View Single Post
Old 12-10-2012, 10:18 AM   #29
Krystal Locke
Location: Phoenix, Oregon
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 385
United_States
Offline
Re: Just how real is violence? And where does Aikido stands in all of this?

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote: View Post
So, if someone describes a person as "Conservative as Hell", then it's trolling, too? How about if they describe someone as "Democrat as Hell"? Is that trolling?

Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, all describe people's views. In fact, they are but generalities as you can have a Liberal Republican and a Conservative Democrat. Far Right, Far Left, Communist, Marxist, etc are also general adjectives describing people's views and beliefs.

Scott wasn't trolling. Stating his opinion, yes. It's amazing, but I find that if you're tolerant of others, you can read things like that without getting upset. For example, Marc Abrams and I have some very different views, but we get along great. Or Janet Rosen and I.

Tolerance. It's not just for conservatives anymore.

Mark
Yes, if someone slaps a "conservative as hell" label on a person's point of view as an excuse for immediate dismissal of the point of view and the person, it is trolling, it is just as prejudicial and inflammatory as Scott's post. Stating an opinion is fine and dandy. Trying to prop up an opinion with political name calling is not as nifty.

If Scott had said "I disagree with Pinker's data" or "I think Mr. Pinker has misinterpreted the information he quotes in his book" without adding in the comments about liberals, we could have a nice, productive discussion. Instead, it has been shown that the foundation of his argument is based on his perception of the author's political stance rather than the work itself. Is it then so very unreasonable to believe that Scott may summarily dismiss my participation in further discussion, since I am generally liberal in my thought? What then would he do when he found out that I am also homosexual? Should I wear a sign that says "AT LEAST I'M WHITE!" so that I can perhaps gain some respect for my opinion about an issue that I believe has very little to do with politics, sexuality, or race? Am I making a reasonable, conservative even, assumption, or am I falling into reductio ad absurdum?

Using externalities to bolster an opinion is poor argumentation no matter who is doing it. Clearly ad hominem, fallacious.
  Reply With Quote