more like
"Allow me to preemptively ruin the strength of my argument's ability to be an argument"

1/6/2017 3:10:12 AM

That's the point

1/6/2017 5:53:15 AM

no. the point is to provide a strong argument that, if defeated, further strengthens the counterpoint.
the best way I know of to pull the rug out from under an argument is to demonstrate no faith in it.
come on man this aint gender studies or something. this is easy

1/6/2017 6:27:12 AM

That movie isn't very good.

1/6/2017 9:07:48 AM

^^ there are multiple applications of devil's advocate.


Another examples is one in which an argument is tested by throwing various counterpoints at it to find holes in the logic.

1/6/2017 9:12:43 AM

1/6/2017 9:27:02 AM

Devil's advocate sucks, let's play hungry, hungry hippos.

1/6/2017 9:28:42 AM

Nothing to see here... just another of Fermat's drunk revelations.

1/6/2017 9:54:51 AM

What about x^n+y^n=z^n has no solutions for n>2?

1/6/2017 7:03:14 PM

trappy still salty
we'd probably get along swell

and i was totally sober for this one.
I enjoy the fact that it's difficult to tell the difference.

But my point stands: don't undermine your own arguments, even if it's for experimental reasons.

Exceptions include:
1. Absurdity
2.

1/6/2017 9:24:51 PM