to attack us, verbally or physically, is a hallmark of ignorance.
You didnt state anything that is an action of ignorance. You also weakened your claim when you walked up to him. He has every right to suggest you shop somewhere else. Hell he might have even been warning you about an imminent attack.
>He felt it ABSOLUTELY necessary to belittle and intimidate us because of our differences
He had fun laughing at you. But you werent okay with ending it there. You started the confrontation. You know what was on his mind so no one is going to sympathize with your passive aggressive remark.
>That is ignorance.
I dont think you know what ignorance is.
>I don't see how thats asking for harassment at all.
People who dont like faggots are enjoying their lives when a wild faggot appears. Can you not see the problem here. They didnt go to you. You went to them.

>>17612708
Well given that your entire post hinges on "These people are ignorant" and you don't know what "ignorant" means, if really nullifies your entire post.

If I say "That wall is red" and my proof is me rattling off shit about car engines, then there's nothing to really address, is there?

>>17612708
So you are upset because he didnt call out the rest of your post as being wrong.
Seeing as the point of your post is to elaborate on how they were ignorant I dont see anything wrong with his remark getting to the core point.

>>17612704

>Being a tranny is as defining a mental illness as I can think of

Well that would actually mean something if you were in any capacity a mental health professional and not just some asshole with an internet connection.

>Being really sad is a mental illness, but wanting to be an entirely new person to the point where you actually convince yourself that you were born in the wrong body and need to be pumped full of chemicals and have parts of your body chopped off, that isn't?

Although your armchair psychology is very interesting I'm going to go head and value your medical knowledge about as much as a hunk of dog shit.

You can use anecdotal evidence about complicated medical and psychological issues you have no knowledge of to justify your idiocy all you want. Everyone is entitled to think whatever they want.

The only time I draw the line is when your idiocy expands past the boundary of your own mind and you insist upon attacking other people with it.

When you go to medical school or have any sort of psychological qualification to say the things you're saying we can talk. Until then you're just pulling your opinions out of your ass like the rest of us, meaning you're no more correct than anyone else.

>>17612726
>Appeal to authority
>Ad hominem
>Appeal to authority
>Ad hominem
>Appeal to authority
>Ad hominem
>Appeal to authority
>Ad hominem
wew tranny, I'm actually impressed by your completely and utter lack of argument. Are you all your mentally ill freaks this dumb?

>>17612731
You messed up anon. Its
>Appeal to authority
>Ad hominem
>Appeal to authority
>Ad hominem
>Appeal to authority
>Ad hominem
>Ad hominem
>Appeal to authority

>>17612739
Silly me. Can't believe I misrepresented that fantastic argument like that.

File: 1471141333489.gif (1MB, 300x165px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x165px

>>17612710
>>17612713
>>17612717

I can see that any information that challenges your preconceived notions of what you agree with is just going to fly straight over your heads.

Thats fine. I expected as much. Instead of addressing the meat of my post you kind of want to bicker over the dictionary definition of ignorance even though any reasonable person knows exactly what I mean and what context I mean it in. You know how sometimes in the english language there are nuances in words that expand beyond the literal dictionary translation? Of course you do. You seem like smart guys.

>You also weakened your claim when you walked up to him.

Yeah, in hindsight I should of tried to purchase my gatorade without walking up to him; you know, the guy that works the counter at the convenience store. Maybe I should of just thrown money at him from behind the peanut rack. Maybe I should of kneeled and crawled towards him and asked him to forgive me for my blackness. That might have made him feel more comfortable with me being in his store. Thats definitely the goal, right? Making sure racist, homophobic people are as comfortable as possible?

>Can you not see the problem here. They didnt go to you. You went to them.

I do, I absolutely do. The problem was I went to a gas station to fill my car and tried to purchase snacks. That was my bad. I should of not done that? I guess?

>Hell he might have even been warning you about an imminent attack.

You'd make a great attorney. If I was some numbskull jury member I might actually buy that bullshit if you worded it correctly.

>You started the confrontation. You know what was on his mind so no one is going to sympathize with your passive aggressive remark.

Yeah. My fault for wanting to be treated with respect and not just sitting there while a grown man mocked me. My bad. The fact that I don't go through my life being a constant silent receptacle for people's hatred and mockery is a huge problem and I'll definitely work on it.

>>17612768
You're not challenging preconceived notions, you simply don't understand the English language. None of what you'ev said constitutes ignorance. Ignorance is a lack of knowledge. If those men in the shop were ignorant, the story would've been "My gay friend went into a shop and nobody knew he was gay".

Lrn2English.

>>17612768
Also, I'm going to add:

Christ Almighty, stop acting like such a spoilt little entitled passive aggressive cunt. No wonder they told you to fuck off.

Why is is goofy ass thread still going

>>17612782
Triggered mentally ill freaks.

>>17612731

Firstly, you're using both of those terms incorrectly.

Secondly, I'm not a transexual but its very cute that you're trying to use that dismissal technique to brush aside my arguments without actually addressing any of my points.

I'll explain to you how you're incorrect, but I'm sure you'll just call me a tranny and give yourself a high five.

