"Just Because THIS.... Doesn't Mean THAT..."

[Goldsickle]

You're arguing with another person and you've been bringing one rebuttal after another.

You proved your point and debunked the person completely.
And then he responds with:


"Just because you were able to prove your point... doesn't mean that I was wrong..."


And there you have it, the most abused artificial argument extender, the dreaded "Just because, doesn't mean" response template.

When this happens, this usually means that the other person has ran out arguments, completely depleted of things to say.
But he wants to go on. He can't just let the discussion end like that.

So in desperation, he uses the template to somehow extend the argument, maybe to buy time or make it look like he has more to say.

The thing is, if he had something to say, he would actually explain why "it doesn't mean that".

If you've been arguing with someone and they use this response, you know you're winning.

If you have been using such responses, then you're most likely wrong.



"B-but... just because I ran out of rebuttals... doesn't mean I lost the argument..."

 

[Demi-fiend]

You've gotta point there... doesn't mean you're right though.

 

[Foxtrot94]

I'm not getting the point of this thread. You want to know if we agree with you or...?

 

[Goldsickle]

I'm not getting the point of this thread. You want to know if we agree with you or...?

Whenever you argue with someone and they use the "just because, doesn't mean" template, it means that they're just artificially extending the argument, even though they're out of things to say.
A good way to find out if they actually have something worth saying or they're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

For example (HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE, I never had this conversation):
Let's say someone makes a claim that Hideo Kojima supports games as an art form.

You proved him wrong by showing interviews where Kojima doesn't see games as art.

The conversation should have ended right there but he tries to extend the argument with:

"Just because he said those things, doesn't mean it's true".

So the argument is unnecessarily extended and lengthened.
Depending on how slippery the other person is, it could go in circles.

From my experience arguing with a lot of people, someone using the "just because, doesn't mean" response template are always the troublesome type who argues for the sake of arguing and won't back down, even when the evidence are against them.

 

[Viper]

Hey, that person at least acknowledged that you proved your point. Do you know how frustrating it is when several people try to prove something, but that one person just ignores everything, even logic? In the end mods made us scatter with nothing achieved.

 

[absolitude]

well if kojima's game as an art or not is the case.. the statement just because doesn't mean can work IF kojima's game indeed feel artistic..

kojima can say all he wants about game not as an art while the game themselves are artistic.. and on another case, you see someone bragging how artsy his game is while the truth is that it's ughhhhh..

some people just don't brag about what they're doing, they just do it, they don't need to feel good about themselves by saying stuffs that supposed to signify them, they just feel good doing what they're doing

Kojima went on to say that "Art is something that radiates the artist," this part alone is the proof of that IF it radiates the artist.. don't really know what radiates mean in this context

but then again, are kojima's game artistic? quiet is darn artistic, well maybe not, but hot hot hot

 

[Goldsickle]

Hey, that person at least acknowledged that you proved your point.

In that example, he's not acknowledging, since he says "doesn't mean it's true".
As mentioned, the problem with this kind of response is that he doesn't explain why it "doesn't mean it's true".

It's a different story if his response was: "Just because he says that, doesn't mean it's true, because the website you linked to is known to be full of false stories" (hypothetical example, pretend that this is the case).

But if that's the case, he could have skipped the "just because, doesn't mean" and go right into explaining "the website you linked to is known to be full of hoaxes".

As I said, the "just because, doesn't mean" response template is mostly reserved for people who ran out of things to say.

well if kojima's game as an art or not is the case..

I merely brought that up as a hypothetical example... please don't stray away from the actual discussion...

 

[Demi-fiend]

Internet arguments almost always end that way though.

 

[absolitude]

I merely brought that up as a hypothetical example... please don't stray away from the actual discussion...

just because it's a hypothetical example doesn't mean i stray away from the actual discussion.. haha!

but seriously tho, i meant that unless ofc you actually don't need a discussion and you've made a point that the guy you're arguing with is wrong and you're right that in the end there's no point to discuss

 

[Innsmouth]

I love new trend of completely meaningless threads. Cant wait till we reach FB level. Im in anticipation "I ate my apple" thread.

 

[Meg]

I love new trend of completely meaningless threads. Cant wait till we reach FB level. Im in anticipation "I ate my apple" thread.

What do you expect? There hasn't be anything DMC-related news for awhile now. It's hard to come up with stuff to talk about.

I've also noticed a trend of people responding to pointless threads just to say how pointless they are.

If it's okay with the OP, maybe we can use this thread to make our own silly "just because this, doesn't mean that" scenarios? Like a fill in the blank thing?

