Nassim Nicholas Taleb Quotes

Suckers try to win arguments, nonsuckers try to win.

I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.

Since when was an emotional argument won by logic?

In my work, you get used to criticisms. Of course you do, because there are a lot of people trying to get you down, but I always cheer up immensely if one is particularly wounding because I think well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left. That is why my father always taught me: never worry about anyone who attacks you personally; it means their arguments carry no weight and they know it.

...associational ad hominem attacks remain the left's favorite rhetorical strategy for undermining opponents.

If you can somehow force a liberal into a point-counterpoint argument, his retorts will bear no relation to what you’ve said - unless you were in fact talking about your looks, your age, your weight, your personal obsessions, or whether you are a fascist. In the famous liberal two-step, they leap from one idiotic point to the next, so you can never nail them. It’s like arguing with someone with Attention Deficit Disorder.

Arguments, like men, are often pretenders.

When they can't win a debate (can they ever?), leftists deploy what the late novelist/philosopher Ayn Rand called the argument from intimidation. Instead of trying to refute the other side, they label their opponents' position evil, attribute sinister motives to its adherents, and charge that its proponents are encouraging violence.

If someone says, "Katie, you are out of order," over something I've said, or, "Katie, you are wrong," if I defend myself or justify myself, then I have just started the war.

Where they couldn't pick holes in our arguments they would drive horses and carriages through my character.

They say, "Katie, you're wrong." And if I say, "How dare you say that? I have studied and studied." Or, "I am an expert in" whatever area we're talking about. Or, "No, you are wrong! And I think you're rude!" Or anything like that, and if we don't say it out loud, maybe we think it, but that's stressful. The moment I've defended, in any way, I've started the war.

However, if you do start crying in an argument and someone asks why, you can always say, 'I'm just crying because of how wrong you are.'

I never saw an instance of one or two disputants convincing the other by argument.

Affect not little shifts and subterfuges to avoid the force of an argument.

The less the difference, the greater the quarrel over it.

Most people argue over who's right, not about what the truth is.

Never make any reference to the other person's family. "You're just like your - " because that is out, completely.

A singular fact about modern war is that it takes charge. Once begun it has to be carried to its conclusion, and carrying it there sets in motion events that may be beyond men's control. Doing what has to be done to win, men perform acts that alter the very soil in which society's roots are nourished.

The daughter of debate That still discord doth sow.

I have pretty thick skin. I've been in the arena a long time, and that means that I am not going to get down with [Donald Trump] and go insult for insult.

That's the beauty of argument, if you argue correctly, you're never wrong.

Rudeness is better than any argument; it totally eclipses intellect.

When all else fails the liberals call you names or attack your personality.

When a person's last response was Saumensch or Saukerl or Arschloch, you knew you had them beaten.

A man who is furnished with arguments from the mint will convince his antagonist much sooner than one who draws them from reason and philosophy.