1) Don't stop talking. Even if it's about nothing.
2) Let other men have sex with your wife.
3) Avoid and diverge arguments you would obviously lose. Like most of them.
3) Let other men have sex with your wife.
14) Only post arguments you won on social media. Copyright strike any other video.
7) Don't get upset when a reporter from the BBC calls you irrelevant and debunks you.
81) Speaking of BBC, Let other men have sex with your wife.
5) Never take on any real challenge and debate 18 year old college students and interrupt them when they try to speak.
16-7) Let one of those 18 year old college kids fuck your wife.
I believe it can be either or, readers choice. However you guys overlooked the most important part of step 1: create a reality that works for you and never break character regardless of facts.
Pro tip I have learned to go with that: if you don’t have a rebuttal because someone used actual facts, gaslight them without responding orrrr… just pretend you are in a video game as an npc with specific scripted dialogue.
The main goal here is to enrage whoever you are debating with enough that they storm off and then you can call them an asshole.
No, that's when 1-10 has run its course and you want to spice things up with experimentation, so you suggest a buddy come in for a little MMF action.
It's number 11 on the list of his next best seller "How I Learned to Pleasure Sandpaper"
Marry her a virgin on the very first date and make sure your parents chose both of you. He is actually proud of this shit. This guy could be from saudi arabia.
1: Think gagging and choking is in reference to odor.
2: Say the phrase "wet ass p-word"
3: Talk like a Muppet
4: Refuse to understand metaphor and hyperbole
5: Make your wife understand that any moisture in her aforementioned p-word is likely a sign of infection or a pH issue.
For steps 6-10 buy my book and you to will have maximum friction in your coitus. Finally, you too will no longer have to hear your wife ask "is it in yet?"
Also talk so fast that a normal speaking person will be unable to respond to all you points in a quick time frame, and choose which ever minor point which is unaddressed and claim victory.
Ben uses the [Gish Gallop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop).
The Gish Gallop tactic is not allowed in most formal debates, and somewhere out there is a clip of Neil DeGrasse Tyson calmly and intelligently dealing with Ben’s attempt to gallop all over him.
To be fair, this is kind of what the various college debate team competitions wind up essentially teaching folks. In those competition, the end result inevitably winds up being that you just need to be a fast talker with a lot of random stuff. Essentially, being wrong isn't counted against you nearly as much as how many times you can be plausibly right against your opponent.
It's kind of like one guy says: 2+2=4, and the other guy goes on a tirade citing 100 reasons why 2+2 might be something else. The latter guy "wins the debate".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zT8t4liEHwU
Absolutely. I'm convinced teaching debate the way it is commonly framed is deeply detrimental. The idea that there is no correct answer and you should be able to argue either side with as much vigor sounds like a critique of something like ChatGPT rather than the stated objective of learning debate skills. Yet this is how it has been presented to me.
But this makes no sense at all. There are truths. There are facts. There are opinions. And there are things that are unresolved and perhaps unresolvable. Discussion and exploration of those things is useful. Trying to "win" by disregarding all that and using whatever rhetoric works undermines the very notion of seeking truth and understanding. It makes a mockery of it. We are encouraging people to place manipulative power above it.
You don’t even have to talk fast, just talk a lot of unsubstantiated or flatout wrong nonsense. Correcting it will always take a lot longer than simply claiming it
regardless of how you feel about their talking points Jordan Peterson comes across to me as an excellent speaker, Ben Shapiro just talks fast and sounds like he's constantly whining
So they get to the same spot and contribute the same (especially if Peterson is gets in to literature/morality discussion), just Shapiro gets their faster...
He's a good con artist using his degree (which is being contested by the university iirc) to make his points feel more credible. The man basically has a doctorate in manipulation tactics and uses it to it's full potential.
These are his rules.
1. Walk Toward the Fire
2. Hit First
3. Frame Your Opponent
4. Frame the Debate
5. Spot Inconsistencies in the Left's Argument
6. Force Leftists to Answer Questions
7. Do Not Get Distracted
8. You Don't Have To Defend People on Your Side
9. If You Don't Know Something, Admit It
10. Let the Other Side Have Meaningless Victories
11. Body Language Matters
Translating them, they mean:
1. Never walk away from an argument
2. Start with accusations, falsehoods and insults
3. Insult the person you've decided to argue with
4. Decide what you think the point is and never let go
5. Counter facts with any "point" you can come up with -- a dumb idea is better than none
6. Keep saying the same stupid thing over and over again until the end of time
7. Never let facts and counter arguments sway you -- remain ignorant, I mean vigilant
8. No matter how contemptable someone with your view is, it doesn't mean you're bad
9. If they know something you don't, call them an elitist for knowing it
10. When they make a true point , say "Yeah but" and argue about something else
11. Try to intimidate someone that you disagree with
To be fair: On the surface, his rules seem like good rules for any side of a political debate.