For instances: "Just because I'm a millennial, doesn't mean I'm good with technology." *breaks the Internet* *breaks the computer* *breaks the vacuum*

 

[Dante's Stalker]

Just because the cake is a lie doesn't meant that you shouldn't eat it.

 

[berto]

Sorry but I agree.

My brother was atheist and I'm Christian so he would constantly berate me with all these 'truths' and try to convince me that his believes were right, it got worse after Religulous came out. One day he just kept pushing and I had no more arguments to defend my believes with and he basically assumed that he had converted me and he said something to the effect of 'so are we in agreement?' and I immediately responded with 'No!' and he was surprised and said 'after all I just said?' 'Just because you are better at arguing a point doesn't mean I agree, nor that I'm abandoning my believes nor that you are right' and smarter men than him had tried.

Been a better advocate doesn't equate to you been in the right, simply that you can argue better.

 

[Goldsickle]

If it's okay with the OP, maybe we can use this thread to make our own silly "just because this, doesn't mean that" scenarios? Like a fill in the blank thing?

It would be nice if instead of made-up scenarios, people post actual quotes from real arguments.

'Just because you are better at arguing a point doesn't mean I agree, nor that I'm abandoning my believes nor that you are right' and smarter men than him had tried.

Now in this case, he's jumping to conclusions, so your "just because, doesn't mean" response is actually valid.

But I'm talking about when the "just because, doesn't mean" type of response is used to artificially extend the argument when the other side is cornered.

 

[berto]

But I'm talking about when the "just because, doesn't mean" type of response is used to artificially extend the argument when the other side is cornered.

I suppose it's dependant on the actual topic. In your example 'Just because you proved your point doesn't mean I was wrong' seems a bit open. It might seem rather picky but a more precise statement might be more solid, such as 'Just because you proved your point, which is that I am wrong...' or 'Just because you proved your point, which is the opposite of mine...' but when you ended it with 'B-but... just because I ran out of rebuttals... doesn't mean I lost the argument...' it reminded me of that situation, only not so much because 'doesn't mean I lost the argument' as much as 'doesn't mean you've convince me.'

I can't think of any examples off the top of my head, though I'd remember my step father making more than a handful while demanding his children simply confirm he is right because he's older and thus all arguments against his commands are wrong...

 

[cheezMcNASTY]

I usually say it to debunk fallacious points.
A lot of my friends A) don't understand that everyone is biased 100% of the time
B) therefore try to assert points based on their observation (instead of FACTS which can only be interpreted subjectively).

That's when I go "Just because it SEEMS like x, doesn't mean x is universally TRUE. Otherwise a stereotype would be FACTUAL."

Problem is, the discussion usually turns into a tangent when I do it. They get fixated on debating whether their point was valid or not usually by trying to prove my observations are the same as theirs. Even if they are, it doesn't prove anything outside of their heads.

tl;dr I try not to argue with people any more. There's no point building a logical argument when everyone is too buried in their own thoughts to see it.

 

[Demi-fiend]

tl;dr I try not to argue with people any more.

That's probably the safest choice.

Not to be confused with Sophie's Choice.

 

[absolitude]

that's the point of arguing don't it? be the most stubborn in the room.. it's different with discussion

 

[LordOfDarkness]

that's the point of arguing don't it? be the most stubborn in the room.. it's different with discussion

I tend to find that if I'm having to try too hard to make my point, then I'm either not doing a very good job or the other person is being too stubborn. If it's the former then I feel like I'm wasting my breath, and if it's the latter then I feel like it's not worth my time. People will make their own minds up on things, it doesn't matter sometimes how many points you make. I never feel like I should 'win' an argument, because I don't care that much if someone else wants to dismiss my points. I'd much rather leave it and simply know myself that I was right about something as an oppose to having to force that I was upon someone.

 

[absolitude]

I tend to find that if I'm having to try too hard to make my point, then I'm either not doing a very good job or the other person is being too stubborn. If it's the former then I feel like I'm wasting my breath, and if it's the latter then I feel like it's not worth my time. People will make their own minds up on things, it doesn't matter sometimes how many points you make. I never feel like I should 'win' an argument, because I don't care that much if someone else wants to dismiss my points. I'd much rather leave it and simply know myself that I was right about something as an oppose to having to force that I was upon someone.

in other words, there's no point in arguing right? yeah, i prefer discussing stuffs, trade informations.. and there's a thing about arguing that you don't know how or when it started you're just there unintentionally, would drown even more if we're short tempered..

and i very much agree it's a waste of time