Logical guide to not just debunking 'shills', but addressing, engaging and refuting the unintentional or intentional inconsistent/incomplete system(s) that source their entire worldview.

ThePRIMARYrequirement is to 'create' an opposing dialectic logic. There are many possible iterations, race vs. race, religion vs. religion, etc. For example, the usual suspect 'shills' have proved that their entire system is inconsistent because it outputs both 'trust jews' and 'do not trust jews'. This is a 'biblical' level revelation of a singular sourced set of opposites that are to be 'ingested' and accepted by whoever would listen, to play one role among the two.

The goal is to set up opposing 'groups'. If you disagree with the 'anti' jew dialectic component then 'your 'motives' suggest you are on the manufactured opposite 'side' that can be described as 'pro jew even if crimes are committed'.

You MUST be 'identified' as one or the other 'role'.

Originating from a source outside yourself.

If any 'anon' on this board tries to 'completely describe you as one or the other 'side' of their own manufactured dialectic, then their system is necessarily inconsistent.

If any 'system' of theorems on this board, there are as many systems as there are anons, outputs a theorem that 'completely describes you, then it is necessarily an inconsistent system.

If a system you see appears to be consistent, it is necessarily incomplete, which means any other anon can ADD new information to the set.

We can as a group output inconsistent theorems. Is that a complete system? If you say so you are recognizing an inconsistency. If you use a consistent system, it will be incomplete.

Any attempt to 'completely' define you, is a projection of the psychology of the source of that attempt.

If a single 'hidden' source outputs two contradictory theorems, citing for example a newspaper managed by jews to 'trust' that source, and also outputting 'do not trust jews', this singular source is projecting a self-alienated psychology, and you as a person to the source has meaning only as 'pro' or 'anti' to that dialectic.

The inconsistency vs. completeness is a mathematical certain reality of ANY sufficiently complex system, including our own minds.