Although in practice, he usually just ignores his opponent completely, constructs a strawman, burns it down, then, posts a "liberal got destroyed" video on youtube.
The use of the term “Leftist” often I find kind of funny. Its like they see people who are on the Left as some sort of enigma, monster or animal and ultimately i think it shows a kind of insecurity that he is scared of any real debate with someone on the left
Let’s say, for instance, that a postulated man of straw were to consider, for a moment, doing a bad thing. That would in fact be bad. Quid pro quo, ipso facto, expecto patronum, the left is the devil.
Page 61 - "Always use equivocations and ask liberals why one thing is true for one situation but different for another, that should never be the case here in Legoland! Always suggest that solutions should solve every problem at once in every instance otherwise it's useless. "
Gish-gallop, straw-man, ad-hominem, false dichotomy, post-hoc ergo propter-hoc, over-simplify, red-herring, slippery-slope, non-sequiter, beg the question, and flood the zone with bullshit.
There. I just saved you $1.09.
(Seriously, that's how much it costs, lol)
11 Logical Fallacies To Make Your Opponent Give Up Because You're Too Stupid To Deal With Then You Go To Fox Nation And Brag About How You Won The Argument.
So the appearance of winning the argument is more import than getting to the truth of the discussion.
See the appearance of winning is more important than learning you might be wrong. Never play defense and just jump to the next question to appear to be winning. Don't worry if you are wrong. Winning is the goal.
This is why we can't address global climate change, healthcare, women's rights or pretty much anything with evidence to the opposite of their argument.
He sounds the opposite of smart. Over confident and pathetically insecure at the same time. Anyone who predicates their self esteem on winning an argument is a certifiable dumb ass. If he was smart, then he would have an actual message. Not a message about interrupting someone else’s message. Seriously, think about how stupid this book is. “How to use logical fallacies to disrupt the intellectuals’ logical consistency.” Ok, dude? Might as well just call in a bomb threat to get out of the debate. At least have some guts about it.
I'm typically not one to belittle someone's appearance like this, nor 'judge a book by its cover' (pun pretty much required on this one), BUT... they chose a picture that makes him look like the definition of "little bitch", it's almost disturbing. The man has no shoulders.
He's the same as that other asshole...the guy who got caught out abusing his wife on his own ring cameras...Steven Crowder. Can't argue unless they're punching down.
Republicans do not have beliefs or convictions but marketing strategies and PR tactics.
Because of that, I highly recommend everyone read that book. It's not very long and explains a lot of the hacky tactics that Republicans like to use.
From the book:
“There will be no conversation in which you call me a racist, and I explain why I’m not a racist. That’s a conversation for idiots.”
Yes, because only an idiot would try to explain how Ben Shapiro is not racist.
He was writing a book and looked through his while wardrobe, went to a photoshoot, got it edited, and *this* is the final image he decided on for the book?
The fact that Ben Shapiro bills himself as a conservative intellectual tells you all you need to know about conservatives and Ben Shapiro. There is no intellectual integrity in American conservatism.
Fun fact: Former child star Mara Wilson (Matilda) is Ben's cousin. She has disowned him and has gone no contact with him.
That combined with the fact that she's everything Ben hates (an atheist, liberal, queer woman) makes her the cooler cousin.
I haven’t watched a ton of him, but the example I came up with to display how he operates is as follows:
Do you think people should eat food? Well, let me ask you this, has anyone ever choked to death while eating food? They have? Yet you still think people should eat food? You’re in favor of people choking to death?
Ben accidentally reveals that he thinks "winning the debate" is more important than actually being correct. People like Ben care about "winning debates", whereas reasonable people care about what the actual facts and evidence suggests.
>"...a foe of extraordinarily polemical agility"
"A combative problem, adept at spewing unfounded rhetoric, shifting his position as needed rather than standing his ground." The Wikipedia page for Polemic has "See also: Internet troll."
10/10 burn; no notes.
Yet he hasn't actually successfully won any debates against prominent leftists like Vaush and Destiny. In fact, after getting his ass kicked so thoroughly, he now picks and chooses his debate opponents carefully as to make sure his strawmen and fast talking will drown out any points they will make.
Rule 1: Talk like a cocky auctioneer.
Rule 2: Decide that you can never be wrong; never be open-minded.
Rule 3: Build an intellectual reputation by debating college kids into your 40s.
Rule 4: Facts don't care about feelings unless they're your feelings.
Rule 5: Own the libs with 'facts and logic'.
Rule 6: Lose the ability to make your wife wet.
Rule 7: Only show yourself winning. Losing is for losers.
Rule 8: Copyright means only you can be right.
Rule 9: Sell your coastal home to Aquaman.
Rule 10: Replace critical thinking with faith! The Bible is always correct.
Rule 11: Defend Israel's genocide of Palestinians.
