Users that often use this tag:
The Whelk (2)

A great contribution to the economics-made-fun genre and food for Mefi thought: Arguing on the internet is addictive because you’re almost always arguing against either a very stupid person or a very smart person, and those are the two types of people most fun to argue with.
posted by Philosopher's Beard on Dec 15, 2011 - 49 comments

People argue just to win, assert researchers. Rationality may have evolved simply to let people feel triumphant; internet inevitable. [more inside]
posted by klangklangston on Jun 14, 2011 - 97 comments

According to recent studies, arguing on the internet is now the second most popular leisure activity in the world, just below shopping and just above sex. But how many of those who spend half their lives debating God versus Atheism or Climate Change on a message board or blog really know how to win those arguments? Now, for the first time, anonymous internet guru Noseybonk reveals the ploys, tactics and strategems of Blogmanship: the art of winning arguments on the internet without really knowing what you are talking about. Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5.
posted by shakespeherian on May 20, 2011 - 67 comments

Philosophical Referee Symbols.
posted by escabeche on Apr 19, 2011 - 23 comments

OBJECTION! This is a silly meme [more inside]
posted by The Whelk on Oct 17, 2010 - 54 comments

frontsection.net is a tasteful, politically right-on and truly curatorial take on aggregating web content. Careful, combined with an MF habit, this is going to eat up a lot of hours. Although the site is MetaFilter-inspired, all links are the fruit of one intrepid reader whose work, it must be admitted, sometimes grinds to a halt for up to a week at a time.
posted by Roachbeard on Aug 14, 2010 - 36 comments

How to Argue With Zompist: Or Social-Skills 101 A helpful guide for online discussion and debate written by Mark Rosenfelder with some help from notmydesk and others.
posted by The Whelk on Feb 11, 2009 - 31 comments

Pop Culture Blind Spots, Guilty Pleasures, Guilty Displeasures and Sacred Cows from The A.V. Club
posted by Navelgazer on Jan 30, 2009 - 44 comments

The Hierarchy of Disagreement: Based on Paul Graham's essay "How to Disagree" (prev), the diagram ranks the types of arguments that can be made. Not quite the same as logical fallacies but a useful guide to measure whether you're making a good argument or if "you are an ass hat".
posted by GuyZero on May 21, 2008 - 34 comments

The Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art was to have been the home of Christoph Büchel's first major US installation, "Training Ground for Democracy". But disputes over budget overruns and missed deadlines led the museum to cancel the project. [NYT registration required] The incomplete installation is now tied up in litigation, and covered by tarp.
posted by silby on Sep 11, 2007 - 11 comments

Women who stifle themselves in marital arguments die younger says a recent study.
posted by serazin on Aug 21, 2007 - 35 comments

My Quonah. "My name is David C and I am the biggest idiot on this planet! Every girl I've ever met has done nothing except want me for what I had to offer them, the amount of cash I could throw their way and not for the person I was. One day that all changed when I meet a lady called Quonah..." Should she call him?
posted by feelinglistless on Sep 3, 2006 - 33 comments

Fallacy Files
posted by Gyan on Feb 11, 2006 - 16 comments

How To Win An Argument. Plus, if you scroll down, you'll find an argument about "How To Win An Argument." (Which may remind you of a Monty Python skit.) What do you think of this guy's strategy? Compassionate or passive-aggressive?
posted by grumblebee on Sep 5, 2005 - 56 comments

Truthmapping: The Ultimate Attempt to Rationalize Debate? From lofty ontological arguments for the existence of God and for the self-contradictory nature of determinism to relatively more down to earth propositions about the unconstitutionality of abortion and the justice of the war in Iraq: can many significant debates be reduced to simple sets of premises and conclusions? Should they be?
posted by shivohum on Jul 25, 2005 - 49 comments

There is something further to be said on the issue of disagreement. If two people find that there are arguments on both sides that are both very compelling, maybe that renders the answer to the question what is right and wrong indeterminate. Maybe there isn’t a clear answer. [via SciTech Daily]
posted by rushmc on Aug 3, 2001 - 10 comments

"Biggest flame war of all time: Danny Boy - sentimental Irish favorite, or stupid song decried by true Celts everywhere?" A link to a discussion in another forum about how one prevents the banal from driving out the profound in online public-participation forums. (Their conclusion: ruthless and efficient moderation.)
posted by Steven Den Beste on Jul 3, 2001 - 4 comments

Terrorists on MeFi!
posted by geronimo_rex on Jul 2, 2001 - 22 comments