<-- home

meta intellectual dishonesty

i just realized that the one person”s ‘criticism” of me actually counts as met-intellectual dishonesty.

person replying to me: fallacious statement

me: that”s a fallacy

person: oh. you don”t have a rebuttal and you sound young.

me: ur intellectually dishonest

person posting in my tag after i blocked them: zomg! they blocked me bc they can”t handle a ‘friendly” debate. u can”t just say ‘that”s a fallacy” and accuse ppl of being intellectually dishonest. u don”t even know what words mean.

me: wow. now ur being intellectually dishonest about being intellectually dishonest. 🙂

i”ve written before how i”m kind of ‘meh” about fallacy. however, if ppl do want to treat this like a fucking ~debate~ then, yeah, i”ll point it out.

asking me to nonetheless engage and ‘rebut” your fallacious argument is intellectual dishonesty.

why? bc you”ve already lost. ur inability to enter the ~debate~ in good faith has defeated you. then, piling on other fallacies isn”t really going to make me think “hey, this person actually wants a discussion!”

to remind ppl, i don”t owe anyone:

  • my time
  • my attention
  • engagement
  • discussion
  • explanations
  • or anything else