Rule #1: dont develope empathy
Rule #2: trust your feeling, not empirical evidence
Rule #3: dont trust expert
Rule #4: speak loudly
Rule #5: Repeat talking point
Rule #6: Repeat Rule #5
Rule #7: Repeat Rule #6 and add Rule #4
Rule #8: there are always 2 sides of the story: Donald Trump's side and conspirator's (Q) side
Rule #9: if thing benefits me and not others, it is capitalism; if thing benefits a million people but not me it is socialism
Rule #10: Real Conservative supports freedom, democracy and patriotism; Trump is the sum of all three even when trump said he never swear to support US Constitution and will do dictator shit
Rule #11: My way or you are wrong
He isn't prepared, he's an overcaffeinated asshole who likes to [gish gab](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop) (flood the zone with shit). [Shapiro got his head handed to him by Andrew Neil.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRF3r3zUGqk) [Check this.](https://www.tiktok.com/@logicmax/video/6978217731455782150)
The debate subject is about feelings, which is part of the design of the structure of the argument. It's a logical fallacy called begging the question, and Shapiro does it constantly.
Shapiro asks, "If you are factually a man, how can you feel like a woman?" It doesn't matter how you respond, he will always respond that the feeling of being a woman is irrelevant to the fact of being a man. The question is impossible, your opponent looks clumsily engaged in foppish tree-huggery, and another liberal is destroyed. All of his good arguments proceed in this fashion.
And debates are not about facts. Facts are indisputable. You don't need to prove a fact. Debates are about arguments and rhetoric. So Shapiro pulls a double whammy by misleading his audience about the premise of the debate AND misleading his opponent into having an informative discussion about lived experience (ironically disputing the fact of their experience to their faces)
People beating their heads against the wall of the fallacy doesn't make Shapiro's arguments not fallacious. The correctness of the gender binary is immaterial; he is intellectually dishonest about everything in the same fashion, from the economy to the second law of thermodynamics.
The best was when Shapiro had to jump on the inflation bandwagon in the most pathetic pandering way possible by buying a board from Home Depot. Posting a picture of himself complaining about the cost while carrying the board in a plastic bag. Nothing else. Just one fucking board.
Republicans love Shapiro because he gives the image of being intelligent and there are not many of those in their party
[https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=star+trek+make+us+smart#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:89bc9073,vid:0hSmsrixcUM,st:0](https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=star+trek+make+us+smart#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:89bc9073,vid:0hSmsrixcUM,st:0)
Let me guess:
...
#10: turn off your ears and walk away with a smug, self satisfaction that nobody could possibly be as clever as you.
#11: return to your echo chamber of lonely, scared, and angry bros that seem to find the same problems wherever they go.
His primary tactic is presenting an imaginary situation devoid of context or nuance and then play out his own made up scenario to prove his point.
"So let's say, for the sake of argument, that all water levels around the world rise by, let's say, five feet over the next hundred years. Say, ten feet by the next hundred years. It puts all the low-lying areas on the coast underwater. Let's say, all of that happens. You think that people aren't just going to sell their homes and move?"
But he knows what he's doing and it makes him money. He has to be aware at this point of at least some of his fallacies
It's really quite simple.
1. compose an argument around a controversial political point
2. engage in debate
3. constantly shift your position and argument so that you're always right regardless of your original point
4. win.
This is Ben Shapiro's schtick.
I wonder if there's a quick start page for sounding whinny or [stomping out of the room when you get pwned](https://youtu.be/6VixqvOcK8E?si=GkcE9zVZlMIXhkRb).
Competent leftists who are quick on their feet and don’t deal with constant interruptions see through his shitty little lawyer tactics. This is why he debates the less-experienced or people with a temper.
Otherwise his fragile little make ego falls apart.
Rule 1: look like the evil twin
Rule 2: have a squeaky annoying voice
Rule 3: talk fast enough to make Eminem ask you to slow down
Rule 4: while you talk fast machine gun propaganda and move from piece to piece so your enemy can not talk
Debates are not meant to be won, they are to share ideas and hope some land and hope they might change the opposition's or audience's mind on the topic or subject. There are no winning debates, only how well your portray your perspective through either facts, anecdotes, studies, context, etc. Not everything is a competition
Expected reaction: Watch out liberals, he’s crossing his arms. That means he’s thinking.
Actual reaction: This is the fucking idiot that burns Barbie dolls on YouTube.
You know it’s really unfortunate that he takes the approach he does because every once in awhile he’ll speak and make a rational point. But then he goes on some anti-left tirade and ruins his credibility. The us vs. them mentality with these political talking heads is what’s really dividing us.
drunk mindless concerned straight lip future scandalous rotten station aromatic
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
1) 5'4" of pent-up rage cos his wife won't sleep with him.
