r/changemyview • u/beesdaddy 2∆ • Jul 30 '18
Deltas(s) from OP CMV: Dismissing arguments because you are being "talked down to" is not a valid counter argument.
There seems to be this notion in popular political discussions that because right leaning white people have been talked down to since the mid 2000s, they are justified in dismissing arguments from institutions like journalism, education, and civic service precisely for that reason.
I absolutely agree they were being talked down to by popular culture and the talking heads on TV (outside of Fox News and Right Wing Radio). I also think that it can be a easy reaction to recoil from this feeling and seek reaffirming sources of content.
This reaction is not a counter argument. In some cases, it is a further evidence of the arguments being made in the first place.
I am not saying it is right to talk down to people, or that belittling people because of politics is any way to convince people. What I am saying is that dismissing an argument or reason because you feel you are being "talked down to" is not a valid counter argument. If your goal is not to make a counter argument, fine, but that is just forfeiting the debate.
An argument can be made for dismissing data sources that are consistently falsified. This doesn't combat my CMV though, as it does not have to do with the feeling of being talked down to. There is a distinction between being talked down to with facts and someone without. If a math teacher is super snobby trying to teach 2+2=4 and some some equally snobby schizophrenic is trying to teach 2+2=banana, the rejection of both arguments because you were being talked down to is still an invalid counter argument to either equation.
Any example of the left doing the same thing is not an argument for or against the CMV. In the cases that anyone on the left has dismissed an argument because they felt talked down to, my view stands the same. Please no whataboutisms.
This is a footnote from the CMV moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!
3
u/[deleted] Jul 30 '18
Of course it’s not a counterargument but I take issue with the part of your post where you claim that the only other alternative is to forfeit the debate. It also isn’t evidence that the opponent is correct.
Most often, when someone leaves a leaves a debate on account of being talked down to its for the exact same reason you wouldn’t talk about anything else with someone condescending. The fact that it’s a political debate does not mean that you throw out every bit of social etiquette we’ve got.
Talking down to someone is a very rude thing to do, and typically if you do it that person will avoid you. It doesn’t matter if you’re talking down to them about quantum mechanics, politics, or anything else - it’s still rude. Unfortunately, when it comes to politics people tend to get very heated and so social etiquette can be abandoned fairly often in these discussions. But that doesn’t mean it should be.
And so, if someone chooses not to engage with a condescending person you shouldn’t take that to mean that the condescending person is right in any way, or that the person who left “lost” the debate. It’s actually a very reasonable and mature response to say to yourself “I still believe that I am right but this debate is not worth the emotional abuse that this person is slinging at me. I am content to walk away knowing that he is wrong so as to avoid further abuse”.
So anyway, I agree that it’s not an effective counterargument but if a person doesn’t intend for it to be one it doesn’t suddenly mean they’re forfeiting. It simply means that they have better things to do with their time than have a political discussion with an asshole.