Is it normal to feel bad after beating someone in a debate or argument?

Only wimps think arguments are about exchanging ideas. Arguments are about convincing the opponent and anyone who is watching that you are right and they are wrong.

Attached: based conan.jpg (890x430, 92K)

This but unironically

humanity is doomed and it's your fault

dude i feel like that all the time i argue with someone, unless it's a "50/50" situation. by that i mean that the poster also proved wrong a few of my arguments, though i eventually "won". in general i feel bad because i feel as if the poster will be embarassed and will feel dumb. especially when i'm on a heated argument and we both end our points with a variation of "you're a retard". i end up in a lot of debate because i think debating is fun and i hope no one actually felt bad or embarassed when i "won" (it's a cringy term, there's no winner but i don't know what else to describe it)

No, because it means you have a conscience, and probably an inner dialogue. But is also right.

You merely engaged in a resentment match, one-upped him, and it has become apparent to you that you are effective at being resentful.
(see youtube.com/c/metaintent)

Their fault for not participating in the lie, like the other onlookers? That's wxactly what I meant abour resentment here youtube.com/watch?v=h1VNRCBIfa4&t=10m49s

10:49 "why did blomkvist follow martin into his house?... he thought he would outsmart him, didn't he? that is resentment."

i think you're right, though when someone stops responding or responds ignoring 90% of your post and only engages with side minor points that doesn't affect your main arguments, are an indication that you """won""". i know that when i lose an argument i give user the last word and hope the thread doesn't get bumped so people don't see me getting BTFO. i accept defeat

Let me guess you debated a woman ?

I report them

Attached: this is gonna sting.jpg (1920x1080, 177K)

this
if you didn't argue with charity then you where being undecorous

yes if you are an autistic annoying fuck.

Also this idea of 'winning' debates is for angsty adolescents. Grown ups have Platonic dialogues like the Phaedo and the Republic (after book I), where the interlocutors participate and are all interested in discorvering something new, rather than engage in pointless dick measuring

>the virgin Intp
Entp masterrace.

>eeer err competition is for women eeer err and totally isn't a masculine trait

Generally when I stop responding it's less that I've conceded that I can't retort and usually more that I've realized the basic beliefs the person is operating under are so different from mine that convincing them on our higher level topic would require some metaethical or epistemic discussion that's only possible to make productive when both parties consist of honest actors.

When I was 12 they had my class do greek debates and my job was to defend slavery. I went off bulletpoint and went so hard the girl I was against cried and didn't debate against me. 12 year old me came up with tons of reasons slavery is good.

Where can I find friends like you guys? (pls be white)

Attached: C9AE363B-828D-4D18-B8C1-59F49C436A2C.jpg (123x125, 2K)

>(pls be white)
Why you can't find friends in a single sentence

I am sad that you are american

there are a lot of nonwhite guys that get it dude. Im racist too, i think anyone who isn't is just lying to themselves, but throwing out an entire people because of average differences is retarded. people care about how you treat them irl, and they are individuals not microcosms of their race.

honestly sort your head out if that's how you think.

the only people who argue are those uncertain of their own position. it's a very feminine way of changing your mind, you engage in bad faith with an idea you suspect might be right just so you can mine their arguments and evaluate them in your own mind as to their persuasion. then you flip flop and switch sides if they do a sufficient enough job convincing you.

people who are militant atheists are just desperate for a reason to believe in god. people who are incredibly religious typically have a secret desire to practice some taboo that would invalidate their faith.

i've been focusing a lot on the conditions around the turn of the 19th into the 20th century that caused so many well educated and cultured people to instill in their populations a type of mania that led to over 100 million deaths. and i believe that emotions are primarily to blame, there is inside all human beings, the desire of desire itself.

it was a combination of philautia and corrupted agape, and we are experiencing a more pronounced type of the same thing now. i think it's a defense mechanism that the human biosphere engages in when the technological progress stagnates but the population lags behind this perceptible change - so you get overpopulation relative to the ability to sustain that population - and then emotions of self-preservation kick in and great wars to thin out humanity take place, always for some unrelated justification.

i hope i made myself clear.

Actually Australian you faggot

>t. jelly he isn't entp

>is so genetically inferior his only grasping of the desire of "the good" or truth is by way of selfish desire

What did I expect.

T. Entp

Attached: Sorta smug Wojak.png (680x574, 127K)

This is hilarious because I'm not sure what you mean exactly. Is it because they've never won an argument, they don't know how they feel, or they're just such brainlets they can't even comprehend the question?

Unfair advantage! Bash the competitor with the bat three times to level the playing field!

so you are good because you are superior. how is this not a christian tautology that you have refitted for a modern world where christ is replaced by your genetic endowment?

are you saying you can meta-meta understand the pursuit of others through a lens of objective universal morality derived from humanity's incomplete understanding of genetics and hereditary effects...

yet you conveniently ignore the thousands of years of rape, murder, pillage and destruction. wait, ur not one of those 'might makes right' people are you? did you really fall for the communist meme in 2019.