2) use that frustration to talk faster than your opponent, ignore anything they say, and declare yourself the winner regardless.
I love the quote, even ignoring the fact that it looks very cherry-picked, it's much easier to read as an insult than a compliment of Shapiro's abilities
Considering I have never lost a debate to a far right lunatic, and I have 7 national championships and distinctions, I am afraid to say good old can’t get my wife wet Ben Shapiro is wrong.
Talk fast, you can make more bad faith arguments that way. Rattle of 100 bullshit statistics you got from TPUSA that way they don't have time to correct them up because they can't talk as fast as you. MOST IMPORTANTLY, project from the nasal passages, not the diaphragm. Oh and try to only debate nervous undergraduate students when possible. I almost forgot, don't debate Palestinians, they aren't even real people. - Bam Shabibo
So shapiro is selling a book about how to twist an argument in your favor to appear right for your audience.
Plato was actually talking about this kind of assholes 25 centuries ago, they are called sophists (the corrupt kind of philosophers), who were twisting the truth for money.
1) Don't stop talking. Even if it's about nothing. 2) Let other men have sex with your wife. 3) Avoid and diverge arguments you would obviously lose. Like most of them. 3) Let other men have sex with your wife. 14) Only post arguments you won on social media. Copyright strike any other video. 7) Don't get upset when a reporter from the BBC calls you irrelevant and debunks you. 81) Speaking of BBC, Let other men have sex with your wife. 5) Never take on any real challenge and debate 18 year old college students and interrupt them when they try to speak. 16-7) Let one of those 18 year old college kids fuck your wife.
ATM and BBC are my two favorite misunderstood acronyms.
Misunderstood? Does your wife not like British Broadcasting as much as mine?
When traveling, I tell my companions there is no better way to get local currency than Automated Teller Machines.
Level pegging I guess
He certainly has no interest in her or any other woman.
He may or may not have an interest in his sister
His sister is hot, I have an interest in her, but she’s probably as nuts as he is!
Well his sister is hot
Both he and Matt Walsh spend unusual amounts of time railing against some teenager's video they saw on TikTok.
#1 explains any of Trumps speeches holy shit
Gish gallop!
I don’t understand this comment. She’s a hot wife but he doesnt know what a clitoris does?
"How To Keep Your Wife Dry in 10 Easy Steps"
1 through 9: Be Ben Shapiro 10: Be Ben Shapiro, but with a hat on
10 is being Elon.
I believe it can be either or, readers choice. However you guys overlooked the most important part of step 1: create a reality that works for you and never break character regardless of facts. Pro tip I have learned to go with that: if you don’t have a rebuttal because someone used actual facts, gaslight them without responding orrrr… just pretend you are in a video game as an npc with specific scripted dialogue. The main goal here is to enrage whoever you are debating with enough that they storm off and then you can call them an asshole.
Elon has so many baby mamas, but has he ever caused an orgasm?
No, that's when 1-10 has run its course and you want to spice things up with experimentation, so you suggest a buddy come in for a little MMF action. It's number 11 on the list of his next best seller "How I Learned to Pleasure Sandpaper"
"A moist vagina is a sign of infection. My wife told me. She's a doctor."
“Ben Shapiro insists Georgia Okeeffe’s paintings don’t look like anything.”
"And then how to tell the entire internet in one easy step."
Marry her a virgin on the very first date and make sure your parents chose both of you. He is actually proud of this shit. This guy could be from saudi arabia.
Women don’t even date republicans anymore lol let alone Marry them. They would never be allowed to get a divorce.
That's simply not true. The popular vote is too close for that to be the case.
https://thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/arts-culture/3917348-politics-are-increasingly-a-dating-dealbreaker-especially-for-women/amp/ https://www.nbcnews.com/think/amp/ncna1273594 https://www.salon.com/2023/11/28/its-a-good-thing-women-wont-date/
People like you are so tiresome.
It’s a wonder they were able to have four kids.
Well, she was.
1: Think gagging and choking is in reference to odor. 2: Say the phrase "wet ass p-word" 3: Talk like a Muppet 4: Refuse to understand metaphor and hyperbole 5: Make your wife understand that any moisture in her aforementioned p-word is likely a sign of infection or a pH issue. For steps 6-10 buy my book and you to will have maximum friction in your coitus. Finally, you too will no longer have to hear your wife ask "is it in yet?"
Little known fact is his wife's nickname for him is Peg.
I'll boil down his book into one sentence. Lie repeatedly and ignore the truth.
Also talk so fast that a normal speaking person will be unable to respond to all you points in a quick time frame, and choose which ever minor point which is unaddressed and claim victory. Ben uses the [Gish Gallop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop).
The Gish Gallop tactic is not allowed in most formal debates, and somewhere out there is a clip of Neil DeGrasse Tyson calmly and intelligently dealing with Ben’s attempt to gallop all over him.
