Part of an actors training is to be able to say “I love you” in a way that makes the person want to flee, or “I hate you” in a way that makes the person feel all warm and cozy. People accusing you of using “the tone argument” are only right if there is more argument than tone (btw: I bet i can get someone to hit me in the face only by saying “Strawberries are nice”, given the right situation. I will do it all with tone, gestures, body posture and facial expressions. Not “loud” ones like giving the middle finger, small ones will suffice).
An argument does NOT become invalid because you are loud, irritable, upset or anything like it.
The problem is it doesent become correct either and just MIGHT be a reason for why most parliments, courts, science labs and so on dont tolerate screaming, insults and obscene gestures as part of debate.
We have a code of civility. If you get pissed off during a debate that doesent negate your argument but it COULD alter the way it is recieved, or make it ….not recieved.
Imagine a lawyer, red in face , screaming while pointing his finger at the alledged purpetraitor.
Do you think he will win the case?
That only works for religous people.
Any stupid twit knows that 80 % (give or take) of our communication is non verbal.
1: I respect you opinions. After all ,you´re more experinced than i am at this job since i am the new guy.
2: I respect yor “opinions”. After all,you´re more “experinced” than i am at this “job”……since I AM THE” NEEEEW GUY”!!!!
I only used written characters, all in print. I only added a few, none altering the grammar or the sentence, but yet altering your perception of it entirely.
There might be those among you who have an opinion on what i wrote here.
Well, there are a number of scientific tests and surveys proving that F*CK YOU!!!