2007-09-22 03:43:51 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
I said, "besides ignoring them of course?"
2007-09-22 03:54:09 · update #1
I don't want an analysis opersons using the argument, but your ideas on how best to reply or respond to that argument. In attacking the person rather than their "me smart-you stupid" argument, you only duplicate their mistake.
2007-09-22 03:57:52 · update #2
BTW the "me smart-you stupid argument" is classed as an ad hominem argument in philosophy. "Argument by authority" is another synonym for it.
2007-09-22 04:08:40 · update #3
The ad hominem argument is where the source of the argument is attacked and the content of the argument. This usually results in a feeling of defensiveness.
There are a variety of techniques used to deal with 'fallacies of logic'.
In addition to ignoring it, you can also acknowledge it and then move on.
2007-09-22 05:27:30 · answer #1 · answered by guru 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You can't really do anything about it. That is to say, you can't do anything about it after the argument has begun.
If your arguing with some one that uses that argument (or would use that argument), it means that their mind is already made up, and nothing you say will change their minds. That is to say nothing; not the smartest, most logic and thought out answer will ever change their mind.
The way I deal with it is that I never start arguments with those kind of people in the first place. People that aren't going to change their minds aren't going to change their minds.
Think of it this way, do you think the person you are arguing with will change your mind? Would you change your mind if that person made a good point? Do you think you could change their minds? Do you think they will change their minds if you make a good point?
from the answers of those question will help you determine if you should argue with someone or not.
2007-09-22 05:58:09 · answer #2 · answered by Martin S 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Philosophy worth its name does not include that kind of arguments. It looks like the kind of row kids have in their 3rd grade. If you ever engage in that kind of confrontation,think: 1. that is not a philosophycal argument and 2. that person is the one who's stupid,there's not even need to sort out who's smart and who's stupid because who's really smart doesn't have to shout it out loud.
2007-09-28 15:37:26 · answer #3 · answered by margarida c 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If one can reason out well over a question, and can explain logically or defend his reason, then he is into philosophy. This so-called "me smart - you stupid" notion is just a vain crap. There is no right or wrong in a philosophical answer. The idea of solution comes from one's own intriguing perspective,..and therefore worth expressing.
2007-09-29 02:03:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
ignoring them is always the best option... after all, the only reason people put thier opinions out in philosphical "discusions" (religeous, atheistical, scietific... any kind) is that they want to see how many people agree with them and have thier egos massaged.
A true philospher will pose questions, wanting to hear ANSWERS while an opinionated nut job (sadly the more common) posses an answer and looks for nothing but approval and validation... Better not to give it to them!
2007-09-22 03:51:35 · answer #5 · answered by supernicebloke2000 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Philosophy may be the most difficult subject to wrap an argument around. Your ideas are just a valid as the next unless you forget to leave out personal opinion... or can you?
2007-09-22 03:48:48 · answer #6 · answered by Lizbiz 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
If by "Me Smart" they mean they have knowledge, then knowledge is nothing without the implementation of that knowledge.
Those that also "blow their own trumpet" are only hoping that the noise will drown out their own ignorance.
2007-09-22 03:56:26 · answer #7 · answered by Dilligaf 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
which means you are stupid enough to think you are smarter than me.
2007-09-29 06:08:56 · answer #8 · answered by love2you 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