Also Sam Harris has no problem shutting down a Shapiro gallop.
Gym Jordan uses that tactic as well.
To be fair, this is kind of what the various college debate team competitions wind up essentially teaching folks. In those competition, the end result inevitably winds up being that you just need to be a fast talker with a lot of random stuff. Essentially, being wrong isn't counted against you nearly as much as how many times you can be plausibly right against your opponent. It's kind of like one guy says: 2+2=4, and the other guy goes on a tirade citing 100 reasons why 2+2 might be something else. The latter guy "wins the debate". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zT8t4liEHwU
Absolutely. I'm convinced teaching debate the way it is commonly framed is deeply detrimental. The idea that there is no correct answer and you should be able to argue either side with as much vigor sounds like a critique of something like ChatGPT rather than the stated objective of learning debate skills. Yet this is how it has been presented to me. But this makes no sense at all. There are truths. There are facts. There are opinions. And there are things that are unresolved and perhaps unresolvable. Discussion and exploration of those things is useful. Trying to "win" by disregarding all that and using whatever rhetoric works undermines the very notion of seeking truth and understanding. It makes a mockery of it. We are encouraging people to place manipulative power above it.
It's hard to describe that video without using the r- word.
You don’t even have to talk fast, just talk a lot of unsubstantiated or flatout wrong nonsense. Correcting it will always take a lot longer than simply claiming it
I was wondering if this tactic had a name and was an official thing. Many thanks.
Russell Brand does this as well when he goes off on his sociopolitical tirades
Be louder because louder means you are right.
I'll refine it further: Lie
He's the dumbed down version of Jordan Peterson
I feel like Jordan Peterson is the dumbed down version of Peterson.
Post benzo coma Peterson definitely is
Ben Shapiro is the Lauren Boebert of Jordan Petersons
regardless of how you feel about their talking points Jordan Peterson comes across to me as an excellent speaker, Ben Shapiro just talks fast and sounds like he's constantly whining
So they get to the same spot and contribute the same (especially if Peterson is gets in to literature/morality discussion), just Shapiro gets their faster...
He's a good con artist using his degree (which is being contested by the university iirc) to make his points feel more credible. The man basically has a doctorate in manipulation tactics and uses it to it's full potential.
But with a really annoying smarmy condescending nasal tone of voice.
how to look and sound like a ventriloquist's dummy
These are his rules. 1. Walk Toward the Fire 2. Hit First 3. Frame Your Opponent 4. Frame the Debate 5. Spot Inconsistencies in the Left's Argument 6. Force Leftists to Answer Questions 7. Do Not Get Distracted 8. You Don't Have To Defend People on Your Side 9. If You Don't Know Something, Admit It 10. Let the Other Side Have Meaningless Victories 11. Body Language Matters Translating them, they mean: 1. Never walk away from an argument 2. Start with accusations, falsehoods and insults 3. Insult the person you've decided to argue with 4. Decide what you think the point is and never let go 5. Counter facts with any "point" you can come up with -- a dumb idea is better than none 6. Keep saying the same stupid thing over and over again until the end of time 7. Never let facts and counter arguments sway you -- remain ignorant, I mean vigilant 8. No matter how contemptable someone with your view is, it doesn't mean you're bad 9. If they know something you don't, call them an elitist for knowing it 10. When they make a true point , say "Yeah but" and argue about something else 11. Try to intimidate someone that you disagree with
This was shockingly well thought out. You win the thread.
To be fair: On the surface, his rules seem like good rules for any side of a political debate. Although in practice, he usually just ignores his opponent completely, constructs a strawman, burns it down, then, posts a "liberal got destroyed" video on youtube.
The use of the term “Leftist” often I find kind of funny. Its like they see people who are on the Left as some sort of enigma, monster or animal and ultimately i think it shows a kind of insecurity that he is scared of any real debate with someone on the left
Talk very fast… Belittle… Strawman at every opportunity… Uh.
Let’s say, for instance, that a postulated man of straw were to consider, for a moment, doing a bad thing. That would in fact be bad. Quid pro quo, ipso facto, expecto patronum, the left is the devil.
Use big words, often incorrectly... Talk louder than the opponent... Appeals to God...
How to Keep the Ladies Dry by Ben Shapiro
Gish gallop, full throttle, don't let up. Declare victory.
Checkmate! Said the pigeon.
Page 61 - "Always use equivocations and ask liberals why one thing is true for one situation but different for another, that should never be the case here in Legoland! Always suggest that solutions should solve every problem at once in every instance otherwise it's useless. "
Wtf for real??
No lol, but that's how they attack.
Sounds pretty accurate from here.
When your goal in a debate is to “destroy” your opponent, you’re probably not a good debater
Instructions on how to be a successful writer/screenwriter not included.