You aren't an authority on mental health, psychological disorders nor medicine. Pointing that out when you're trying to make medical, psychological claims is not the correct use of "appeal to authority". Like if I told you your engine needed to be replaced but I had no training in car repair whatsoever, you telling me I didn't know what I was talking about wouldn't be a logical fallacy, it would be an indisputable fact.

Facts, you see, are the backbone of debate. For future reference, screaming AD HOMINEM, APPEAL TO AUTHORITY is not actual proving me wrong. You provided no evidence or reference that in anyway compared my statements to those two logical fallacies. You just said it.

For example, if you gave me the answer to a math question and I just yelled "WRONG" that doesn't prove me correct because I didn't provide the answer, nor did I provide evidence for why you were wrong. I just yelled "WRONG". You see how dumb that is?

Also, calling you an asshole isn't an ad hominem because I wasn't using you being an asshole as a logical step for why you were incorrect. I just called you an asshole. ALL name calling doesn't fall under the umbrella of ad hominem. It actually has to meet a set of requirements in the context of a debate. You would know that if you worked your Google a little better when looking up logical fallacies.

You, however, did use an ad hominem when you called me a tranny because you did use it as a reason for my arguments were incorrect. You just used it as a replacement for an actual argument.

So, in summary, you're an asshole.

>>17612798
>Firstly, you're using both of those terms incorrectly.
No, I'm not.

>An argument from authority (Latin: argumentum ad verecundiam), also called an appeal to authority, is a common type of argument which can be fallacious, such as when an authority is cited on a topic outside their area of expertise or when the authority cited is not a true expert.
>Ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.
Educate yourself.

Calling you a tranny wasn't an attempt to dismiss anything. You didn't present anything to dismiss after all, since they were all fallacies.

>Pointing that out when you're trying to make medical, psychological claims is not the correct use of "appeal to authority
See above definition.

>Facts, you see, are the backbone of debate
You should try using some instead of fallacies then.

>For example, if you gave me the answer to a math question and I just yelled "WRONG" that doesn't prove me correct because I didn't provide the answer
The correct analogy here would be me not actually answering the maths question and then you saying "You didn't answer the question." And that doesn't need to be explained, it's very self-explanatory.

>Although your armchair psychology is very interesting I'm going to go head and value your medical knowledge about as much as a hunk of dog shit.
This is the ad hominem. That's you attacking me and not what I said, so you could easily dismiss it.

>psychological issues you have no knowledge of to justify your idiocy all you wan
This is the ad hominmen.

>your idiocy
There's that ad hominem again.

If you considered "Tranny" to be an attack on your character, that's on you.

Done embarrassing yourself?

>>17612772

You're being purposefully dumb to avoid admitting that you know exactly what I'm talking about. You know for a fact that being ignorant doesn't just refer to an inability to retain quantifiable knowledge, but social knowledge, perspective and awareness as well. People use ignorant in that context literally every day and anyone with a brain stem and a grade 4 reading level knows that.

But, I already said thats fine, dude. You can keep spinning around in circles all you want I'm not going to try to disengage you from your retard suicide mission. Go for it, man.

>>17612776

Yeah, definitely entitled. It was my mistake for going in there to buy snacks. When people laugh and mock me I should just learn to stay quiet and not say anything so that the people mocking me don't feel harassed or endangered. Because if they do feel harassed or endangered they could lash out at me and then it would be my fault for provoking the racist.

Next time I should just not go anywhere, not stop for gas or stand up for myself when someone is mocking me. Everyone knows that the only way to logically and properly stand up for yourself when someone harasses you for being gay or black is to say nothing, be polite and apologize for existing. I mean, ANY reasonable human being would do that, right?

Like if someone at a store called you a faggot and told you to leave or walked up to you, shined a light in your face and told you white people weren't allowed to park in this parking lot? I mean, according to your logic you're just supposed to say "So sorry" and slowly back away because if any conflict happens out of that situation it would be your fault for engaging them, correct?

Thats correct, right? Standing up for yourself is not okay, for sure. I should of known.

You're totally right.

I was definitely spoiled though, you had the right. I grew up with food, and water and not being called a nigger every day to my face. I have to admit, it was a very privileged life.

>>17612824
>You're being purposefully dumb
No, I'm being correct. You're the one being dumb by using the word incorrectly. Actually, one could even say you're being very ignorant. (That's how you really use that word)

>The entire rest of the post is you doubling down on the passive aggressive faggotry I called you out for in the first place.
Kek. What are you doing m8?

If someone insulted me, I'd probably just hit them and be done with it because I'm not a passive aggressive entitled faggot.

Are you angry because people don't like niggers? Is that what it is?

Spoiler: Niggers had civil rights in the US 30 years before I had civil rights in my country.

You know what "white people aren't allowed here" example you used? That's my life, except we don't get a warning, we get our kneecaps shot.

Get over yourself.

>>17611256
>Everyone can be what he wants as long as no one is hurt.
...Nnnnnnnnno? Everyone can be only what they were made, nothing else. There's every reason to take a hard stand against the denial of reality.

>>17612768
Calling him ignorant just shows you are ignorant of what the word means.

>>17612768
The amount of butthurt you display here just shows how you are in the wrong. You cant have a reasonable exchange with a person.

File: 1462496029646.jpg (22KB, 300x265px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 300x265px

>>17611256
>they want acceptance
The first step is request for tolerance – the right to be left alone.

Then, you have demand for acceptance – equal status.
Examples can be gay-marriage laws. (Personally I'm not fond of marriage status having bearing on any legal processes, but that's besides the point.)

Next comes celebration – everyone must accept and promote the agenda, as a good, valuable thing.

After that you have forced participation – everyone must play along, participate in the culture.
Be it either by so-called "preferred pronouns", allowing men using female bathrooms, or treating them as genuine women.

The final, fifth step, is punishment of everyone who disagrees.
Censorship, "hate-speech police", just with the mere excuse of "hurt feelings".


These sick agendas need to be fought the second they appear. No matter if it's gay, trans, or whatever else appears in the future. They only cause harm to the human civilisation and human beings as individuals.

People obviously deserve right to be treated like humans, no one is calling for lynch or banning such people from public activities. That's why I wholly support OP, for his effort to fight it lawfully, using logic and going against enforced obedience and compliance with such sick agenda.

The point is not to demonize these people, but to turn as many as possible away from such ideas. It may seem like "not letting them be", is attacking them as individuals, but in reality it's a fight against agenda.

>>17611303
>Making the tranny cry isnt gratifying. having the class understand that he is crazy is what made me go to class with a smile on my face.
My hero. Though I would use "in the wrong", rather than "crazy". Nonetheless, you have my blessing.

File: transgender_pride_dna_by_lovemystarfire-d6yngqm.jpg (104KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 1024x683px

oh god who the hell has time for this shit.

>>17611464
Scientific method is valuable even in the most non-scientific fields.

>>17611230
>Philosophy student thinks he knows more about transsexuality than the medical community
lol

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4987404/
>Untreated MtFs and FtMs who have an early onset of their gender dysphoria and are sexually oriented to persons of their natal sex show a distinctive brain morphology, reflecting a brain phenotype. These phenotypes are different from those of heterosexual males or females; the differences affect the right hemisphere and cortical structures underlying body perception. The genesis of these phenotypes might be caused by atypical effects of sex hormones or their metabolites in specific cortical regions of MtFs and FtMs. These effects of hormones on the cortex suggest the hypothesis that brain differences between homosexual MtFs and FtMs and male and female controls are due to differences in the development of the cortex; this hypothesis would imply that the thinning process undergone by some regions of the cortex is timed differently in each phenotype.

>The review of the available data seems to support two existing hypotheses: (1) a brain-restricted intersexuality in homosexual MtFs and FtMs and (2) Blanchard’s insight on the existence of two brain phenotypes that differentiate “homosexual” and “nonhomosexual” MtFs."

In other words transsexuals exclusively attracted to their natal sex are neurologically intersexed. They aren't the other gender but they're certainly not their birth gender. They're between male and female, leaning to one direction or the other.

>>17613282
Like any of these fuckwits apply it. No, they yammer about things without end as if that's how you decide things, as if they have the first clue about the subject they're discussing. Why research and experiment when you can hold debates instead?

>>17611230
man, just fuck the tranny and be done with it. It's so obvious.

>>17614387
>implying OP wasn't rejected

>>17614426
>implying rape is consentual

>>17611809
>appealing to mental health professionals is an appeal to authority
> but the stance of a varied and generally uneducated l society is reliable

Lynching was pretty okay for a while. So was humping your first cousin.

That's not a very good argument, friend.

>>17614523
Thats because thats not what he was arguing. You just cant read.

>>17614538
Ouch! I won't recover. Well, you seem to be smart. Please, do enlighten me. Reading is so hard in the wee hours.

>>17614543
Im not going to read that whole conversation, but its obvious you took his post out of context and didnt read the post he was replying to. One the topic of transphobia being acceptable. Not if its good or bad. Thats just you failing at a 4th grade reading level.

>>17614548
Ah, I see what you're referring to now. My mistake. Though I don't quite see how my proficiency is relevant.

Speaking of elementary reading levels;
> I'm*
> it's*
> didn't*
> On*, not one
> it's*
> that's*
> I think it would be *achieving a fourth grade level, actually, not failing

I want to help you, too.

Thank you. I have learned to read more carefully.

File: 1475028681720.png (376KB, 514x506px) Image search: [Google]

376KB, 514x506px

>>17611230
>OP thinks he told off his professor
>OP implies he can teach a class without sweating and shitting pants when one person looks at him

>mfw it's a 'things that didn't happen' thread

>>17614594
Its actually very common to have your students teach a class if you arent at some shitty college. I wouldnt be surprised if OP said he was at a small college.

>>17614600
Are we saying the OP isn't an autismal nerd with some sort of spastic tendencies?

>"H-hey class... um, these trannies-"
>"Fuck off"
>"O-oh okay..."

>>17614606
The type of class OP described is very common. Its an intro philosophy course.