The W
Views: 100890132
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
26.11.14 2231
The W - Current Events & Politics - How to argue in the Politics forum Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1(2019 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (3 total)
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 23 hours
AIM:  
#1 Posted on
It's the Woolly-Thinker's Guide To Rhetoric!

A few highlights:
Clumsy Sarcasm
Say things like 'Of course I could be just as wrong as you.' Or 'Well naturally I'm not as subtle as you are, I don't know how to pick words apart until there's nothing left.' Or 'Certainly, you're right and the rest of the world is wrong.' Or 'Where did you read that, TV Guide/The Sun?'

Go Ahead, Contradict Yourself
Don't be afraid to make two mutually incompatible statements in one sentence. For instance, if you are a bishop, declare that the Church is not afraid of critical examination, but at the same time guards the 'truths' of its faith very jealously. If anyone asks how you can do both of those, exactly, just look vague and perhaps hum a little sacred music.

Pat Yourself On The Back
Say things like "This is a trivial issue, there are much more important battles to fight," and then go right on arguing. That way you give yourself credit for having a sense of proportion but still get to go on trying to win the argument.

Pave With Good Intentions
Make it clear that you mean very well, that all the benevolence and right feeling and compassion and tolerance are on your side, and all the other thing on your opponent's.

Repitition
If your ideas are weak, if you have neither logic nor evidence to back them up, simply keep asserting them over and over and over again. This will convince everyone that they must be true. If they were not true, surely we wouldn't keep hearing about them all the time?

Say The Methodology Was Flawed
When your opponent presents evidence (and it always happens, so be ready) that would undermine or completely contradict your argument, simply say everyone knows the methodology of that particular study was deeply flawed. Never mind if you know nothing about it, that this is the first you've heard of the study, just say they went about it in quite, quite the wrong way. If there's another study with a different methodology that also proves you wrong, no matter, just say it again.




Promote this thread!
-proletarian-
Chipolata








Since: 29.4.03

Since last post: 4091 days
Last activity: 4090 days
#2 Posted on
-taking notes-


;)
Michrome
Head cheese








Since: 2.1.03

Since last post: 3867 days
Last activity: 2933 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00


    Say The Methodology Was Flawed
    When your opponent presents evidence (and it always happens, so be ready) that would undermine or completely contradict your argument, simply say everyone knows the methodology of that particular study was deeply flawed. Never mind if you know nothing about it, that this is the first you've heard of the study, just say they went about it in quite, quite the wrong way. If there's another study with a different methodology that also proves you wrong, no matter, just say it again.



This reminds me of the response of many people whenever I cite studies by John Lott and Gary Kleck.
Pages: 1Thread ahead: Sheer Insanity
Next thread: IL Bans Ephedra
Previous thread: OMG Call the NRA GUN CONTROL
(2019 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
(Missed one? http://wienerboard.com/cagcotd.php) MICHAEL JACKSON (R) Website: www.michaeljacksonforgovernor.com Not to be confused with: Former KABC-AM mainstay Michael Jackson (michaeljacksontalkradio.com) - what, you thought I was gonna say....
- CRZ, CA GCOTD: JACKSON (2003)
The W - Current Events & Politics - How to argue in the Politics forumRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.197 seconds.