his method of debating consists in ignoring the original topic at hand, extrapolating a similar, apparently parallel idea that is easily rebukable onto his opponent, we may see this in the current thread on the smug and revolting attitudes of left wing partisan hacks on sc, instead of focusing on the discussion at hand he has repeatedly brought in experiences from without the topic and attempted to put them on his opponent, this has given the false impression of an analyst when he is really just a con artist
example number 1:
https://sociopathcommunity.com/Forum/Topic/15428/5/my-own-random-thoughts#post89603
the original premise has been set by tc himself "how is lacking in original thought stupid?"
https://sociopathcommunity.com/Forum/Topic/15428/6/my-own-random-thoughts#post89613
"I could see a willingness to conform being more intelligent than an insistence towards original thinking in the face of superior solutions, as is blatantly shown by the Flat Earth phenomenon. "
very good! our protagonist has managed to ignore the fundamental premise yet again, the topic at hand was never a willingness to conform but rather those who lack original thought are stupid, he had for instance built up the original premise
https://sociopathcommunity.com/Forum/Topic/15428/5/my-own-random-thoughts#post89589
and my response to this was " in a sense, but conformity is fueled by a lack of original thought, which finds it root in stupidity"
and nowhere did tc dispute this! instead he went on a rant as to the utility of conformity but not the original premise regarding conformity being fueled by a lack of original thought!
now a pedant (and there are many vile ones amongst you, chipping away at every little detail as though your lifeblood depended on it, if only to woo the audience with your sublime and unmatched perseverance to carefully scrutinise every word as though one was perusing a legal contract or the profession of faith into a cult) may see my second-to-last response
"of course a willingness to conform because it appears to be a more logical opinion displays intelligence, but this is different from conforming to something just because the spirit of the times demand it"
and say "aha! you yourself have validated his point by using the word conform in your response!" but it is obvious that the word was merely used to draw the distinction between one who was willing to adopt the same rationales as others because it was fueled by original thought and the one who adopted the same line of reasoning merely because the spirit of the times demanded it
we may thus summarise the debate as follows:
1) the original premise was that a lack of original thought (which fuels conformity) finds its roots in stupidity
2) our protagonist was utterly perplexed that one could think that, just because society holds some opinions those opinions in themselves ought to be considered as stupid (when this was never stated)
3) pivoting to his final question "Would someone resisting conformity purely for the sake of it be more intelligent than someone accepting it purely for the sake of it?" so as to force the negation, as though my original point was an affirmation
in my opinion, her behaviour in this debate may be extrapolated to her behaviour during debates in general
she will adopt a vague point so as to not have any firm point so that she may shift the goalposts later to her liking, and then later strawman the opponents argument to the point that the original premise of the debate has been forgotten
unfortunately this behaviour has been perpetuated through years and years of consistent praise by complete and utter morons (alter-ego comes to mind) for our protagonist, she has been incorrectly given the title of analytical, no, real analysis rests on the fundament of perusing the original point vigorously with logical rigor, what our protagonist has done is no more than propagate casuitry year in year out, she is extremely skilled at it to be sure, an adroit sophist! and she should even be celebrated and praised as a mendacious perjurer, but nothing more, and nothing less
