Strawmen

[Mac'nCheese]

Is it just me or is the word STRAWMAN being used way too much and often incorrectly in PRSI? Just saw another post where the poster just wrote STRAWMAN in response to an argument and I felt, hmmm, your strawman argument makes no sense. Maybe I'm just cranky cause I didn't win that half a billion dollars on Friday. But my odds......

[MorphingDragon]

Originally Posted by Mac'nCheese

Is it just me or is the word STRAWMAN being used way too much and often incorrectly in PRSI? Just saw another post where the poster just wrote STRAWMAN in response to an argument and I felt, hmmm, your strawman argument makes no sense. Maybe I'm just cranky cause I didn't win that half a billion dollars on Friday. But my odds......

Name names.

Do It! You know you want to.

The strawman fallacy is to simply argue with a misrepresentation of the original argument. If I'm thinking of what you're thinking of, it is most definitely a generalisation and a misrepresentation of the original argument.

[citizenzen]

Straw man arguments do get thrown about a lot around here.

I have nothing against that being pointed out.

[obeygiant]

Originally Posted by Mac'nCheese

Is it just me or is the word STRAWMAN being used way too much and often incorrectly in PRSI? Just saw another post where the poster just wrote STRAWMAN in response to an argument and I felt, hmmm, your strawman argument makes no sense. Maybe I'm just cranky cause I didn't win that half a billion dollars on Friday. But my odds......

Yeah, I'm also surprised at your inability to spot one like the one you quoted in the Santorum thread. You know, the issue where he DIDN'T use the n-word.

[Mac'nCheese]

Originally Posted by MorphingDragon

Name names.

Do It! You know you want to.

The strawman fallacy is to simply argue with a misrepresentation of the original argument. If I'm thinking of what you're thinking of, it is most definitely a generalisation and a misrepresentation of the original argument.

Naming names would be a forum violation and I can't afford a third strike man! I can't do it!

Originally Posted by obeygiant

Yeah, I'm also surprised at your inability to spot one like the one you quoted in the Santorum thread. You know, the issue where he DIDN'T use the n-word.

Ok, give me a minute to check out that thread....

----------

Originally Posted by obeygiant

Yeah, I'm also surprised at your inability to spot one like the one you quoted in the Santorum thread. You know, the issue where he DIDN'T use the n-word.

That was quick. For someone who is trying to insult me for missing the point, I'm sorry to point out that you are the one who missed the point. More details in the other thread...

[Liquorpuki]

On this board I see a ton of strawmen, red herrings, proof by obfuscation, loaded language, and argument hedging. It's just a lot of people don't realize they normally use f'd up logic

A few times I've pointed out the fallacy only to see the other guy deny it repeatedly and get all butthurt

If you want a good thinking exercise, read through a book like Pirie's "How to Win Every Argument" then see how many fallacies you can spot on this forum. Makes you a better debater.

[dukebound85]

I see this alot with a certain poster whose username involves a "/"...

[Mac'nCheese]

Today's pet peeve is posters who just post something like "fail" or "fallacy" without any facts to show why. Just "no it's not" and they're done.

[MorphingDragon]

Originally Posted by Mac'nCheese

Today's pet peeve is posters who just post something like "fail" or "fallacy" without any facts to show why. Just "no it's not" and they're done.

You mean just like this post?

[citizenzen]

Originally Posted by MorphingDragon

You mean just like this post?

No.

[MorphingDragon]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

No.

Yes

[/user/me]

First thing that came to mind when reading this thread :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0_zzCLLRvE

[Mac'nCheese]

Originally Posted by MorphingDragon

You mean just like this post?

Not at all. I had a point. I vented about something. Just saying "fail" is not adding anything to the discussion. Its not bringing up anything new. Its like the people who instead of just hitting the thumbs up button posts "this" or "I agree". What's the point?

[Happybunny]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

No.

Originally Posted by MorphingDragon

Yes

Maybe.

[MorphingDragon]

Originally Posted by Mac'nCheese

Not at all. I had a point. I vented about something. Just saying "fail" is not adding anything to the discussion. Its not bringing up anything new. Its like the people who instead of just hitting the thumbs up button posts "this" or "I agree". What's the point?

To annoy the **** out of the mods.

Originally Posted by Happybunny

Maybe.

Ask again later.

[jeremy h]

I suspect it's a cunning plan to win the argument - as for some reason whenever I see/hear the word strawman it makes me think of the Wicker Man. Then I get thinking about Brit Eckland and 'that' dance and guess what - then I completely forget the really important and salient point I was going to make...

[MadeTheSwitch]

In a speech today, Romney used the "strawman" line regarding something Obama said earlier this week. I found that interesting considering this thread. Maybe Romney reads MacRumors?

[hulugu]

Originally Posted by Liquorpuki

On this board I see a ton of strawmen, red herrings, proof by obfuscation, loaded language, and argument hedging. It's just a lot of people don't realize they normally use f'd up logic...

I agree.*

Of course, some people will use it incorrectly and even throw the phrase and hope nobody notices it's a dud, but pointing out that an argument is based on a logical fallacy is part of a debate.






*(And I'm sure I've used them myself).

[localoid]

Dogmatic assertions of straw man arguments, misplaced concreteness, and other evil products of cognitive flawed minds don't bug me nearly as much as topic drift does. Won't someone please think of the children?

[Liquorpuki]

Originally Posted by hulugu

Of course, some people will use it incorrectly and even throw the phrase and hope nobody notices it's a dud, but pointing out that an argument is based on a logical fallacy is part of a debate.

*(And I'm sure I've used them myself).

I know I have but I've gotten a lot better though. Part of the reason is it's easy for straw men to get in the mix when the person you're arguing with isn't communicating coherently, is hedging his argument, has poor reading comprehension, or doesn't pay attention to context. Sometimes that person is you and you don't realize you're doing it.

Originally Posted by localoid

Dogmatic assertions of straw man arguments, misplaced concreteness, and other evil products of cognitive flawed minds don't bug me nearly as much as topic drift does. Won't someone please think of the children?

a straw man is a form of topic drift though. it's also probably the most subtle