comment: >
  
  
  There is a considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists.
  
  - Yosemite Park Ranger on challenges to design a bear-proof garbage can
context: This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.
  Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"
  (For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, please read this page.)
  Rule-breaking posts may result in bans. >
  
  It's very rare for someone to "win" a political or philosophical argument in the moment. Most "wins" come later when the information you shared or learned meets a slightly different context in a different moment and begins to make sense, even if you don't necessarily tie that epiphany back to any specific interaction, or even if there is no epiphany moment, just a slow evolution of view. >
  
  Pro tip: you can't "win" an argument. You just have to be satisficed that your point got across to the other person. >
  
  Again, it's not actually about winning. It's about learning. >
  
  No it’s about winning. >
  
  What's the prize? >
  
  The satisfaction of being, err thinking you're right? >
  
  You can beat stupid, but you don’t win >
  
  If I can point and laugh I'd consider that a win. >
  
  There’s a guy downtown who wins this way against everyone. >
  
  Six years in the Navy.
  I promise you, sometimes you have to figure out ways to explain things in a way a dumb person can understand because someone else got injured or killed. Sometimes it's just experience talking.
  "You can't make anything idiot-proof because there is always a better idiot."