Shinobi Legends Forum - Shinobi Legends Game Site

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Ever wondered if your ideas have been talked about in the forum already? Well, try out the "search" option, where all your questions can be answered.

Author Topic: Argumentation  (Read 332 times)

Vail

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +17/-13
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 232
    • View Profile
Argumentation
« on: March 03, 2017, 12:54:39 pm »

I've watched in silence for a while now, but a recent spat involving a certain someone on the wiki made me feel like I needed to post this. A lot of arguments happen on SL, particularly surrounding the Biju fights. Arguments happen ad nauseaum. Since it doesn't seem like this trend is going to end any time soon, I figure we could all take the time to learn how to argue better so it isn't so irritating to read.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy

This is a good start. We all commit them, so being aware of this and looking to spot our own fallacies as well as our opponents (see: Fallacy Fallacy) is important.

Cheers.
Logged

Eric

  • Roleplay Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +100/-100
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3452
    • View Profile
Re: Argumentation
« Reply #1 on: March 03, 2017, 01:55:18 pm »

I've watched in silence for a while now, but a recent spat involving a certain someone on the wiki made me feel like I needed to post this. A lot of arguments happen on SL, particularly surrounding the Biju fights. Arguments happen ad nauseaum. Since it doesn't seem like this trend is going to end any time soon, I figure we could all take the time to learn how to argue better so it isn't so irritating to read.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy

This is a good start. We all commit them, so being aware of this and looking to spot our own fallacies as well as our opponents (see: Fallacy Fallacy) is important.

Cheers.

Wiki spats? Narutoprofile wikia or a different one?

Nevermind, I'm more interested in learning how "arguing better" is less irritating to read than aruging.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2017, 02:11:07 pm by Eric »
Logged
Anything you can think of I can't think of, let me know; that's how the sharing circle works.

UettoSenju

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +38/-63
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1195
    • View Profile
Re: Argumentation
« Reply #2 on: March 03, 2017, 03:39:56 pm »

I wish we could just fight our disagreements out in RL. It'd make thing so much easier. Just beat the hell out of each other.
Logged

Vail

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +17/-13
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 232
    • View Profile
Re: Argumentation
« Reply #3 on: March 03, 2017, 03:48:09 pm »

I've watched in silence for a while now, but a recent spat involving a certain someone on the wiki made me feel like I needed to post this. A lot of arguments happen on SL, particularly surrounding the Biju fights. Arguments happen ad nauseaum. Since it doesn't seem like this trend is going to end any time soon, I figure we could all take the time to learn how to argue better so it isn't so irritating to read.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy

This is a good start. We all commit them, so being aware of this and looking to spot our own fallacies as well as our opponents (see: Fallacy Fallacy) is important.

Cheers.

Wiki spats? Narutoprofile wikia or a different one?

Nevermind, I'm more interested in learning how "arguing better" is less irritating to read than aruging.

Because the irritating part about the arguments is that most of them are blatantly fallacious. By arguments, I mean the formal process of presenting a sound and valid argument. Not shouting at each other and having pissing contests.
Logged

Athos

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +32/-72
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1059
    • View Profile
Re: Argumentation
« Reply #4 on: March 04, 2017, 12:06:50 am »

Oh cool they even have a word for what people would actually use this for.

Fallacy-dropping
“”What we have here is a blatant example of argument by assertion (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_by_assertion). It's therefore clear your mother was a whore, and you flunked out of elementary school.
—Colonel Custer[10]
It is not acceptable to merely state that one's opponent is using a fallacy (as above). One must explain how the opponent's argument is fallacious (eg, they claim that you are a shill), why it is wrong (there's no evidence that you are a paid government disinformation agent), and what that means for their argument (if you're not a shill, then your arguments can't be hand waved away) [11].
This need not be a drawn-out paragraph. Even "your ad hominem is irrelevant to my argument, so my argument stands" is sufficient.
Otherwise, one runs into the risk of fallacy dropping -- claiming someone's argument is wrong without bothering to explain why -- which comes dangerously close to ad hominem. (It's equivalent to shouting "your logic is bad!" and claiming victory.)

That's what I imagine the majority would be just copy and pasting words from this page as to why someone is wrong without actually understanding them.
Logged
I don't always make sense, but that's kind of the point.



