Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,581 Year: 2,838/9,624 Month: 683/1,588 Week: 89/229 Day: 61/28 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Open letter to conservatives
Taz
Member (Idle past 3281 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 2 of 122 (551853)
03-24-2010 3:51 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by xongsmith
03-24-2010 2:42 PM


Xongsmith writes:
On the other hand, it also can be construed as a sort of Gish Gallop, I suppose.
I don't think you understand how gish gallop works. It's more than just throwing a bunch of facts out there. In fact, there's nothing wrong with throwing a bunch of facts out there.
In a formal face to face debate, gish gallop works by giving a bunch of inaccurate and complicated facts over a wide variety of topics knowing the opponent won't have enough time to debunk them all.
In an online debate setting, gish gallop works by jumping from one topic to the next without addressing the criticisms of the previous topic. For example, the following conversation is an outline of what a gish gallop debate style looks like. I've seen quite a few of these on this forum alone.
Person A: X is true because of Y.
Person B: But Y has been proven to be false. Here is the evidence...
A: Z is false because of X.
B: Hang on a second. I just proved to you that Y is proven false, thus X is meaningless. How could you claim Z?
A: Never mind that. Q is false because R was a hoax.
B: Q never depended on R to be true. In fact, the people who supported Q proved that R was a hoax. It was never widely accepted anyway.
A: R was the biggest hoax in history and scientists continue to use it to prove M.
B: Damn it, I just proved to you that R was never big. It was a hoax and it was exposed right away by scientists.
A: X is true because R is a hoax.
B: What the hell?
A: N is false therefore Y is true.
B's head explodes.
The reason that blog isn't a gish gallop is because the author provided a link to news articles that prove every point he made. They're not just random facts. They're compiled in a coherent manner that anyone can understand. Furthermore, his sources are reputable news sources, not some wacko's website.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by xongsmith, posted 03-24-2010 2:42 PM xongsmith has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3281 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 9 of 122 (565835)
06-21-2010 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Hyroglyphx
06-21-2010 11:18 AM


Re: Know what a NeoCon is?
Hyroglyphx writes:
The problem is that the open letter generalizes and makes sweeping allegations.
Generalization and sweeping allegations? The author provided very specific examples and links to reputable news sources as evidence of these specific examples. Did you even read the article and the provided links?
I think it would be more wise and conducive to productive conversation to narrow it down to specific people within the party instead of blaming the entire GOP. That way you can be an objective observer versus being a biased mouthpiece for the left.
And that's exactly what the author of the article did. He was addressing individual conservatives, not the republican party as a whole.
Again, did you read the article and the provided links or are you just taking the middle man approach for the sake of political correctness?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-21-2010 11:18 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-21-2010 11:47 AM Taz has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3281 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 14 of 122 (565843)
06-21-2010 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Hyroglyphx
06-21-2010 11:47 AM


Re: Know what a NeoCon is?
Hyroglyphx writes:
Broad in the sense that he indicts the entire Republican party for what only some do or have done.
And that's exactly what he didn't do. This was an open letter to conservatives, not an open letter to the republican party. And in the "letter", he pointed out each individual case.
Could a conservative publication point to Bill Clinton's philandering and conclude that the entire DNC agrees with it or acts as irresponsibly?
Again, the author didn't condemn the whole republican party. He specifically pointed out specific cases.
Did you read the article?
What the author did was pointing out individual cases that, after a while, formed a pattern for hypocrisy. Case in point, you can't condemn homosexuality during the day and hire a rent boy during the night.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-21-2010 11:47 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-21-2010 12:43 PM Taz has not replied
 Message 20 by Artemis Entreri, posted 06-21-2010 1:09 PM Taz has replied
 Message 36 by Blue Jay, posted 06-22-2010 2:22 PM Taz has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3281 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 25 of 122 (566001)
06-22-2010 11:30 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by Artemis Entreri
06-21-2010 1:09 PM


Re: Know what a NeoCon is?
Artemis writes:
You. Is not very specific. It implies the audience who reads its.
No, it doesn't. In the English language, taken in context "you" could be used for a general case or a specific case. I agree that if one uses "you" alone without further explanation then yes it is used in a general context. But if I were to say "you can't have a red, white, and blue flag with 7 stars as your avatar and not be a douchebag *cough cough*," then wouldn't you agree that I'm only talking specifically about you, Artemis?
Context is everything in our language. You should know this by now unless you're like twelve.
Reputable news sources!?! Roflmfao! Since when do various BLOGS count as a reputable source?
Yes, some of those links go to blogs, but those blogs have links to news sources.
If you question the validity of any of those claims, please point them out and we can discuss about them. I read through them and I couldn't find any misinformation that I know of.
This leads be to believe that as I look into the reputable sources and come to find more and more liberal blogs, as these source that I was correct in my original observation that this article is nothing more than leftist propaganda.
Again, if you dispute any of these claims, point them out specifically.
Using your own words against you, I could simply say that your entire posts are nothing more than stalinist propaganda.
Which individual is the Texas school board?
Um, if you weren't aware of this fact, the board is made of individuals, not robots. And it took the majority of them to vote something into effect. In this particular case, when he used the word "you", he was using it in context of the board that voted the policy in.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Artemis Entreri, posted 06-21-2010 1:09 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Artemis Entreri, posted 06-22-2010 11:40 AM Taz has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3281 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 26 of 122 (566002)
06-22-2010 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by onifre
06-21-2010 4:30 PM


Re: Know what a NeoCon is?
onifre writes:
PS. I love Charlie Daniels
Not knowing who Charlie Daniels is, I'm assuming it's some dude that you have found to be your true love. Congrats! So, when did you come out and when can we attend your gay wedding? Don't worry, I'm sure the Malawi police won't be able to arrest you this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by onifre, posted 06-21-2010 4:30 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by onifre, posted 06-22-2010 1:55 PM Taz has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024