(Print) Use this randomly generated list as your call list when playing the game. There is no need to say the BINGO column name. Place some kind of mark (like an X, a checkmark, a dot, tally mark, etc) on each cell as you announce it, to keep track. You can also cut out each item, place them in a bag and pull words from the bag.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Argues against their own points without realizing it
Would ask for a citation if you said the sky is blue
Obscurantism
Expresses high levels of certainty on matters he couldn't possibly know
If opponent expresses his argument in their own words for clarification, cries "strawman!"
Will debate literally anything -physically incapable of not having an opinion on a subject
Fallacy Man!
Wall of text for simple point
No interest in learning from his interlocutor
Concludes causal relationships based on grossly insufficient statistical evidence
Name-drops philosophers whose works usually don't actually support their point(s)
Brings all discussion back to one of a handful of pet issues
Oblivious to second and third order effects
Makes arguments which rely on their specific moral assumptions
Has never admitted fault in their life
"That's not what I said", but that is actually what they said.
/r/IAmVerySmart
Uses studies they haven't read as evidence
"You wouldn't understand"
"Saying I don't understand something is an ad-hominem attack"
Uses circular reasoning to justify their assumptions
Presents statistics in isolation of known causal factors
Incapable of using a search engine instead of begging for a citation
