“Cursing” is a left-over of the jewish restrictions on saying “Yahweh”
Is this the right room for an argument
(AKA: “the unpronouncable god”) – saying the name of god was punishable by death, so, uh, let’s call it (mumble) because a supreme being won’t be able to tell we’re talking about it if we refer to it as “Monique.”
Charles Stross’ book Accellerando has a large number of absolutely brilliant projections of the future of trolling.
Is this the right room for an argument
This posting will not contain spoilers, so don’t worry. There are weaponizable ideas in this posting that I am not encouraging you to do, because not all things that can be done are worth doing.
Sometimes, you encounter an annoying person who is not arguing honestly with you; someone who just wants to show you how clever or tenacious they are.
Is this the right room for an argument
Actually, they are tedious, not clever, but your problem then becomes a matter of explaining that to them.
Is this the right room for a strawman argument?
John Cleese gives an inadvertent demonstration of how to strawman. It’s rather embarrassing to see one of Argument Clinic’s idols as a subject for dissection, but we must follow the path of intellectual honesty, and break out the flensing-knives.
Is this the right room for an argument?
One of FtB’s own has blundered recklessly into one of the worst tactics of Argument Clinic: referring to “political correctness.” In this installment of Argument Clinic we will discuss using the techniques of linguistic nihilism, as well as basic argumentation 101 (introductory level) to analyze discussions of “political correctness.”
Is this the right room for an argument?
I’m going to try something here that I consider daunting: as a side effect of this module, I will attempt to offer a refutation of two important paradoxes/arguments that bedevil philosophers and skeptics. Not one, but two! In the interest of Argument Clinic, however, I am willing to fail in the attempt even though it may leave me covered with shame and ripped to pieces by The Commentariat(tm)
In fencing, a destroying parry is one in which the defender’s blade kills the momentum of the attacker’s blade, leaving them in a known position for a riposte.
This is an emergency public service announcement from Argument Clinic!
Is this the right room for an argument?
I see a lot of discussion on various news sources as to whether or not so-and-so is a racist, or such and such. It is poor strategy to engage in such a discussion unless you plan to win it. To explain further… [Read more…]
Is this the right room for an argument?
Labelling is a rather strange tactic in argument; it’s popular but weak and mostly a poor tactic because of the ease with which it can be dragged into verbal nihilism. [Read more…]
Sextus Empiricus’ “Outlines of Pyrrhonism, Part 1” Chapter 15:
The later Sceptics hand down Five Modes leading to suspension, namely these: the first based on discrepancy, the second on regress ad infinitum, the third on relativity, the fourth on hypothesis, the fifth on circular reasoning.
I frequently use fencing terms in Argument Clinic. That’s because fencing has a lot of
Is this the right room for an argument?
the same properties as a battle of words. There are a lot of useful words from the school of the rhetoricians, but I would feel weird saying, “nice anadiplosis.” Because my opponent might reply, “gesundheit!”