Quotes About Argument

The timing alone argues against that hypothesis.

But his analytical skills, particularly his ability to detect weaknesses in an argument, would make everyone around him better and lead to better policy.

Both had valid points.

There will be no conversation in which you call me a racist, and I explain why I'm not a racist. That's a conversation for idiots.

The truth is that your opponent, who labels you a racist without evidence, is the actual racist: it is he who waters down the term racism until it is meaningless by labeling any argument with which he disagrees racist.

You may notice when arguing with someone on the left that every time you begin to make a point, that leftist begins shouting

SHAPIRO: This is astonishing. MORGAN: What's astonishing? SHAPIRO: What's astonishing about it is for weeks now, you have been saying that anybody who disagrees with your position is absurd, idiotic, and doesn't care about the dead kids in Sandy Hook. And then when I say that it's a bullying tactic, you turn around and that say I'm bullying you for saying that. It's absurd. It's ridiculous.

I would have said, "Why do you have to use victims to illustrate your point? Why can't you just convince me on the basis of the evidence that what you're proposing is the right solution for America?

You may notice when arguing with someone on the left that every time you begin to make a point, that leftist begins shouting about George W. Bush. It's like Leftist Tourette's Syndrome. "Why did Obama blow out the budget?" "BUUUUUUUSHHHH!!!!!

This is the Hollywood argument same-sex marriage: you like certain characters, so if you don't like their behavior, it's because you're mean and nasty. This is what Hollywood does best.

That person already disagrees with you, and they're not going to be convinced by your words of wisdom and your sparkling rhetorical flourishes. The goal will be to destroy the leftist in as public a way as is humanly possible.

Leftists prefer to argue half-measures in which they don't truly believe. For example, they say they want to ban assault weapons to stop gun murders. But that argument is silly, because handguns are used to kill far more people than so-called assault weapons. And yet the left won't argue in favor of a blanket gun ban, because they know they will lose.

point out that throwing around accusations without evidence makes your opponent a piece of garbage

In fact, if your opponent thinks you're not worthy of debating, he isn't worthy of debating.

You know he's going to call you a racist, because he always calls his opponents racist.

MORGAN: I'm not the one who came in here and accused you of standing on the graves of dead children -- SHAPIRO: Because you're the one who is doing that. I'm punching back twice as hard. MORGAN: That's what I call bullying. SHAPIRO: You know what I call it? Punching back twice as hard, in the words of President Obama.

Why can't you just convince me on the basis of the evidence that what you're proposing is the right solution for America?

Many have quarreled about religion that never practiced it

If you argue and rankle and contradict, you may achieve a temporary victory - sometimes; but it will be an empty victory because you will never get your opponent's good will.

Persons of good sense, I have since observed, seldom fall into disputation, except lawyers, university men, and men of all sorts that have been bred at Edinburgh.

in the course of my observation, these disputing, contradicting, and confuting people are generally unfortunate in their affairs. They get victory sometimes, but they never get good will, which would be of more use to them.

134. Give no Advantage in Argument, nor lose any that is offered. This is a Benefit which arises from Temper.

The time for argument was over: Foucault wanted to crush an enemy, even though he claimed he loathed this kind of attack, in one of his last interviews.*

We all want our border to be secure. However, certain individuals use this argument to stop us from ever enacting immigration reform.