On, and if he is winning, it is an argument, but if he is losing, it's just having a chat.
Often this will be accompanied by bog-standard ad homenim attacks, and even assumptions of intent, all for the sake of driving ever farther down the road to the loony bin. Hopping from one concept to the next whenever the opportunity presents itself, he will derail the conversation into territories further and further afield from the original topic, all for the sake of carrying on with whomever he has engaged with until they give up and drift off, after which he will assume that it is because they can no longer argue the point-thus, he was right all along. When he is inevitably provided with the correct information, he not only refuses to admit to being wrong time and again, he engages in semiotic disorienteering-focusing on the signifier (the words used) rather than the signified (what concepts the words are referring to)-to try and weasel out of any kind of admission of being wrong. In short: he puts out an opinion that is based, wholly or in part, on incorrect assumptions or simple errors of fact. The OP isn't a troll, he is an aidspig, which stands for "anti-intellectual demagogue spouting pseudo-intellectual gibberish," and refers to a person who engages in the practice of semiotic disorienteering. I suppose that this is as good a time as any to roll out and explain it (there's some good stuff in my profile's "About Me" section).
0 kommentar(er)
