If you makeb another wall....
He who fights walls
Ironically you didn't have to debate with anyone in order to get the debater post-bit. The sub-forum just attracted people who took a simple conversation and tried to scrutinize it for no reason. People tend to forget that you don't "win" a debate. The only reason to talk to someone is to embrace ideas to change yourself or to influence other people to make a change. In this sense, attempting to break down a conversation point by point is sophistry when you are attempting to win an imaginary debate when you should be deciding whether having this conversation will either help you or help them.
I don't think breaking down things point by point is inherently sophistry, it depends on the objective. Breaking down point by point is effective at illustrating central points but can be used to obscure them as well by battering down with irrelevant information.
I also don't understand why people act offended when someone from a higher elo is taking time out to give advice. You may disagree with them, however acting like they're taking advantage of you is ridiculous when they are spending time to give you advice on how to positively impact your game from their mind regardless of how they say it. Expecting people to sugar-coat freelo information is absurd. Arguing about it is absurd. We have team builder where you can play literally the same champion and change one mastery value to determine whether changing it makes a difference or not. We may not have a sandbox mode, however Team Builder comes close to being used as a concentrated form of practice on one champion with minor variations.
Well just because somebody is at a higher elo doesn't necessarily make them right on each individual point, Elo illustrates skill overall, it doesn't mean complete knowledge. In the end, logic should carry the day. The issue is the use of sophism to obscure.
Because this isn't a contest of skills, it's about what's right and when a person realizes they're incorrect or that they misunderstand what the other person is saying they should acknowledge it if they still disagree, deal with their opponent's actual argument.
Granted, sometimes it can be a subconscious misunderstanding of their opponent's argument (eg I think Jaswa wanted to believe that only damage was meant because it would make the discussion so much easier so even after it was clarified he dismissed it) but it still comes from a mentality of caring about you being right instead of what's right.
Not like it can't happen in the opposite situation, but DH does tend to cultivate that mentality.
Also decency in delivery > all, being great at the game doesn't excuse being a jerk, though what was said was less being a jerk and more venting at the "DH mentality".