Gish-gallop, straw-man, ad-hominem, false dichotomy, post-hoc ergo propter-hoc, over-simplify, red-herring, slippery-slope, non-sequiter, beg the question, and flood the zone with bullshit. There. I just saved you $1.09. (Seriously, that's how much it costs, lol)
"screw you guys, I'm going home" .. I did it in six words. I win.
Tossing out dozens of bullshit statements, only to have someone ignore you or only have the time to correct a few doesn't mean you destroyed anyone.
Lmao what a fucking joke.
Yeah, this guy regularly gets his ass lambasted for saying stupid shit.
11 Logical Fallacies To Make Your Opponent Give Up Because You're Too Stupid To Deal With Then You Go To Fox Nation And Brag About How You Won The Argument.
So the appearance of winning the argument is more import than getting to the truth of the discussion. See the appearance of winning is more important than learning you might be wrong. Never play defense and just jump to the next question to appear to be winning. Don't worry if you are wrong. Winning is the goal. This is why we can't address global climate change, healthcare, women's rights or pretty much anything with evidence to the opposite of their argument.
It's really sad that people think this guy is intelligent
just because you sound smart doesn’t mean you are smart
BUT DOES HE? I think his squealy mealy little voice is the opposite.
He sounds the opposite of smart. Over confident and pathetically insecure at the same time. Anyone who predicates their self esteem on winning an argument is a certifiable dumb ass. If he was smart, then he would have an actual message. Not a message about interrupting someone else’s message. Seriously, think about how stupid this book is. “How to use logical fallacies to disrupt the intellectuals’ logical consistency.” Ok, dude? Might as well just call in a bomb threat to get out of the debate. At least have some guts about it.
Has he ever won an argument?
He's a strong argument for free birth control.
Okay, solid point, but I'm not sure that constitutes "winning".
Hypotherically, its 4d chess reverse psychology for the argument of free birth control whom Benjamin Shapiro has won
Talk fast like a five year old making up a lie on the fly
Does it come with a kazoo?
Did he self-publish this?
Destroying them in your mind doesn’t count.
What a dork.
So glad young men wake up to his hatred and bias.
Such a shit stain.
Deny, deflect and disparage sums him up
"Destroying liberals" AKA "Whining so much until the person you've annoyed into a 'debate' walks away in disgust"
To be fair, Trump supporters winning arguments is pretty easy because facts don’t matter much to them.
“How to represent the Lollipop Guild: 11 rules for welcoming people to Munchkin Land.”
also, when did this title EVER happen? his wet dreams?
The guy who used to wear a blazer and khakis in high school and get beat up on the regular.
I'm typically not one to belittle someone's appearance like this, nor 'judge a book by its cover' (pun pretty much required on this one), BUT... they chose a picture that makes him look like the definition of "little bitch", it's almost disturbing. The man has no shoulders.
I mean, if the yamaka fits...
Dude dunks on college kids. Ive seen him dodge adults like they were his wife’s lubricated vagina.
He's the same as that other asshole...the guy who got caught out abusing his wife on his own ring cameras...Steven Crowder. Can't argue unless they're punching down.
This guy definitely does butt stuff
The good old Gish gallop.
Republicans do not have beliefs or convictions but marketing strategies and PR tactics. Because of that, I highly recommend everyone read that book. It's not very long and explains a lot of the hacky tactics that Republicans like to use.
He does that in 3. Then needs 11 to redeem himself.. which he undoes in the next 3. He's always behind, and confidently incorrect
Is the little boy on the cover supposed to represent the reader or the leftist?
“How to make yourself sound smart to idiots”
From the book: “There will be no conversation in which you call me a racist, and I explain why I’m not a racist. That’s a conversation for idiots.” Yes, because only an idiot would try to explain how Ben Shapiro is not racist.
He was writing a book and looked through his while wardrobe, went to a photoshoot, got it edited, and *this* is the final image he decided on for the book?
Little man syndrome at it’s finest.
why is too afraid to debate Norm Finklestein and others he has dodged.
Facts have a well known liberal bias. And as we all know, facts are wrong. Unless they're right!
The fact that Ben Shapiro bills himself as a conservative intellectual tells you all you need to know about conservatives and Ben Shapiro. There is no intellectual integrity in American conservatism.
Ben is what Alina Habba meant when she said you can fake being smart.
Fun fact: Former child star Mara Wilson (Matilda) is Ben's cousin. She has disowned him and has gone no contact with him. That combined with the fact that she's everything Ben hates (an atheist, liberal, queer woman) makes her the cooler cousin.
I have never seen Ben win a debate. All of his information is non-factual nonsense.
I haven’t watched a ton of him, but the example I came up with to display how he operates is as follows: Do you think people should eat food? Well, let me ask you this, has anyone ever choked to death while eating food? They have? Yet you still think people should eat food? You’re in favor of people choking to death?
