mstevens comments on Open Thread, November 16–30, 2012 - Less Wrong

3 Post author: VincentYu 18 November 2012 01:59PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (213)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: mstevens 29 November 2012 12:00:54PM *  1 point [-]

argumentative antipattern ramblings from irc -

< mstevens> Imagine two people arguing. One is in favour of X, and hates Y, the other likes Y, and hates X

< mstevens> both X and Y are members of class a

< mstevens> There's a good chance that the X-supporter will argue "all things in a are perfectly fine!" in an attempt to support X

< mstevens> Then, the Y-support will say "aah, you must also like Y", and the X-support will basically splutter and try to deny this obvious conclusion

...

< Tenoke01> mstevens, an example which doesn't create a lot of tension will be marijuana smokers who say that it is fine to smoke because it is a plant and is natural but when asked on their opinion of tobacco for example will say that tobacco is bad even though it is also a plant

(mstevens is me, I asked Tenoke01 for permission to quote)

Maybe we should have a name for this?

Comment author: fubarobfusco 29 November 2012 09:29:27PM -1 points [-]

I think it is named "inventing a fictitious person who holds contradictory beliefs, in order to cast aspersions on one of those beliefs" and is a form of strawman fallacy.