"No, it's not evident at all. That is pure bullshit."
There's a definition for the kind obstinacy you're battling .....
Fractal wrongness
Fractal wrongness is the state of being wrong at every conceivable scale of resolution. That is, from a distance, a fractally wrong person's worldview is incorrect; and furthermore, if you zoom in on any small part of that person's worldview, that part is just as wrong as the whole worldview.
You're wrong there, and there, oh, and there too, there, now let's step back a little, yep, still wrong.
“”You are not just wrong. You are wrong at every conceivable level of resolution. Zooming in on any part of your worldview finds beliefs exactly as wrong as your entire worldview.
| | —There's a "de-motivator" poster for everything. |
“”You are not just wrong; you are recursively wrong. The wrongness of every possible iteration of any of your arguments is self-similar with the wrongness of your entire worldview.
| | —There's also a corrected "de-motivator" poster for everything. |
Debating with a person who is fractally wrong leads to infinite regress, as every refutation you make of that person's opinions will lead to a rejoinder, full of half-truths, leaps of poor logic, and outright lies, that requires just as much refutation to debunk as the first one. It is as impossible to convince a fractally wrong person of anything as it is to walk around the edge of the Mandelbrot set in finite time.
If you ever get embroiled in a discussion with a fractally wrong person on the Internet - in mailing lists, newsgroups, or website forums - your best bet is to say your piece once and ignore any replies, thus saving yourself time. |
