Straw Man Nominations

[Widow]

I've noticed a few people using the "straw man argument" method:

One can set up a straw man in the following ways:

• 1. Present a misrepresentation of the opponent's position, refute it, and pretend that the opponent's actual position has been refuted.
  2. Quote an opponent's words out of context -- i.e., choose quotations that are not representative of the opponent's actual intentions (see contextomy).
  3. Present someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, refute that person's arguments, and pretend that every upholder of that position, and thus the position itself, has been defeated.
  4. Invent a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs that are criticized, and pretend that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical.
  5. Oversimplify a person's argument into a simple analogy, which can then be attacked.

Some logic textbooks define the straw man fallacy only as a misrepresented argument. It is now common, however, to use the term to refer to all of these tactics. The straw-man technique is also used as a form of media manipulation.

However, carefully presenting and refuting a weakened form of an opponent's argument is not always itself a fallacy. Instead, it restricts the scope of the opponent's argument, either to where the argument is no longer relevant or as a step of a proof by exhaustion.

Anyone care to nominate the site's best straw man?

[CD]

I don't think that the voting function will support all 11839 registered users...

[2R]

I still say it is at least ten inches there must be something wrong with your ruler

[Cat Driver]

Anyone care to nominate the site's best straw man?

C . . ??

[CID]

I don't think you're allowed to vote for yourself Cat.

[flyinphil]

All of the Israel/Arab verbal warriors..

.. and CID.

[CID]

Can you offer an example flyinphil?

[Surly Joe]

I know who CID is looking for...lets see if he shows up.

As for me, I enjoy reading both Cat and CIDs point of views. I find them both informative and at least thought does go into what they post....unlike a select few on this forum.

[flyinphil]

Can you offer an example flyinphil?

Sure..

No matter what method is used to get the message out, there will be an impact on the environment.

It's wise to use the most effective method that can reach the most people with the money available.

Lighting a sign with the currently available technology is much more effective than some other means and it certainly is acceptable. The original post suggests that the power used could light a small town. Sounds like extreme exageration and alarmism from someone who is opposed to David Suzuki's message.

There is far too much of this hysteria driven by inaccurate statements and hypernbole on this forum.

It would be interesting to find out what the FACTUAL power consumption of the sign lighting is and what sort of exposure the location enjoys. How effective is the use of energy and resources? If it has David Suzuki's name attached to it, I assume it's quite reasonable.

[CID]

Sorry, Phil, I don't see how what I posted meets the criteria. Where is the misrepresentation? I noticed however you've demonsrated your strawman skills by presenting information out of context.

Let's get to the punch here. This is a troll thread if I ever saw one. Why don't you just spit it out widow. Who is the "strawman" you wish to expose to the world?

How about pretty much everyone who debates SMS?

[Widow]

I wasn't trying to "expose" anyone CID. I actually agree with CD, that just about everyone has probably presented a "straw man" argument at one time or another - and certainly not limited to SMS debate.

And I thought flyinphil's example was pretty good. You did misrepresent your "opponent's" position - I never said I was anti-green. Nor did you actually refute my position - that the advertising method appears hypocritical.

[CID]

Widow, I didn't say you were anti-green. That's a good strawman technique. It appears you took my statement and transformed it into an accusation that you were "anti-green".

Who's doin' the misrepresenting?

[niss]

Widow, I didn't say you were anti-green. That's a good strawman technique. It appears you took my statement and transformed it into an accusation that you were "anti-green".

Who's doin' the misrepresenting?

Lighting a sign with the currently available technology is much more effective than some other means and it certainly is acceptable. The original post suggests that the power used could light a small town. Sounds like extreme exageration and alarmism from someone who is opposed to David Suzuki's message.

If David Suzuki's message is one of finding green solutions and helping the earth, and you are accusing Widow of being opposed to DS message, that would indirectly accuse her of being anti green.

[Widow]

. The original post suggests that the power used could light a small town. Sounds like extreme exageration and alarmism from someone who is opposed to David Suzuki's message.

Your post was addressed to me. You have implied clunckdriver is ani-green and that anyone who agreed with him must also be anti-green.

The original post in that thread was not a criticism of the movement, but a criticism of the advertising method.

[CID]

Your post was addressed to me.

Widow, my statement clearly is addressed to the "original post".
Were you the author of the original post? Did you state the power used could light a small town?

If you feel I was targetting you, I can assure you I was not.

Niss,

Go play outside. The grown-ups are talking about something important.

[Widow]

My apologies. It was your second post which was addressed to me, and finished with:

Doing a "little investigating" sometimes leads you down the wrong path. It's not a good replacement for in-depth knowledge.

Did your pontificating on LED lights actually refute the idea that the advertising method was hypocritical?

[niss]

Go play outside. The grown-ups are talking about something important.

Thanks,

I think Ill stay here and watch the, no you're the strawman, no you're strawman escapades of CID.

[twotter]

Widow, I didn't say you were anti-green. That's a good strawman technique. It appears you took my statement and transformed it into an accusation that you were "anti-green".

Who's doin' the misrepresenting?

Lighting a sign with the currently available technology is much more effective than some other means and it certainly is acceptable. The original post suggests that the power used could light a small town. Sounds like extreme exageration and alarmism from someone who is opposed to David Suzuki's message.

If David Suzuki's message is one of finding green solutions and helping the earth, and you are accusing Widow of being opposed to DS message, that would indirectly accuse her of being anti green.

Oh Niss, you've so hit the nail on the head here..

[GilletteNorth]

Widow,

if I were a rich man, I'd pay to have the beginning post explaining the straw man argument stickied, but without the "Anyone care to nominate the site's best straw man?" portion.

(not as a teaching tool on how-to either)

[niss]

Widow,

if I were a rich man, I'd pay to have the beginning post explaining the straw man argument stickied, but without the "Anyone care to nominate the site's best straw man?" portion.

(not as a teaching tool on how-to either)

Do you want me to follow it up with a Youtube of a guy covered in straw?

LOL I kid I Kid

[Widow]

Widow,

if I were a rich man, I'd pay to have the beginning post explaining the straw man argument stickied, but without the "Anyone care to nominate the site's best straw man?" portion.

You are right Gillette. It was quite provocative without the question. But then, sometimes I like to be provocative!