Subject:
|
Re: Democracy.... Dubya Style
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 22 Dec 2003 20:43:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
961 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
| |
Whereas I usually concur with you, Larry, it seems as of late that Scott had
developed a debate style in which his points are backed up and cited,
|
Unfortunately, sometimes they are cites of the caliber of the ones given in this
post
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=23056
the first one is an unattributed false (1) claim that tars by association(2) and
the next one is facile... the cited material is not much more than satire or
ridicule, broadly drawn, not really much to hang an argument on, and he closes
with a claim that because everyone’s (that is, Scott and J2) “rubbished”
something it must not be any good.
I’m OK with the notion that an idea (that people ought to be able to do as they
like as long as they don’t harm others, for example) is a good idea even if it’s
not well liked by “everyone”.
| |
as is the case with this particular arguement.
|
It’s not enough to throw out quotes and pseudo cites. They, in my view anyway,
have to, be actual cites, not smears and they have to be relevant, and they have
to help advance the argument being made.
The post I cite is, in my view, a prime example of how not to cite, it’s the
“old Scott” back again. Too bad, really. But it’s why I never respond directly
to him any more. because he just backslides again. Better that he get the “last
word” than that we go round and round. I trust the critical thinkers out there
to see through it all and make their own minds up.
1 - *I* certainly wouldn’t consider Pinochet’s dictatorship very libertarian,
nor would most libertarian scholars, and it is certainly *not* the most
libertarian society we’ve yet seen. There are many many better candidates than a
tired fascist dictatorship like Pinochet’s.
2 - this is actually a standard propaganda tactic. Make a false equivalence
between the thing you want to discredit and something generally held to be bad,
and voila, even if you’re later proven wrong, you’ve planted the association in
some people’s minds anyway. (or alternatively if you are trying to positively
influence, make a false association to something good... why are so many product
adverts ones in which the product user seems to be surrounded with beautiful
people?)
++Lar
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Democracy.... Dubya Style
|
| (...) On this I concur. As stated earlier, sarcasm and humour have their places in debate and discourse--however, there has to be some substance--saying a point is stupid is fine and all--proving it is where the true debate lies. (...) snip sit back (...) (21 years ago, 22-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | Re: Democracy.... Dubya Style
|
| (...) Not really. It was a personal recollection; as was clear in my post. (...) Was it not clear from my post that the cited page was reather light-hearted? (...) Your post was in direct response to mine; that should be clear to everyone? (...) (...) (21 years ago, 23-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Democracy.... Dubya Style
|
| (...) Whereas I usually concur with you, Larry, it seems as of late that Scott had developed a debate style in which his points are backed up and cited, as is hte case with this particular arguement. If the counter arguement to this debate is 'ride (...) (21 years ago, 19-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
32 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