Eric

  • Roleplay Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +100/-100
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3452
    • View Profile
Re: Argumentation
« Reply #5 on: March 04, 2017, 12:13:46 am »

I wish we could just fight our disagreements out in RL. It'd make thing so much easier. Just beat the hell out of each other.

You will always have that guy (or gal) to bring a gun to a fistfight or a knife to a fistfight. Nah, if you think people are backtabby now, translating these issues to RL... *shivers*.


Because the irritating part about the arguments is that most of them are blatantly fallacious. By arguments, I mean the formal process of presenting a sound and valid argument. Not shouting at each other and having pissing contests.

Well, if the (presidential, important to be clear) Election is anything to go by, presenting sound and valid arguments is less important than convincing the deciders. I could argue that the sky is blue, and thus air is blue, and if my goal is to convince some kids that the air is actually blue, then a sound and valid argument is hardly needed if they are convinced of it.

Similiary, you don't have to be absolutely correct, objectively speaking, to win a decision in a biju match. You just gotta convince the judge(s) and/or Council members of your cause. Sure it helps to be right, but being convincing is more important in this setting.

Oh cool they even have a word for what people would actually use this for.

Fallacy-dropping
“”What we have here is a blatant example of argument by assertion (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_by_assertion). It's therefore clear your mother was a whore, and you flunked out of elementary school.
—Colonel Custer[10]
It is not acceptable to merely state that one's opponent is using a fallacy (as above). One must explain how the opponent's argument is fallacious (eg, they claim that you are a shill), why it is wrong (there's no evidence that you are a paid government disinformation agent), and what that means for their argument (if you're not a shill, then your arguments can't be hand waved away) [11].
This need not be a drawn-out paragraph. Even "your ad hominem is irrelevant to my argument, so my argument stands" is sufficient.
Otherwise, one runs into the risk of fallacy dropping -- claiming someone's argument is wrong without bothering to explain why -- which comes dangerously close to ad hominem. (It's equivalent to shouting "your logic is bad!" and claiming victory.)

That's what I imagine the majority would be just copy and pasting words from this page as to why someone is wrong without actually understanding them.

Lol.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2017, 12:14:32 am by Eric »
Logged
Anything you can think of I can't think of, let me know; that's how the sharing circle works.

UettoSenju

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +38/-63
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1195
    • View Profile
Re: Argumentation
« Reply #6 on: March 06, 2017, 02:44:56 am »

I wish we could just fight our disagreements out in RL. It'd make thing so much easier. Just beat the hell out of each other.

You will always have that guy (or gal) to bring a gun to a fistfight or a knife to a fistfight. Nah, if you think people are backtabby now, translating these issues to RL... *shivers*.


Because the irritating part about the arguments is that most of them are blatantly fallacious. By arguments, I mean the formal process of presenting a sound and valid argument. Not shouting at each other and having pissing contests.

Well, if the (presidential, important to be clear) Election is anything to go by, presenting sound and valid arguments is less important than convincing the deciders. I could argue that the sky is blue, and thus air is blue, and if my goal is to convince some kids that the air is actually blue, then a sound and valid argument is hardly needed if they are convinced of it.

Similiary, you don't have to be absolutely correct, objectively speaking, to win a decision in a biju match. You just gotta convince the judge(s) and/or Council members of your cause. Sure it helps to be right, but being convincing is more important in this setting.

Oh cool they even have a word for what people would actually use this for.

Fallacy-dropping
“”What we have here is a blatant example of argument by assertion (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_by_assertion). It's therefore clear your mother was a whore, and you flunked out of elementary school.
—Colonel Custer[10]
It is not acceptable to merely state that one's opponent is using a fallacy (as above). One must explain how the opponent's argument is fallacious (eg, they claim that you are a shill), why it is wrong (there's no evidence that you are a paid government disinformation agent), and what that means for their argument (if you're not a shill, then your arguments can't be hand waved away) [11].
This need not be a drawn-out paragraph. Even "your ad hominem is irrelevant to my argument, so my argument stands" is sufficient.
Otherwise, one runs into the risk of fallacy dropping -- claiming someone's argument is wrong without bothering to explain why -- which comes dangerously close to ad hominem. (It's equivalent to shouting "your logic is bad!" and claiming victory.)

That's what I imagine the majority would be just copy and pasting words from this page as to why someone is wrong without actually understanding them.

Lol.

Bullets fly both ways. Lol.
Logged
 

Page created in 0.033 seconds with 14 queries.