Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (516625)	9/28/2009 11:23:59 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575761

>>>"You still don't even know what a straw man is. " "You're right. He doesn't." ++++++++++++ How do either of you know what Tenchusatsu doesn't know? Here is a pretty good explanation of 'Straw Man' Argument'. If you are not just piling on and making false allegations perhaps you could show how your allegation applies...or not. ======================== "A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position. Presenting and refuting a weakened form of an opponent's argument can be a part of a valid argument. For example, one can argue that the opposing position implies that at least one of two other statements - both being presumably easier to refute than the original position - must be true. If one refutes both of these weaker propositions, the refutation is valid and does not fit the above definition of a "straw man" argument. [edit] Origin The origins of the term are unclear; one common (folk) etymology given is that it originated with men who stood outside of courthouses with a straw in their shoe in order to indicate their willingness to be a false witness. [3] [4] Another is that a man made of straw, such as those used in military training, is easy to attack. Attacking a straw man can give the illusion of a strong attack or good argument. In the UK, it is sometimes called Aunt Sally, with reference to a traditional fairground game. [edit] Reasoning The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern: 1. Person A has position X. 2. Person B disregards certain key points of X and instead presents position Y. Thus, Y is a resulting distorted version of X and can be set up in several ways, including: Presenting a misrepresentation of the opponent's position and then refuting it, thus giving the appearance that the opponent's actual position has been refuted.[1] Quoting an opponent's words out of context — i.e. choosing quotations which are intentionally misrepresentative of the opponent's actual intentions (see contextomy and quote mining).[2] Presenting someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, then refuting that person's arguments - thus giving the appearance that every upholder of that position (and thus the position itself) has been defeated.[1] Inventing a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs which are then criticized, implying that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical. Oversimplifying an opponent's argument, then attacking this oversimplified version. 3. Person B attacks position Y, concluding that X is false/incorrect/flawed. This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious, because attacking a distorted version of a position fails to constitute an attack on the actual position. [edit] Example Straw man arguments often arise in public debates even when less flawed arguments could be found to support the same position. (Hypothetical) prohibition debate: Person A: We should liberalize the laws on beer. Person B: No, any society with unrestricted access to intoxicants loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification. The proposal was to relax laws on beer. Person B has exaggerated this to a position harder to defend, i.e., "unrestricted access to intoxicants". en.wikipedia.org