Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 3812927" data-attributes="member: 4937">I would accept it as a personal opinion of you were speaking about yourself, not labeling others.&nbsp; For example, if you said, &quot;I find the objectional pictures interesting and dynamic.&quot;, that isn't a strawman, because its about you.&nbsp; The reason I called it a strawman is because you were characterizing other people's arguments in ways that they would not themselves use: &quot;the definition is apparently so broad as to include dynamic art with interesting characters&quot;&nbsp; How could anyone support people that are opposed to &quot;dynamic art with interesting characters&quot;?&nbsp; Strawman.&nbsp; You might as well have said that anyone who doesn't like what you like doesn't like things that are interesting and dynamic.Quite obviously, people aren't opposed to dynamic art with interesting characters.&nbsp; They differ on what is interesting.&nbsp; It may well be wrong to be opposed to the things that they are opposed to, but it isn't 'interesting' or 'dynamic' which is being opposed.&nbsp; It may be that the things that they are opposed to are in your opinion 'interesting' and 'dynamic', but it isn't true that the things you like are the only things that are interesting and dynamic.&nbsp; The positive experession of your opinion is to try to demonstrate that the things people are in oposition to are interesting and dynamic.What you said though was just a back handed ad hominem.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 3812927, member: 4937"] I would accept it as a personal opinion of you were speaking about yourself, not labeling others. For example, if you said, "I find the objectional pictures interesting and dynamic.", that isn't a strawman, because its about you. The reason I called it a strawman is because you were characterizing other people's arguments in ways that they would not themselves use: "the definition is apparently so broad as to include dynamic art with interesting characters" How could anyone support people that are opposed to "dynamic art with interesting characters"? Strawman. You might as well have said that anyone who doesn't like what you like doesn't like things that are interesting and dynamic. Quite obviously, people [i]aren't[/i] opposed to dynamic art with interesting characters. They differ on what is interesting. It may well be wrong to be opposed to the things that they are opposed to, but it isn't 'interesting' or 'dynamic' which is being opposed. It may be that the things that they are opposed to are in your opinion 'interesting' and 'dynamic', but it isn't true that the things you like are the only things that are interesting and dynamic. The positive experession of your opinion is to try to demonstrate that the things people are in oposition to are interesting and dynamic. What you said though was just a back handed ad hominem. [/QUOTE]

Verification