Home > Topic > argumentative
1 " Liza Hempstock, who had been Bod's friend for the last six years, was different in another way; she was less likely to be there for him when Bod went down to the nettle patch to see her, and on the rare occasions when she was, she would be short-tempered, argumentative and often downright rude.Bod talked to Mr Owens about this, and after a few moments' reflection, his father said, " It's just women, I reckon. She liked you as a boy, probably isn't sure who you are now you're a young man. I used to play with one little girl down by the duck pond every day until she turned about your age, and then she threw an apple at my head and did not say another word to me until I was seventeen." Mrs Owens stiffened. " It was a pear I threw," she said, tartly, " and I was talking to you again soon enough, for we danced a measure at your cousin Ned's wedding, and that was but two days after your sixteenth birthday." Mr Owens said, " Of course you are right, my dear." He winked at Bod, to tell him that it was none of it serious. And then mouthed " Seventeen" to show that, really, it was. "
2 " It reminded me of a study I had read about Alzheimer's disease. The study said that the disease often enhanced and reinforced people's existing personality traits. If a person was quiet and gentle, with Alzheimer's they became even more docile. If a person was argumentative and negative the disease made them unbearable to be around. I couldn't help but wonder if sudden wealth had that same effect on a person. "
3 " Understand that every ‘voice’ has the spirit to influence. Watch your tone, accent, volume and speed. Be careful that you don’t sound angry or argumentative whenever driving an important point. Equally important, is not sounding serious or sounding playful when the message being conveyed needs to be taken seriously. "
― Archibald Marwizi , Making Success Deliberate
4 " So what? Why should an a priori proof of the libertarian property theory make any difference? Why not engage in aggression anyway?” Why indeed?! But then, why should the proof that 1+1=2 make any difference? One certainly can still act on the belief that 1+1=3. The obvious answer is “because a propositional justification exists for doing one thing, but not for doing another.” But why should we be reasonable, is the next come-back. Again, the answer is obvious. For one, because it would be impossible to argue against it; and further, because the proponent raising this question would already affirm the use of reason in his act of questioning it. This still might not suffice and everyone knows that it would not, for even if the libertarian ethic and argumentative reasoning must be regarded as ultimately justified, this still does not preclude that people will act on the basis of unjustified beliefs either because they don’t know, they don’t care, or they prefer not to know. I fail to see why this should be surprising or make the proof somehow defective. "
― Hans-Hermann Hoppe , The Economics and Ethics of Private Property: Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy
5 " The more passionate and argumentative I get the more followers and friends I make online. "
― Tasha Turner
