A genie grants you a wish at random: you're guaranteed to win your next argument. Who do you argue with?
-
Yeah, this really depends on what you meant by winning here. Are we actually changing the other person's mind or do they admit we are right, but still believe otherwise? Are people who witness the argument included? Do people continue to agree indefinitely? Does it change reality to match?
The genie has already departed and cannot answer any questions 🧞
️ -
I think you would have to argue with quite a few people to even get access to trump.
The OP's what if scenario is already well outside the realm of potential reality, might as well go hard into the imagination space.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I don't want to argue with anyone. Can I have cake instead?
-
Genie - it's always 3 wishes clearly the genie misspoke
he's doing his best ok 🧞
️ -
I don't want to argue with anyone. Can I have cake instead?
It's Genie's first day and he didn't read the training guide
-
This post did not contain any content.
I'd argue the genie wants to do everything I wish, regardless of the amount of individual wishes.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Alex O'Connor.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I argue that American Conservatives should all commit suicide with Trump on Truth Social.
-
This post did not contain any content.
My father, and the argument would be about his political views. Radicalized years ago but the taking heads on Fox.
I miss my dad.
-
I think you would have to argue with quite a few people to even get access to trump.
Unless social media counts.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
Maybe myself (as an experiment), or the genie about if I should get more wishes or something. Wasting universe-altering magic on convincing one person seems like a waste.
::: spoiler Edit: To be more clear about the self argument:
You can do a lot of funny stuff with logical constructs. If you say "exclusively, [wish] or this statement is false" it's a paradox unless the wish is true. If I argue with someone else, them misunderstanding could count as a victory, but if I'm on both sides that's a bit harder. It's possible I just die or explode or something, but maybe it will actually work, too.
You can get way more sophisticated with that, and probably should if you only get one shot. Godel's incompleteness theorem is a famous example of that kind of tortured self-reference. Magical evaluation of a single arbitrary statement is just way more OP than it may seem at first.
:::
-
Maybe myself (as an experiment), or the genie about if I should get more wishes or something. Wasting universe-altering magic on convincing one person seems like a waste.
::: spoiler Edit: To be more clear about the self argument:
You can do a lot of funny stuff with logical constructs. If you say "exclusively, [wish] or this statement is false" it's a paradox unless the wish is true. If I argue with someone else, them misunderstanding could count as a victory, but if I'm on both sides that's a bit harder. It's possible I just die or explode or something, but maybe it will actually work, too.
You can get way more sophisticated with that, and probably should if you only get one shot. Godel's incompleteness theorem is a famous example of that kind of tortured self-reference. Magical evaluation of a single arbitrary statement is just way more OP than it may seem at first.
:::
Well, you may win the argument against the genie, but it doesn't guarantee that the genie would be granting you more wishes--because maybe they just can't (the universe itself might not let it or something).
Just like some convenience store clerk agreeing that your coupon should be accepted, but the higher-ups won't--and she can't pay for it because she's got even less money than you do.
-
I argue that American Conservatives should all commit suicide with Trump on Truth Social.
That’s something I can stand behind
-
This post did not contain any content.
[Dictator’s name] Orbán/Trump/Xi/etc…
On TV
And the argument is about them not being able to rule the country
-
This post did not contain any content.
What does winning mean in this case? That every single person watching that debate concludes that I was right and the other person was wrong? What about if I'm objectively wrong? Do I still win?
-
I argue that American Conservatives should all commit suicide with Trump on Truth Social.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Horseshoe theory in action here.
Wishing death on 150+ million people because of their political beliefs doesn’t make you righteous. You’ve looped all the way around to becoming the exact thing you claim to oppose.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Frivolous lawsuit against the government or a FAANG company
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
I don't care who I'll be arguing with, but the disagreement will center on the hour and manner of Trump's inevitable demise.
I'm thinking a trauma-induced stroke, caused when JD Vance has a sudden epileptic fit and bites off Donny Jr. in the Lincoln bedroom.
-
Alex O'Connor.
What would you debate him on?
-
Frivolous lawsuit against the government or a FAANG company
Well that's good, humiliate them and get paid
