-
-
Replying to @BEN123L
The "point by point take-down" is always immoral. Takes the debate out of context.
10 replies 5 retweets 18 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @BEN123L
I listened to the podcast, and you were largely overmatched by
@SamHarrisOrg, Scott.@conor64 just summarized the TKO.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JimNotGene @BEN123L and
Overmatched? We didn't disagree on anything. Sam said ethics are important, and I said outcomes are too. Who disagrees with any of that?
2 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @BEN123L and
@SamHarrisOrg argued that@realDonaldTrump is a "a totally unethical person" and your attempts at arguments were lame and contradictory.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JimNotGene @BEN123L and
I never debated Sam's magical thinking that people are good at reading the inner thoughts of strangers. I just put it in context.
2 replies 1 retweet 8 likes -
-
Replying to @JimNotGene @BEN123L and
There's the "so" tell for cognitive dissonance with the "never" absurd absolute for confirmation.
1 reply 2 retweets 4 likes -
-
In your hallucination, is it a serious question as to whether humans are ever wrong?
-
-
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @BEN123L and
No, only if you'll ever admit it. Without your usual hedge.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JimNotGene @BEN123L and
Sure. For example, I called Trump University a license deal when it was a different structure. (Although my point was unchanged.)
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.