By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Far right politico Charlie Kirk just shot in the neck in Utah on 01:25 - Sep 18 by The_Romford_Blue
I’ve nothing really to add to thread but I’ve read the last few pages (and the first few the night it happened) but just wanted to take a second to say this is one of the smartest posts I’ve ever read on here. Found it legitimately interesting seeing debate tactics somewhat explained and examples of.
Have an arrow of love
He missed the Straw Man Argument - taking what someone said that's hard to debate against and watering it down and changing the meaning and/or context to make it much easier to defeat (like blowing over a straw man that you made yourself) despite it not being the original argument.
I learned all of these in Logic lectures, as part of my Philosophy module at uni, but tend to forget a lot of people didn't go to uni and won't know them.
Charlie Kirk, incidentally, used a lot of these logical fallacies to 'beat' less aware opponents.
Far right politico Charlie Kirk just shot in the neck in Utah on 09:07 - Sep 18 by The_Flashing_Smile
He missed the Straw Man Argument - taking what someone said that's hard to debate against and watering it down and changing the meaning and/or context to make it much easier to defeat (like blowing over a straw man that you made yourself) despite it not being the original argument.
I learned all of these in Logic lectures, as part of my Philosophy module at uni, but tend to forget a lot of people didn't go to uni and won't know them.
Charlie Kirk, incidentally, used a lot of these logical fallacies to 'beat' less aware opponents.
Oh so you're saying all scarecrows are fair game are you? Fascist.
Far right politico Charlie Kirk just shot in the neck in Utah on 09:07 - Sep 18 by The_Flashing_Smile
He missed the Straw Man Argument - taking what someone said that's hard to debate against and watering it down and changing the meaning and/or context to make it much easier to defeat (like blowing over a straw man that you made yourself) despite it not being the original argument.
I learned all of these in Logic lectures, as part of my Philosophy module at uni, but tend to forget a lot of people didn't go to uni and won't know them.
Charlie Kirk, incidentally, used a lot of these logical fallacies to 'beat' less aware opponents.
if you went to university and took a philosophy module you should also know that a very common technique in logical discourse is to simplify and try to isolate the key issues by abstracting from irrelevant detail. so someone reframes a question by stating it in a simpler and clearer context. the idea is that this simplification and questioning exposes the fundamental issue at stake, equally it allows you to say which bit of the simplification or abstraction actually impedes a proper understanding of the matter. it is a means to advance discussion and through abstraction and iterative revision to reach a deeper understanding. what you are labelling a "straw man method" is actually a collaborative process of questioning that exposes assumptions, encourages critical thinking, and helps individuals arrive at their own understanding and justifications for their beliefs. it's usually known as the socratic method - which your philosophy module will also have covered.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
-1
Far right politico Charlie Kirk just shot in the neck in Utah on 18:41 - Sep 18 with 1324 views
Far right politico Charlie Kirk just shot in the neck in Utah on 16:17 - Sep 18 by lowhouseblue
if you went to university and took a philosophy module you should also know that a very common technique in logical discourse is to simplify and try to isolate the key issues by abstracting from irrelevant detail. so someone reframes a question by stating it in a simpler and clearer context. the idea is that this simplification and questioning exposes the fundamental issue at stake, equally it allows you to say which bit of the simplification or abstraction actually impedes a proper understanding of the matter. it is a means to advance discussion and through abstraction and iterative revision to reach a deeper understanding. what you are labelling a "straw man method" is actually a collaborative process of questioning that exposes assumptions, encourages critical thinking, and helps individuals arrive at their own understanding and justifications for their beliefs. it's usually known as the socratic method - which your philosophy module will also have covered.
Blimey. You're now trying to claim the straw man fallacy doesn't exist? And then telling me what I covered in my philosophy degree?
Far right politico Charlie Kirk just shot in the neck in Utah on 18:41 - Sep 18 by The_Flashing_Smile
Blimey. You're now trying to claim the straw man fallacy doesn't exist? And then telling me what I covered in my philosophy degree?
Are you alright Lowers?
i'm saying that you'e misidentifying a form of argument. isn't that clear. did you do a philosophy degree? i thought it was a module?
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
Far right politico Charlie Kirk just shot in the neck in Utah on 18:41 - Sep 18 by The_Flashing_Smile
Blimey. You're now trying to claim the straw man fallacy doesn't exist? And then telling me what I covered in my philosophy degree?
Are you alright Lowers?
In fairness, there are formal fallacies and informal fallacies. Straw man isnt a formal one- more a shorthand for critiquing and identifying a dishonest or flawed approach to an argument.
0
Far right politico Charlie Kirk just shot in the neck in Utah on 22:02 - Sep 18 with 993 views
Far right politico Charlie Kirk just shot in the neck in Utah on 21:55 - Sep 18 by redrickstuhaart
In fairness, there are formal fallacies and informal fallacies. Straw man isnt a formal one- more a shorthand for critiquing and identifying a dishonest or flawed approach to an argument.
I didn't say if it was formal or informal, I just said it exists.
but was it a philosophy degree or a philosophy module? you've claimed both?
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
-1
Far right politico Charlie Kirk just shot in the neck in Utah on 22:18 - Sep 18 with 899 views
Far right politico Charlie Kirk just shot in the neck in Utah on 09:07 - Sep 18 by The_Flashing_Smile
He missed the Straw Man Argument - taking what someone said that's hard to debate against and watering it down and changing the meaning and/or context to make it much easier to defeat (like blowing over a straw man that you made yourself) despite it not being the original argument.
I learned all of these in Logic lectures, as part of my Philosophy module at uni, but tend to forget a lot of people didn't go to uni and won't know them.
Charlie Kirk, incidentally, used a lot of these logical fallacies to 'beat' less aware opponents.
I’m not convinced someone has to have a particular ideology to be considered a fascist either. It appears that fascists throughout history haven’t had a defined economic ideology, or at least people who study these things can’t agree what it is, even if there is one. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism
It seems the least of the criteria one should use to define a fascist and not one to be used to rule out whether someone is a fascist if they meet other criteria.
I think we should just stick to ‘charismatic and engaging fellow with abhorrent views’.
Far right politico Charlie Kirk just shot in the neck in Utah on 07:41 - Sep 19 by The_Flashing_Smile
What difference does it make? I studied philosophy at uni. Feck me, you're as boring as you are tedious.
so are you saying it's ok for someone to post "what I covered in my philosophy degree" when they didn't take a philosophy degree? what other degrees can people pretend to have? are you going to claim to have a law degree when it fits another thread on the basis that you attended some introduction to law lectures?
"what difference does it make?" a module is hugely different from a degree. you know that. and claiming degrees you don't have is not good. imagine the grief you would give someone else if they did that.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
