Arguing With Ignorance

Larry The Cable Guy once made a catch phrase out of “You can’t fix stupid”. Well, I learned this past week that you can’t fix ignorance either. Actually you can if you just learn, but you can’t fix ignorance when people aren’t able to understand they are ignorant.

So, over the Thanksgiving week, I got into a debate with someone that felt that Donald Trump should indeed be impeached because of all of the ruinous things he’s done to the country. Now, this person couldn’t specifically identify what ruinous things Trump had done except “be a bully”, which I whole-heartedly agree with. But being a bully, last I checked isn’t an impeachable offense. No, it’s not very presidential, but it’s not illegal.

And it got me to thinking, that when you are debating the merits of anything with someone that’s ignorant and hasn’t done their research, you are not going to win. You are going to prove to yourself that you shouldn’t be having that discussion in the first place. This was the case in my situation. I was talking with someone who didn’t know who Adam Schiff was. They didn’t know who Jerry Nadler was. They weren’t aware that people on the Democrat side had called for Donald Trump’s impeachment even before he took office, just because… well, that was another thing they couldn’t identify.

We’ve talked about impeachment for months here, and probably will for at least a couple more as it continues to be the elephant in the room. But for the Millennials and even some Gen X’ers out there, they don’t follow this stuff. And when they do, they get their news from NPR, or the three major networks, or another of the liberal press outlets. So, they’re getting tainted fake news that is filtered and not factual. And of course, they aren’t up to speed on what is factual. So, they spew whatever opinions they have heard last. Hence, Donald Trump is a terrible person, an illegal president because he’s a bully and he badgers people he doesn’t agree with, and for that reason, he should be impeached. They don’t say, removed from office because they don’t understand the whole impeachment process, and don’t realize that impeachment is simply the accusation phase.

You can’t argue with people that aren’t equipped to argue the facts. If all they have is their opinion, you’re going to get semantics and circular logic, which is what I found out. You’re best at that point to either tell them to get educated on the subject before opening their mouth (and that won’t end well!), or just wave them off and let them have their say. You can write them off as another of the uneducated masses.

I think it was Mark Twain who said, “Never argue with a fool. Onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

8 thoughts on “Arguing With Ignorance

  1. I’m quite sure I know who you were talking with! Unfortunately – it made me question – not that he is bright but how deep goes it go or just in one area

    > WordPress.com

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I’m talking about arguing with people that have “opinions” but have no research behind it, and don’t care to do any. If you only have “feelings” or listen to one side of an argument, you can’t get the full picture regardless how smart you are.

      Like

  2. The Trump haters were ready to impeach moments after the election two months before the inauguration and don’t think they need any other reason than they don’t like him to make their belief legitimate. Now the dems seek to manufacture something, anything to get him. Trump said no president should have to go through this and I agree but still can’t wait to crucify he next democrat president for revenge and yet am disappointed in myself that I feel this way. It’s not right. But that’s how I feel. Kill the other party’s president is the model for the future and the end of our governing ability.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. See, I would say the sweetest revenge isn’t to impeach the next Dem president…it’s for Trump to win in 2020 by a landslide, and replace both RBG and Breyer on the Supreme Court with young, conservative nominees that will be there for 40 years! Then he can add another 500 judges to the federal court system. THAT is the sweetest revenge!

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s