On Feb 1, 2009, at 4:36 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
Lachlan Hunt 2009-02-01 03.30:
-public-html
+www-archive
Sam Ruby wrote:
The third word is "strawman". It involves raising and addressing
an issue that bears only a superficial resemblance to the topic
being discussed.
That is not the definition of a strawman. A strawman is an
argument where one person misrepresents another's position so as to
be easily refuted.
Avoiding the point(s), for the benefit of one's own point(s), but
still making it seem as if one were on topic. That is a straw man.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
Maciej Stachowiak 2009-01-31 22.55:
I don't think your description is in conflict with what I stated.
The one part I disagree with is that any raised issue that at
least three people agree is an issue must be flagged in Working
Drafts. I do think it is often a good idea to mark especially
controversial issues, or especially pervasive and clearly
unresolved issues, but I think doing this as a matter of course
may create a lot of work. I would say instead that we should
exercise reasonable judgment about when a flag in the draft is
warranted.
Stating his disagreement. (Conditionally permitted by Sam.)
P.S. I know you asked people not to state their agreement on the
list. But since your email was a reply to me, but since your
email was a reply to me and since I think it is helpful to the
group to see people coming to agreement, I chose to make an
exception.
Claiming to have stated his agreement.
Sam:
Keep a watch out for these three, and call them out when you see
them.
I see a "strawman".
Sorry, that's not a strawman either. Maciej was just pointing that
the he largely agreed with what Sam wrote, except for one small part.
You (and Majiej) make it sound as if there is any difference between
saying
"I disagree in point x."
and
"I agree, except in point x."
Regardless, a strawman is misstating someone else's position. If I
misstated my own position, then that may be inconsistent, mistaken, or
positively deceptive on my part, but it is not a strawman argument.
This is an example of why it is a terrible idea to encourage people to
accuse each other of fallacious arguments. We are now debating the
definition of "strawman" and what is and isn't a strawman argument,
instead of any point of substance.
Regards,
Maciej
