RageFuel I hate it when women or libtards use microskepticism to dismiss anything remotely redpill but push anything bluepill without skepticism.

[Pinpoint]

Selective Skeptipressure is something I know that the lying manipulative normies use.
Where they just put on high sketpicism to deplatofmr oppressors, and look to push their ideology. whenever they know people don't have the techniques to hyperskepticize/ pressure with skepticism.

I hate literally been refuted by a normie with such criteria for having knowledge as
"you don't know everything to such a point if the government isn't controlling us, if they aren't moving our thoguhts to one direction or the other, so how can you be real". But then the cunt would immediately believe something because she "feels" it.
But with the same obstacles for understanding she put ME THROUGH she shouldn't have suspicions fully believed in in the first place.

 

[Deleted member 18214]

Ikr I hate this also

 

[FidelCashflow]

And then they always ask for sources, and then day your sources are incorrect

 

[BodyFat10orRope]

I remember way back debating some online guy for an hour (I used to actually waste time with this sometimes) and it turned it out he was jewish the whole time. Immediately stopped bothering with it.

 

[Mystic]

Ikr I hate this also

And then they always ask for sources, and then day your sources are incorrect

Pure ragefuel

 

[Invidia]

They just take social consesus as truth beyond criticism, they don't have to prove the liberal dogmas they parrot but they will always nitpick even your cientific sources.

 

[lightskin2thousand0]

yea

 

[Pinpoint]

They just take social consesus as truth beyond criticism, they don't have to prove the liberal dogmas they parrot but they will always nitpick even your cientific sources.

There was a cunt, dad's mongol gf who kept saying "if you trwistin up everything no scientist can figure it out"
Basically a cop out for someone to forget logic.And integrity of believing in whats true.

But conscious reasoning is needed, because at least there's a structure to that, and feelings are often arbitrary, emotional mindsets that seem right to someone's primal justice system, but if you really dissect the reason behind it, it's often vague and skewed. Logic is needed to dissect things.
I think she comes from a very uneducated area of the world who also had a lot of time to think. Whenever people put logic in her way she probably finds it nagging and difficult.
It's like how something in a movieforsakes logic for the sake of imagery/ emotion like in a jj abrams movie.

Microskepticism becomes a cop out eventually.
What people do to push their argument is to have skepticism/ logic skills to the point of haing a safe time looking credible supporting it around laymens. But what they really try to do is have a powerful position where everyone will liek who they are, and then unleash the pressures pushing their ideology on other people.
Much like how muhammad knew he had to get his ideas across to people, while microskepticizing anyone opposing islam. And when his power of force was his from all of his followers, then the power flow was his enough that people had to yield and surrender, and then he could believe all he wanted. Counterers were gone.

Skepticizing is simply obstacle pushing. It's not logic that people want, it's ideologies that make systems broken in their favor. People will continue to throw obstacles at any ideology not their own, and throw power/ permissiveness/ etc into theirs.

 

[Deleted member 21504]

Confirmation bias is real, more at eleven.

 

[Player]

And then they always ask for sources, and then day your sources are incorrect

Happened to me more than once IRL with libtards.

And then they always ask for sources, and then day your sources are incorrect

Happened to me more than once IRL with libtards.

 

[SchrodingersDick]

Uncle ted’s wisdom

and lol at expecting intellectual consistency or just intellectual.. anything.. from foids.

 

[Pinpoint]

View attachment 162249
Uncle ted’s wisdom

and lol at expecting intellectual consistency or just intellectual.. anything.. from foids.

Being a cool headed logician is taking apart your feelings, taking apart your underlying perspectives and then using them
The problem is with women is that they’re mentally lazy a lot of the time, they want to live and comfortable realities and hate it when people use knowledge to go ahead and pierce the sociobiology of life
Woman want things vague except it themselves
Women hate it when I ever barrage things in the red pill, they want people to be numb, typical, conventional, surface level oriented.
They think that using their suspicions and intuitions is called hard logic, but they haven’t examined for themselves their own understanding of what their inference is deducing by, if their deduction strategies are working
Often human beings think that their intuition and instincts From their stock build are enough to discern everything around them, but they have no idea
I only except logic when it is shown, And insecure feelings are just selfish unfair methods of deduction
Either someone’s deduction is defined, and can be explained, or it is emotional and selfish, impulsive.

That’s why I’ve barely had any interaction with women, they see you guys as whiners, or dangerous for red pill rants

 

[Deleted member 10124]

And then they always ask for sources, and then day your sources are incorrect

Confirmation bias is real, more at eleven.

View attachment 162249
Uncle ted’s wisdom

and lol at expecting intellectual consistency or just intellectual.. anything.. from foids.