Pat Gunn (dachte) wrote,
Pat Gunn

Camofalanged as Science

Brief meditations on a common, usually-misleading tactic in discourse;

Predicting a response from a particular (type of?) opponent and mentioning it before that response, often using the opportunity to characterise it.

Why does this "work", in that why do people feel it is a successful move?

  • Offering a (possibly) false explanation - It allows one to either be the first to frame a line of argument as one likes, or it allows one to offer a false explanation of the reasoning behind the objection, perhaps pressing buttons (stressing their membership in some widely-disliked groups) along the way.
  • Conversaitonal flow dynamic - Arguments often are not entirely about their content; there's a give-and-take to issues that happens on an emotional level, and this disrupts that
Less bad related tack: identifying possible objections to what one's saying and addressing them, either accepting that they have some weight but pointing out that that weight is limited, or showing their invalidity.

  • Still alive

    Been feeling a bit nostalgic. Not about to return to LiveJournal - their new ownership is unfortunate, but I wanted to briefly note what's been up…

  • Unplugging LJ

    It's about time I pulled the plug on the LJ version of my blog: 1) I'm much more active on G+ than I am with general blogging. I post many times a…

  • Mutual Trust

    I don't know which should be considered more remarkable: That a cat should trust a member of a far larger and stronger species that it can't…

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded