3 ms·
> [H]e was so insecure and petty that he would argue with complete “nobodies” like myself for extended periods of time if you tried to be reasonably persuasive.
by ninjin 4y ago
> [H]e was so insecure and petty that he would argue with complete “nobodies” like myself for extended periods of time if you tried to be reasonably persuasive.
I do appreciate Adams’ work, although I think he has “gone off the deep end”. However, is what you write here not potentially a very uncharitable take? Is it not also possible that this man genuinely cares about a fellow man and believes he can somehow get through to you? This is of course putting aside whether he is on the right side of the argument and whether he himself can be argued out of his own position.
- Waterluvian 4y agoAd hominem attacks aren’t a great way to get through to anyone. Perhaps “argue” is the wrong word.
- ninjin 4y agoYes, I would tend to agree that delivering a tirade of ad hominem attacks does not qualify as providing a solid argument to a fellow man. =) I hope Adams’ comes around eventually. Until then, we will always have the good old times: https://dilbert.com/strip/1995-06-24 https://dilbert.com/strip/1995-06-24
- Waterluvian 4y agoHah. That’s a good one. It’s an interesting situation I find myself in more often than I wish: someone has become fairly deplorable but I still like their earlier work. Adams, Roiland, Rowling, Louis C.K. etc. How does one reconcile that? It really sours things.
- porkbeer 4y ago'Deplorable' are we still using that hateful dog whistle?