P&R News

[Dill]

(08-26-2023, 05:48 PM)Lucidus Wrote: You were speaking to me specifically; I was speaking about volleyball. So, why place the ideas or positions of other upon me, instead of directly addressing my point. It's a disingenuous approach which you have utilized with me prior, and then later admitted to. It's getting rather burdensome to make a point and then have someone argue things you never stated or lump you in with others so as to strawman you. 

With you on the "strawman" argument, although I think people sometimes don't realize they are doing it. They are arguing THEIR point; they're excited and just keep doing that regardless of whether other angles to the topic are introduced.  

Other times yes, it is a tactic. And fairly effective in this kind of venue, which doesn't lend itself to careful review of who actually claimed what. When "strawmaning" is a tactic, the perp will just keep jamming efforts to sort it out rather than working with you in good faith.  That's how to tell whether it was deliberate. 

Most here agree on what counts as a personal attack, but they don't agree on what constitutes sound argument. 

(08-26-2023, 08:37 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Thank you for the reply and I'm glad to hear you're monitoring the issue. Unfortunately, as you can see by the responses that followed my message to you, the behavior continues in the very thread where you admonish it. 

I appreciate that you're trying to make this forum better, I'm considering taking an extended break. It has become much to difficult to have honest exchanges and productive conversations. It's gotten to the point where I'm being told I don't understand science, even though I have degrees in biology and psychology, and am a practicing neuropsychologist. Imagine how frustrating it would be to have people telling you that you don't understand message boards or forum administration. It's become exhausting; as it feels like logic and reason are mere nuisances that regularly get drowned out by faulty premises and invalid conclusions. 

My apologies for venting a bit, but I do hope for the best in terms of making this a better place. 

Well I, for one, hope you hang around. I DO see the value in having a practicing neuropsychologist in the forum. 
We're better with you here because you are very careful in how you present and defend claims. And we just lost someone like that.

As posters here, we have to accept from the get go that there aren't agreed on conventions for what counts as evidence and rational argument. (I think not everyone wants such agreement either, for fear that it would disadvantage them.) That lack makes debates more closely mirror stormy, irrational political debates at the national level. I see a silver lining in our muddles, though, as they force me to view arguments from new angles, and practice arguing with people who break the rules without breaking them myself. That experience makes me better at handling debates in other venues.

Anyway, when I view my participation as, in a few cases, learning how to argue outside the traditional conventions, I don't get very upset about what is said to me or about me. I am engaging a wider spectrum of US political thought than I otherwise would--a great value to me. So when I debate, it's sometimes more about learning, observing and rhetorical experimentation than persuading others or "winning."  E.g., I am constantly innovating ways to manage the "strawmanning," without involving the moderators.  

I don't suggest you engage people for the reasons I do, but it helps if you know in advance that rational discussion of some topics, an even handed and civil back and forth, is not going to happen. Choose your battles and the people to whom you respond.