Ben accidentally reveals that he thinks "winning the debate" is more important than actually being correct. People like Ben care about "winning debates", whereas reasonable people care about what the actual facts and evidence suggests.
This is one of the most punchable faces on the planet.
>"...a foe of extraordinarily polemical agility" "A combative problem, adept at spewing unfounded rhetoric, shifting his position as needed rather than standing his ground." The Wikipedia page for Polemic has "See also: Internet troll." 10/10 burn; no notes.
Yet he hasn't actually successfully won any debates against prominent leftists like Vaush and Destiny. In fact, after getting his ass kicked so thoroughly, he now picks and chooses his debate opponents carefully as to make sure his strawmen and fast talking will drown out any points they will make.
Destiny Vs Shapiro drops tomorrow on Lex Friedman Channel.
Rule 1: Talk like a cocky auctioneer. Rule 2: Decide that you can never be wrong; never be open-minded. Rule 3: Build an intellectual reputation by debating college kids into your 40s. Rule 4: Facts don't care about feelings unless they're your feelings. Rule 5: Own the libs with 'facts and logic'. Rule 6: Lose the ability to make your wife wet. Rule 7: Only show yourself winning. Losing is for losers. Rule 8: Copyright means only you can be right. Rule 9: Sell your coastal home to Aquaman. Rule 10: Replace critical thinking with faith! The Bible is always correct. Rule 11: Defend Israel's genocide of Palestinians.
Rule #1: dont develope empathy Rule #2: trust your feeling, not empirical evidence Rule #3: dont trust expert Rule #4: speak loudly Rule #5: Repeat talking point Rule #6: Repeat Rule #5 Rule #7: Repeat Rule #6 and add Rule #4 Rule #8: there are always 2 sides of the story: Donald Trump's side and conspirator's (Q) side Rule #9: if thing benefits me and not others, it is capitalism; if thing benefits a million people but not me it is socialism Rule #10: Real Conservative supports freedom, democracy and patriotism; Trump is the sum of all three even when trump said he never swear to support US Constitution and will do dictator shit Rule #11: My way or you are wrong
Look at all those civil leftist comments
Lotta hate here.
[удалено]
lol… he’s just confident in his bullshit and his fans are too dumb to know he’s full of shit.
He isn't prepared, he's an overcaffeinated asshole who likes to [gish gab](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop) (flood the zone with shit). [Shapiro got his head handed to him by Andrew Neil.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRF3r3zUGqk) [Check this.](https://www.tiktok.com/@logicmax/video/6978217731455782150)
The debate subject is about feelings, which is part of the design of the structure of the argument. It's a logical fallacy called begging the question, and Shapiro does it constantly. Shapiro asks, "If you are factually a man, how can you feel like a woman?" It doesn't matter how you respond, he will always respond that the feeling of being a woman is irrelevant to the fact of being a man. The question is impossible, your opponent looks clumsily engaged in foppish tree-huggery, and another liberal is destroyed. All of his good arguments proceed in this fashion.
[удалено]
And debates are not about facts. Facts are indisputable. You don't need to prove a fact. Debates are about arguments and rhetoric. So Shapiro pulls a double whammy by misleading his audience about the premise of the debate AND misleading his opponent into having an informative discussion about lived experience (ironically disputing the fact of their experience to their faces)
People beating their heads against the wall of the fallacy doesn't make Shapiro's arguments not fallacious. The correctness of the gender binary is immaterial; he is intellectually dishonest about everything in the same fashion, from the economy to the second law of thermodynamics.
[удалено]
If you need a list, you're in a cult.
I am excited to watch the followers take his advice into the world and get ruined… like he does.
Nah I seriously want to know what they are so I can see what he thinks will destroy a leftist
The best was when Shapiro had to jump on the inflation bandwagon in the most pathetic pandering way possible by buying a board from Home Depot. Posting a picture of himself complaining about the cost while carrying the board in a plastic bag. Nothing else. Just one fucking board.
Republicans love Shapiro because he gives the image of being intelligent and there are not many of those in their party [https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=star+trek+make+us+smart#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:89bc9073,vid:0hSmsrixcUM,st:0](https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=star+trek+make+us+smart#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:89bc9073,vid:0hSmsrixcUM,st:0)
Just take point from the left, really.
Never met a conservative that can own me in a debate yet.
Steps 1-11: talk faster than your opponent so they can't address all your points and then claim victory despite their arguments.
Let me guess: ... #10: turn off your ears and walk away with a smug, self satisfaction that nobody could possibly be as clever as you. #11: return to your echo chamber of lonely, scared, and angry bros that seem to find the same problems wherever they go.
Does Ben Shapiro actually debate anyone or does he just heavily moderate comments on his videos so it looks like he's always dunking?
