ADVERTISEMENT

I've always found it ironic that the religious wingnuts in this country.....

I asked this earlier: what constitutes a strawman argument? I understood it to be a false opinion asserted to create an argument that uses logic that the strawman is seeking to attack.
That is close. It is drawing a conclusion based on a false assertion. The strawman is the false assertion so the argument is a strawman. I just gave an opinion that based on Kennedys campaign at that time that he is more closely aligned with republicans today than democrats. If someone disagrees I am ok with that but it is my opinion.
 
A strawman is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent.

e.g. dave's Kennedy post.

So a strawman is built to define my statement of opinion as a strawman. A double strawman. Cool.
 
That is close. It is drawing a conclusion based on a false assertion. The strawman is the false assertion so the argument is a strawman. I just gave an opinion that based on Kennedys campaign at that time that he is more closely aligned with republicans today than democrats. If someone disagrees I am ok with that but it is my opinion.
So a strawman is built to define my statement of opinion as a strawman. A double strawman. Cool.
i don't know Dave, but I think the whole strawman thing is a little stupid. I certainly have never sought to manipulate discussion in such a way, yet you've accused me of such. I state opinion a lot, and many times (i admit) that opinion is based on theory and not fact, but the assertions I make aren't necessarily false.
 
i don't know Dave, but I think the whole strawman thing is a little stupid. I certainly have never sought to manipulate discussion in such a way, yet you've accused me of such. I state opinion a lot, and many times (i admit) that opinion is based on theory and not fact, but the assertions I make aren't necessarily false.
You are the one who claimed my statement was a strawman. Being a strawman doesnt suggest you are wrong. It is pointing out a logical fallacy. If I had responded to your point about Kennedy being an elite ivy league democrat by suggesting that you are crazy for calling him a democrat because he would never support gay marriage now. We dont know if he would support it or not. I am basing your craziness on a claim that I just made up. I might be correct but it is a logical fallacy.

You made a claim that Kennedy was an elite ivy league democrat and I responded that I dont think he would be a democrat today. There is no basis on logical fallacy, just an opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boomboom521
You are the one who claimed my statement was a strawman. Being a strawman doesnt suggest you are wrong. It is pointing out a logical fallacy. If I had responded to your point about Kennedy being an elite ivy league democrat by suggesting that you are crazy for calling him a democrat because he would never support gay marriage now. We dont know if he would support it or not. I am basing your craziness on a claim that I just made up. I might be correct but it is a logical fallacy.

You made a claim that Kennedy was an elite ivy league democrat and I responded that I dont think he would be a democrat today. There is no basis on logical fallacy, just an opinion.
Well said! Thanks. As I posted, I was just trying to be a jerk....
 
I apologize for my initial tone in response. We are having christmas at my folks today and with a household of teens and pre teens running around it is difficult to be clear and concise.
Appreciate the apology.
 
I apologize for my initial tone in response. We are having christmas at my folks today and with a household of teens and pre teens running around it is difficult to be clear and concise.

Bitch slap those kids for interfering with your O T posting
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT