Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5721669" data-attributes="member: 4937">I'm going to call this as an example of arguing on the basis of &quot;the other guy has something wrong with him&quot;.&nbsp; It's a logical fallacy and a subtle ad hominem attack.&nbsp;&nbsp; Basically it says that the other guy has no logical basis for his beliefs, and he is passionate for dishonest, blindly partisan or down right insane reasons.I really honestly don't think that is ever the case.&nbsp; I think that pretty much everyone is evaluating the editions - or anything else - on the basis of the information that they have, and looking at the stengths and weaknesses of the two and making a critical judgment.&nbsp;&nbsp; Furthermore, I think that there is a cultural fallacy involved in the 'comprimise meme' you've just advanced, namely, that for any given problem you can take answers from both sides and come up with some sort of comprimise or halfway position that would be stronger than both and make more people happy.&nbsp; I think that its pretty rare when that is actually true, because there are usually legitimate tradeoffs where it is hard to produce 'win/win' for everyone or even most everyone.&nbsp; And I likewise reject that it is only intrangiance, irrationality, and stupidity that keep us from recognizing these magic comprimise positions.If we put together both of your claims, we see a very strong preference for 'moderation' and a very strong attack on what you see as 'extremism'.&nbsp; Or in other words, you are staking out territory for your 'moderate' team against the teams you see as being to either side of you.&nbsp; And I dare say there is the whiff of you implying that the 'moderate' team is the rational, reasoning, considerate one and the other teams are composed of unreasoning wild eyed fanatics that are just ruining everything for you.&nbsp; Now, there are probably some good reasons for prefering moderation, and by no means am I saying that you are being dishonest or disingenius.&nbsp; I'm merely pointing out that your claim that the other guys are merely 'fighting for their team and demonizing the other side as 'the enemy' is ironicly a charge that can be directed right back at your post.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 5721669, member: 4937"] I'm going to call this as an example of arguing on the basis of "the other guy has something wrong with him". It's a logical fallacy and a subtle ad hominem attack. Basically it says that the other guy has no logical basis for his beliefs, and he is passionate for dishonest, blindly partisan or down right insane reasons. I really honestly don't think that is ever the case. I think that pretty much everyone is evaluating the editions - or anything else - on the basis of the information that they have, and looking at the stengths and weaknesses of the two and making a critical judgment. Furthermore, I think that there is a cultural fallacy involved in the 'comprimise meme' you've just advanced, namely, that for any given problem you can take answers from both sides and come up with some sort of comprimise or halfway position that would be stronger than both and make more people happy. I think that its pretty rare when that is actually true, because there are usually legitimate tradeoffs where it is hard to produce 'win/win' for everyone or even most everyone. And I likewise reject that it is only intrangiance, irrationality, and stupidity that keep us from recognizing these magic comprimise positions. If we put together both of your claims, we see a very strong preference for 'moderation' and a very strong attack on what you see as 'extremism'. Or in other words, you are staking out territory for your 'moderate' team against the teams you see as being to either side of you. And I dare say there is the whiff of you implying that the 'moderate' team is the rational, reasoning, considerate one and the other teams are composed of unreasoning wild eyed fanatics that are just ruining everything for you. Now, there are probably some good reasons for prefering moderation, and by no means am I saying that you are being dishonest or disingenius. I'm merely pointing out that your claim that the other guys are merely 'fighting for their team and demonizing the other side as 'the enemy' is ironicly a charge that can be directed right back at your post. [/QUOTE]

Verification