Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site mtx5d.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!ariel!mtunf!hou5e!mtx5d!hbb
From: hbb@mtx5d.UUCP (H.B.Braude)
Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish
Subject: inappropriate debating tactics
Message-ID: <682@mtx5d.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 24-May-85 09:23:51 EDT
Article-I.D.: mtx5d.682
Posted: Fri May 24 09:23:51 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 25-May-85 07:38:43 EDT
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Holmdel, NJ
Lines: 32

> Replace all references to homosexuality and homosexuals with "Judaism"
> and "Jews", and replace "Jews" with "Christians" or "Americans" or
> some such word, and the paragraph above sounds awful hateful, doesn't it?
This is an example of a type of debating tactic that I have  seen
over  and  over again in different places and it bothers me. What
bothers me has nothing to do with the topic of the debates  where
it is used, but the very tactic itself.

This is a form of straw-man. A straw-man usually takes  the  form
of  one  person  in  a  debate  taking  the words of an opponent,
molding and shaping those words into  something  very  silly  and
then  proceeding  to  knock  down  the  new,  silly statement. It
doesn't in anyway disprove or rebuff the original statement,  but
it  can  embarrass an opponent into submission or it can sway the
opinions of an audience  not  familiar  with  such  sophisticated
weaponry.

The example we have here is another form  of  straw-man,  but  in
this  case, the person takes an exact quote of the other person's
words and demonstrates that by substituting some of words in  the
sentence, the statement can be turned into something idiotic. The
sheer number of legitimate and well respected  masterpieces  that
can  be turned into meaningless drivel through the employ of this
method is absolutely mind boggling.

If you disagree with another person's statement,  argue your view
on the merit of the content of the original statement, not on the
merit of its structure or, worse, on the merit of a statement you
made.
-- 
Harlan B. Braude
{most "backbone" sites}!mtx5d!hbb