Not them but if this is real, and not a false flag trolling, it's a pretty self refuting answer, because you admit that non-whites can have desirable traits that you seek for (intelligence? compassion? i don't know what you're looking for) but you still don't want anything to do with them because of retarded reasons or because /pol/ told you they're your enemies or something.
I'm also racist, it's difficult not to be, but i enjoy friendships with people of various different backgrounds, because they're individuals and not the average of such and such race. I may not want to live near a somali
neighborhood but i'll have absolutely no problem having a good friendship with a somali individual.

is it normal to feel bad after beating your meat?

Attached: 432423423.jpg (1004x719, 34K)

Arguments are a mere means to humiliate others and impose my dominance or to flaunt my intelligence. I’d only partecipate in serious arguments with people more intelligent than me, but I’ve yet to find one. I deem pathetic the way some people in this thread value respect and honor. You don’t deserve your life. You are worthless, powerless, clueless insects to annihilate.

>so you are good because you are superior. how is this not a christian tautology that you have refitted for a modern world where christ is replaced by your genetic endowment?
I'm going to refrain from answering this until I understand what you mean, all possible explanations seem so far beyond the level of idiocy that even yourself would not state them.

>are you saying you can meta-meta understand the pursuit of others through a lens of objective universal morality derived from humanity's incomplete understanding of genetics and hereditary effects...

No one said objective morality idiot.

>yet you conveniently ignore the thousands of years of rape, murder, pillage and destruction. wait, ur not one of those 'might makes right' people are you? did you really fall for the communist meme in 2019.

What the fuck are you even trying to connotate? It seems you have become so lost within your fantasy's you forget my original point.

My original point only being that argumentation and the reasoning for it contain so many uncountable variables. You cannot simply say "one does it because so"

all of the above

>argue with someone a bunch
>both of you are pretty wrong and retarded
>slowly become friends after a few weeks of absolutely hating each other
Best feeling.

I feel like this with my dad so I usually always just accept and try to change the subject. I guess it's kinda natural to respect your father's say though.

Based

I love him who is ashamed when the dice fall in his favor, and who then asks: "Am I a cheat?" -- for he wants to perish.

I love him who reserves no share of spirit for himself, but wants to be wholly the spirit of his virtue: thus he walks as spirit over the bridge.

I love him whose soul is deep even in the wounding, and may perish through a small matter: thus he goes willingly over the bridge.

animegirl?

did you even read my original post?

>people who are militant atheists are just desperate for a reason to believe in god. people who are incredibly religious typically have a secret desire to practice some taboo that would invalidate their faith.
complete opposite. people who are religious really hope that God is real and people who are atheist really hope that God isn't real. look at Thomas Nagel for example:
>He also said in his book The Last Word, I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers. It isn't just that I don't believe in God and, naturally, hope that I'm right in my belief.

Attached: 200px-Thomas_Nagel_(cropped).jpg (200x200, 12K)

No, it's a product of Christian slave morality to make you feel bad about completely normal biological impulses

But they are microcosms of their race when it really matters. What you are seeing is affluent clownworld. How would those same idians act if the US was starving. We are of different species you see. You are so in your own overeducated westernized brain you seem to think were all individuals floating through space and anyone who disagrees is a fool. But we are not we are animals of different species. When push comes to shove qa peoples true nature comes out. You are the fool.

You project your own mind on those around you and assume they think like a westerner. They cater to your worldview to fit in, and your white empathy and conquerors ego validates them. But you and your people are the ones truly being quietly conquered.

It’s not about differences retard

you are assuming people are honest. what does nagel have to gain from admitting he is a true believer without faith? listen to how he phrases his argument:
>a lot of intelligent people believe, that's scary to me

why would it be, aren't you a rationalist? if so you must follow the evidence, and admit when you are in error, irrespective of what a crowd of people say or do. here he betrays himself, because clearly his atheism is unsound, since the grounding of it largely comes from popular opinion and is (unconsciously) grounded in the collapse of the church and the traditions of western european monotheism and the imperial system that held everything together for over 1000 years.

NOT in actual useful critiques of a belief in god - which were repeatedly hashed out by people as broadly separated by time as aquinas to kierkegaard. the fact most famous mathematicians were religious or at most agnostic simply shows that there isn't any structural problem with a belief in god, it's an axiom just like our number system or cartesianism.

tell me have you ever see a one in nature? what defines it's borders or edges? the separation you make between objects is largely a physical abstraction at the level of size and scale you can interact with. a planet is too big for you to conceive, just close your eyes and try to imagine the entire world right now, with all of the continents and oceans and peoples and various things, it's a trillion trillion things, abstracted into one thing we call Earth.

the case for religion is largely sound. and all intelligent atheists know this, their scorn is somewhat strange, because you can tell in another time they might have been the inquisitors of a powerful church or the jannisaries and intellectual ardent defends of a growing faith movement. they are emotionally connected to spreading their ideas, which is counter productive if you are truth seeking, since the truth wins no matter how you communicate it- therefore this again hints to me that the goal of all atheists is to enslave mankind in a competing ideology, by offering salvation - through themselves.

it is tho even science confirms it. Its dopamine withdrawal and influx of other hormones

i will add a common joke that translates something like this:
>There goes the Catholic priest, he forgot his to put on his belief in God when he was dressing this morning

If you feel bad about expressing and defending your views, it probably means that you were debating some frivolous unimportant shit.

Attached: 1564720765716.gif (352x288, 2.02M)