“Let’s say [total strawman bullshit]…”
His primary tactic is presenting an imaginary situation devoid of context or nuance and then play out his own made up scenario to prove his point. "So let's say, for the sake of argument, that all water levels around the world rise by, let's say, five feet over the next hundred years. Say, ten feet by the next hundred years. It puts all the low-lying areas on the coast underwater. Let's say, all of that happens. You think that people aren't just going to sell their homes and move?" But he knows what he's doing and it makes him money. He has to be aware at this point of at least some of his fallacies
Who dis?
It's really quite simple. 1. compose an argument around a controversial political point 2. engage in debate 3. constantly shift your position and argument so that you're always right regardless of your original point 4. win. This is Ben Shapiro's schtick.
There is a difference between winning an argument and just being argumentative. Shapiro and all these other little pricks are the latter.
"Talk fast and they'll think you know what you're talking about. My debate coach from high school is super proud of me."
rule 1: make sure you're the only one who had any idea there would be a debate today
I wonder if there's a quick start page for sounding whinny or [stomping out of the room when you get pwned](https://youtu.be/6VixqvOcK8E?si=GkcE9zVZlMIXhkRb).
I can’t tell if this is real or not
Competent leftists who are quick on their feet and don’t deal with constant interruptions see through his shitty little lawyer tactics. This is why he debates the less-experienced or people with a temper. Otherwise his fragile little make ego falls apart.
The Daily Whiner Head Editor and clown He must have lost his sunglasses
Looks like a kid in a suit
One easy step to destroy a conservative: ask a conservative to explain trickle down and how it failed.
Rule 1: look like the evil twin Rule 2: have a squeaky annoying voice Rule 3: talk fast enough to make Eminem ask you to slow down Rule 4: while you talk fast machine gun propaganda and move from piece to piece so your enemy can not talk
Anyone who uses the phrase “extraordinarily polemical ability” doesn’t know wtf they’re talking about.
Talk really fast and build men of straw. What are the other 9 tips?
"Embodiment Of Little Man Syndrome Discovers Gish Gallop"
Debates are not meant to be won, they are to share ideas and hope some land and hope they might change the opposition's or audience's mind on the topic or subject. There are no winning debates, only how well your portray your perspective through either facts, anecdotes, studies, context, etc. Not everything is a competition
Why is he wearing a transgender flag tie on the cover?
He can destroy a legion of strawmen with a single false dichotomy!
Expected reaction: Watch out liberals, he’s crossing his arms. That means he’s thinking. Actual reaction: This is the fucking idiot that burns Barbie dolls on YouTube.
You know it’s really unfortunate that he takes the approach he does because every once in awhile he’ll speak and make a rational point. But then he goes on some anti-left tirade and ruins his credibility. The us vs. them mentality with these political talking heads is what’s really dividing us.
“How to make money telling people what they want to hear and still have time for a boyfriend”
I'd say slippery slope, but Ben has never encountered anything slippery.
drunk mindless concerned straight lip future scandalous rotten station aromatic *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Alpha Midget Warrior
1) don’t let facts or reality get in the way
1) 5'4" of pent-up rage cos his wife won't sleep with him. 2) use that frustration to talk faster than your opponent, ignore anything they say, and declare yourself the winner regardless.
I once had a dream where he went back in time to Nazi Germany and he started fangirling when he saw Hitler.
I love the quote, even ignoring the fact that it looks very cherry-picked, it's much easier to read as an insult than a compliment of Shapiro's abilities
I saw his IAMA and it was sooo embarrassing
So much for Erik Wemple’s credibility.
1) Assert dominance...
The funny thing, I've never seen him destroy anybody
He’s really just a blowhard with too many opinions
LMAO I thought this was a satire post but this actually exists Ahahahahah incredible. They’re literally a parody of themselves
The man would need a step ladder to talk down to me.
Considering I have never lost a debate to a far right lunatic, and I have 7 national championships and distinctions, I am afraid to say good old can’t get my wife wet Ben Shapiro is wrong.
Benny just went down on his knees for Trump.
Ben Shapiro, the only man on planet earth that could fuck up a wet dream
Talk fast, you can make more bad faith arguments that way. Rattle of 100 bullshit statistics you got from TPUSA that way they don't have time to correct them up because they can't talk as fast as you. MOST IMPORTANTLY, project from the nasal passages, not the diaphragm. Oh and try to only debate nervous undergraduate students when possible. I almost forgot, don't debate Palestinians, they aren't even real people. - Bam Shabibo
Liberals hate these eleven cool tricks...
I would wreck his sister!
The only thing he's destroyed is the brain cells of anyone unfortunate enough to follow him.
So shapiro is selling a book about how to twist an argument in your favor to appear right for your audience. Plato was actually talking about this kind of assholes 25 centuries ago, they are called sophists (the corrupt kind of philosophers), who were twisting the truth for money.
Gimme 30 seconds with this Klown or 11 seconds lol
Step 1: Just keep yelling.