info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
I hate the word substitution game
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Modemac
Sep 5, 2010, 5:55:12 PM9/5/10
to
One of the worst ways to defend your position in an argument is
through the substitution of words. It goes like this: "'YOURGROUP' is
doing something bad." "You're persecuting us! Replace the word
'MYGROUP' with 'Jew' and you'll see it's just like saying that we're
innocent Jews being subjected to the Holocaust!" Now, I'm
deliberately invoking Godwin's Law here to make an extreme example of
the word substitution game. The problem with this argument is that
the person or group forwarding this argument is deliberately choosing
a word that suggests he or they are the innocent victims of
oppression. A neutral word such as "hot dog" or "Rhodococcus" or
"hyena" is never used. It's easy to say "we're just like Jews being
persecuted by the Nazis," but how come the word substitution game is
never used to say, "We're just like innocent tornadoes being
persecuted by innocent cumulonimbus clouds?" Word substitution is not
an argument based on reason and logic. Then again, neither are most
religion-based arguments.
through the substitution of words. It goes like this: "'YOURGROUP' is
doing something bad." "You're persecuting us! Replace the word
'MYGROUP' with 'Jew' and you'll see it's just like saying that we're
innocent Jews being subjected to the Holocaust!" Now, I'm
deliberately invoking Godwin's Law here to make an extreme example of
the word substitution game. The problem with this argument is that
the person or group forwarding this argument is deliberately choosing
a word that suggests he or they are the innocent victims of
oppression. A neutral word such as "hot dog" or "Rhodococcus" or
"hyena" is never used. It's easy to say "we're just like Jews being
persecuted by the Nazis," but how come the word substitution game is
never used to say, "We're just like innocent tornadoes being
persecuted by innocent cumulonimbus clouds?" Word substitution is not
an argument based on reason and logic. Then again, neither are most
religion-based arguments.
--
The High Weirdness Project
http://www.modemac.com
Message has been deleted
No it's not
Sep 5, 2010, 11:03:26 PM9/5/10
to
Modemac <mod...@modemac.com> wrote in
news:2d4886p28f1qfqkfa...@4ax.com:
news:2d4886p28f1qfqkfa...@4ax.com:
Nobody gives a stagootay what you think. Take your stagootay stagootay and
shove it up your stagootay.
Rev. 11D Meow!
Sep 6, 2010, 3:42:31 AM9/6/10
to
On Sep 5, 3:15 pm, IMBJR <im...@cloon.gasm> wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Sep 2010 17:55:12 -0400, in alt.slack you wrote:
> >One of the worst ways to defend your position in an argument is
> >through the substitution of words. It goes like this: "'YOURGROUP' is
> >doing something bad." "You're persecuting us! Replace the word
> >'MYGROUP' with 'Jew' and you'll see it's just like saying that we're
> >innocent Jews being subjected to the Holocaust!" Now, I'm
>
> *sigh*
>
> No. Your base sentence was:
>
> "'YOURGROUP' is doing something bad." "You're persecuting us!["]
>
> So placing the word Jew in there gives us:
>
> "'Jew' is doing something bad." "You're persecuting us!["]
>
> Which is gibberish.
>
> >deliberately invoking Godwin's Law here to make an extreme example of
> >the word substitution game. The problem with this argument is that
> >the person or group forwarding this argument is deliberately choosing
> >a word that suggests he or they are the innocent victims of
> >oppression. A neutral word such as "hot dog" or "Rhodococcus" or
> >"hyena" is never used. It's easy to say "we're just like Jews being
> >persecuted by the Nazis,"
>
> Again. That was not your original sentence. You did not start with a
> base sentence of:
>
> "we're just like 'YOURGROUP' being persecuted by the Nazis,"
>
> >but how come the word substitution game is
> >never used to say, "We're just like innocent tornadoes being
> >persecuted by innocent cumulonimbus clouds?" Word substitution is not
> >an argument based on reason and logic. Then again, neither are most
> >religion-based arguments.
>
> And it's not the "substitution game", it is erroneous comparison you
> are describing. And Godwin does indeed have some baring on this,
> because, as is usual, a lot of these "debates" boil down to HITLER
> HITLER HITLER.
> On Sun, 05 Sep 2010 17:55:12 -0400, in alt.slack you wrote:
> >One of the worst ways to defend your position in an argument is
> >through the substitution of words. It goes like this: "'YOURGROUP' is
> >doing something bad." "You're persecuting us! Replace the word
> >'MYGROUP' with 'Jew' and you'll see it's just like saying that we're
> >innocent Jews being subjected to the Holocaust!" Now, I'm
>
>
> No. Your base sentence was:
>
> "'YOURGROUP' is doing something bad." "You're persecuting us!["]
>
> So placing the word Jew in there gives us:
>
> "'Jew' is doing something bad." "You're persecuting us!["]
>
> Which is gibberish.
>
> >deliberately invoking Godwin's Law here to make an extreme example of
> >the word substitution game. The problem with this argument is that
> >the person or group forwarding this argument is deliberately choosing
> >a word that suggests he or they are the innocent victims of
> >oppression. A neutral word such as "hot dog" or "Rhodococcus" or
> >"hyena" is never used. It's easy to say "we're just like Jews being
> >persecuted by the Nazis,"
>
> base sentence of:
>
> "we're just like 'YOURGROUP' being persecuted by the Nazis,"
>
> >but how come the word substitution game is
> >never used to say, "We're just like innocent tornadoes being
> >persecuted by innocent cumulonimbus clouds?" Word substitution is not
> >an argument based on reason and logic. Then again, neither are most
> >religion-based arguments.
>
> are describing. And Godwin does indeed have some baring on this,
> because, as is usual, a lot of these "debates" boil down to HITLER
> HITLER HITLER.
Get the Bee's Wax outta your ears, Mister Hexgonal Box Dood!
0 new messages