now, in whitemen society, they have a thing, called logic, and dialogue.
which, the possum was just mouthing about yester, eg socrate dialog.
now, this whitemen thing, is one way of human society makes progress.
however, the problem with whitemen, is that they insist, it is the only way.
now, fastforward to america usa, in 21th century.
the land became ill, in particular, with late milengen and zoomers.
their socratic habit, also became corrupt.
thus, in their internet online drivels, they have a obsession with the concept of ad hominem.
meaning, in the western tradition of dialogue, aka discussion, or aka debate, a variant, they r obsessed with one of the so called western fallacy, namely, ad hominem, short is, ad hom.
this ad hom, is one of the fallacy in logic, in the context of debate.
meaning, instead of addressing an issue, they attack the arguer.
so in a debate, when someone attack the arguer, it is an fallacy.
for example, RP says xah no accept trump corruption.
xah says RP is a trump hater .
RP applies the ad hom, accusing xah is attacking him, instead of addressing his argumentation.
so far so good?
it seems, on the surface, the western whitemen aka europid's senses, r supreme.
but the problem is, they so obsessed with the western logic fallacies they forgot the premise of dialog.
here, is an illustration.
let's say u have a retard, or technically, an imbicile.
(xah edu corner side box: imbecle means, someone with low iq, or drivels from mouth. as typically seen in a zoomer drawing).
now, imbecile says, one plus one is 3.
xah says, lol, but u r an imbecile.
now, here is where the whitemen come in.
whitemen say, xah is wrong, because he ad hom.
end of proof. ∎.
now, an explicit description of this meta fallay, is this:
the whitemen, got too obsessed with whitemen's way of logic, they forgot, the context.
i.e. when in a western dialog or debate, there are certain implicit context. when this context is not met, ad hom, itself, becomes invalid.
e.g. in a socrate dialog, first premise, is that the participants, are in equal footing of brain size, or can read write, understand the language (eg greek or english).
but when this premise is not met, the debate itself is a farce.
now, imbecile, is just one example.
it could be lots other.
eg illiterate debating literacy, trump hater debating trump, ignorant programer debating relevance of math in code, average american discussing usa politics, et al.
so, in a zoomer 4chan way of manner thinking, u could, whenever u see someone mouthing something online u disagree, u can simply say no u.
and you would be actually correct.
exhibit, insert 1. half brain zoomer meme that illustrates imbecile.
halfbrain meme 2025
now, zoomers themselfs r halfbrain, so they usually no unstand what is an imbecile.
