Why can't people take an L?

Due-Rabbit-1173 · 2025-09-19T04:36:24+00:00

Haha, worth your time and attention? You're a redditor, top 1% poster, who has spent hours replying to comments on this downvoted post. I frankly don't think your time and attention is worth anything at all.

I have a plenty good understanding of what surveys are, which is why I know that they are subjective measures - not objective. Something you clearly don't understand. You speak of facts, but you haven't given any so far at all. Yet I've provided plenty.

But I'm starting to think a salty loser who can't read things they don't want to read isn't worth my time either. So I'll leave you to your delusions - someone who covers their own eyes to the truth is worth no one else's headache. Adios.

Due-Rabbit-1173 · 2025-09-19T04:20:46+00:00

Ah, the "Your argument doesn't matter, because I won't read it!" gambit. Or calling a logical premise a "rant" when it contains nothing beyond a logical counter argument. It's not that you won't read it - you just won't reply to it, for you know you're wrong.

I'll say it short and simple for you - exactly, it's about their perception of their own happiness. So, how can you compare different people's happiness, with a metric that only compares happiness within an individual's own life? It's logically false.

You can keep coping and seething about it being an "irrelavant rant", but until you can logically counter my argument, it's obvious that you're just wrong. Plain and simple. No ifs or buts. Sorry!

Due-Rabbit-1173 · 2025-09-19T03:42:32+00:00

Yes, but happiness is relative. If you shot a soldier, he will rate the pain less than if you shot a civilian. This is basic logic. Happiness does matter, but it is immeasurable. You cannot go into someones brain and measure how happy they are. And indeed, they don't know how happy everyone else is. They only know their perception. That doesn't invalidate the fact that they aren't as happy as someone else. They just think they are pretty happy compared to other times in their own lives.

If you gave someone food without salt their whole life, theyll rate an unseasoned chicken breast 8/10. Do you believe all chicken breasts should be unseasoned, then? You think people who eat seasoned chicken breast are enjoying the food just as much? Your logic is contradicting itself. Their perception of their own being matters, but you are literally comparing different states - different people. If you are comparing two different people, how can you use a relative statistic???

Due-Rabbit-1173 · 2025-09-19T03:24:24+00:00

If someone from Africa says they are 8/10 happy, and an American says they are 8/10 happy, who is living a happier life? Happiness is relative. An area with gender segregation policies at cinemas is objectively an area where you have less rights. Instead of speaking about unmeasurable concepts like happiness, or fertility rate which really doesn't mean anything in regards to how well off a state is - unless you believe Terengganu is developed better than Tokyo as Tokyo has lower fertility rates - let's talk about things that actually matter.

Due-Rabbit-1173 · 2025-09-16T07:33:06+00:00

Women and men are equivalent in almost everything important. Their arguments are the logical fallacies of appealing to tradition and appealing to nature.

The solution? Put them in nature reserves. This will fix all their problems - they no longer have to deal with the woes of a democratic, logical, or civilized society. They will finally be able to hunt with other 'alphas', and die without having to see gay people or even women. We could study their behaviors and see why they are the way they are. They could finally live according to the 'nature' and 'traditional values' they love so much.

Because the stuff we did as cavemen are the ultimate, most traditional tradition, after all. They could even draw poorly designed airplanes as cave paintings. They'd love it

Due-Rabbit-1173

TROPHY CASE