Community >> View Post
Post By
Late Great Donald Blake 

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,566
In Reply To

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Subj: Yes it is.
Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2022 at 11:35:19 am EDT (Viewed 184 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Again, I'll respond later,
Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2022 at 09:22:27 am EDT (Viewed 176 times)

Previous Post

    I'm articulating it to my satisfaction.  Not yours.   I think I've captured the substance of it adequately.

Except that's not how it works. You can't read my mind. You don't get to decide whether you've adequately understood my position because it is my position, not yours. It is precisely when one side of the debate defines the other side incorrectly which makes a strawman argument. As you said I am free to debate or not, and I'm not interested in a debate where one side solely gets to define the terms of the debate.

People can be unfair about how their positions are summarized only accepting the most pristine, honorific, or generous versions.  Someone can always claim a strawman is taking place, regardless of the fairness  or utility there.  Btw it's an informal fallacy.  They're heavily influenced if not outright determined by context  and semantics.  They are themselves subject to disagreement.  As I've said, I believe I've captured the substance sufficiently to argue against.   You'll always be able to split hairs about how imperfectly I'm rearticularing your premises, claims etc.  It's a waste of time.  I'm just attending to the substance of the argument as it pertains to my disagreement.  You can by all means direct my attention to the functional differences and how you think it'll affect the outcomes.  But to the degree those functional differences don't exist I'll ignore cosmetic ones.

---the late great Donald Blake

Posted with Google Chrome on Linux
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software