5 ms·

I am not defending SJW in saying this, merely pointing out a clear and obvious fallacy and a shameful one considering those who submit and post here that use it

I am not defending SJW in saying this, merely pointing out a clear and obvious fallacy and a shameful one considering those who submit and post here that use it. Employing the pejorative "woke" is an ad hominem fallacy because it doesn't speak to any argument, and it, in fact, says nothing at all. It ignores all argument for the sake of, I presume, insult. It is fundamentally tribalistic. Insulting or denigrating the opposition in an argument does not win any argument, not ever. In fact, it hands victory to your opponent whether their argument is sound or not. Using "woke" is, effectively, a stupid way to communicate, and I mean that literally. If one is too stupid to form an argument or to obliterate an opponent's argument using sound reasoning, then you'll employ "woke" in pejorative, as well as other common fallacies. Also, when "woke" is employed as pejorative, I'm nearly certain it is racist or sexist, depending on the context. So in trying to sound cool, the user ends up sounding racist or sexist, again, depending on context. Use meaningful words. Form an opinion. Have good reasons for that opinion. Defend your position with facts and logic. If not, speak not.

type0 5y ago
I don't consider "woke" to be pejorative to me it's just synonymous to "hyperprogressive", just more searchable because you'll filter out the physical disease and will only be left with the cultural one in the results
- Maursault 5y ago
  This just kicks the can down the road, as the label "hyperprogressive" then becomes the ad hominem. Once you characterize or label the opponent, whether in contempt, approval or apathy, you've employed ad hominem fallacy. Ignore the arguer. Speak only to the argument.
derac 5y ago
The article uses the word woke twice, in reference to a specific sort of ideology. It isn't ad homing the author(s).
- Maursault 5y ago
  > The article uses the word woke twice How many times is it used on this page? > in reference to a specific sort of ideology It is a pejorative reference, a slur intended to belittle and insult. That makes its use as such an ad hominem attack.
adolph 5y ago
> Employing the pejorative "woke" is an ad hominem fallacy because it doesn't speak to any argument, and it, in fact, says nothing at all. > So in trying to sound cool, the user ends up sounding racist or sexist, again, depending on context.
- Maursault 5y ago
  > > Employing the pejorative "woke" is an ad hominem fallacy because it doesn't speak to any argument, and it, in fact, says nothing at all. > > So in trying to sound cool, the user ends up sounding racist or sexist, again, depending on context.
da39a3ee 5y ago
Ok, and just to be clear, you’re saying SJW (which you used) is ok because it is descriptive? But, like, the etymology of many words is obscure; sometimes we do use words as arbitrary references, whose semantics cannot be inferred from their form, no?
- Maursault 5y ago
  My hypocrisy does not affect the soundness of my argument. I may be a hypocrite, it doesn't mean that I'm wrong. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
boppo1 5y ago
You know, I'm extremely frustrated with "wokeness" and its attendant ideologies, but I agree with almost everything you said. I think the problem is that "woke" ideology employs a lot of deliberately slippery language and rhetorical flourishes that make it difficult to argue with. It employs motte and bailey strategies everywhere. I recently lost a friendship with someone who converted to wokeness. I say 'convert' because he was religious in his fervor. We were discussing a particular Netflix series fondly when he stopped and told me that he musn't get tied up enjoying it too much, because he knows it's just a ploy to get him to forget all the other ways that white people and white society "deliberately designed" to cause him to hate himself for being non-white. "My anger allows me to think clearly. By making me forget it, this show is how a white supremacist society gives me a few breadcrumbs to just be happy for a moment. So even though it has some positive representations of my people, it really is just more white supremacy designed to make me hate myself." I tried to tell him, as gently and empathetically as I could, that I was quite sure that, at least in this particular case, Netflix was not trying to get him to hate himself and he could maybe allow himself to enjoy the show. He told me that I was blinded by my white fragility. I don't know how to argue with this, or what to call it. But his system of belief increasingly touched every topic in every conversation we had until he finally stopped talking to me for being white (although he framed it that I had "chosen the side of white supremacy").
- leephillips 5y ago
  Reminds me of friends who got under the thrall of a[n explicitly] religious cult. You can’t reason them out of it, because their faculties of reason have been short-circuited by the linguistic circularity of the cult. You can’t appeal to what should be their reluctance to cause distress to the people who care about them, because their hearts belong to the cult now. You just need to wait and see if they snap out of it. They often do, and it’s surprising. Perhaps cult deprogramming techniques can help woke people. I don’t know anything about them, but it’s worth looking in to .

type0 5y ago

I don't consider "woke" to be pejorative to me it's just synonymous to "hyperprogressive", just more searchable because you'll filter out the physical disease and will only be left with the cultural one in the results

Maursault 5y ago
This just kicks the can down the road, as the label "hyperprogressive" then becomes the ad hominem. Once you characterize or label the opponent, whether in contempt, approval or apathy, you've employed ad hominem fallacy. Ignore the arguer. Speak only to the argument.

derac 5y ago

The article uses the word woke twice, in reference to a specific sort of ideology. It isn't ad homing the author(s).

Maursault 5y ago
> The article uses the word woke twice How many times is it used on this page? > in reference to a specific sort of ideology It is a pejorative reference, a slur intended to belittle and insult. That makes its use as such an ad hominem attack.

adolph 5y ago

> Employing the pejorative "woke" is an ad hominem fallacy because it doesn't speak to any argument, and it, in fact, says nothing at all. > So in trying to sound cool, the user ends up sounding racist or sexist, again, depending on context.

Maursault 5y ago
> > Employing the pejorative "woke" is an ad hominem fallacy because it doesn't speak to any argument, and it, in fact, says nothing at all. > > So in trying to sound cool, the user ends up sounding racist or sexist, again, depending on context.

da39a3ee 5y ago

Ok, and just to be clear, you’re saying SJW (which you used) is ok because it is descriptive? But, like, the etymology of many words is obscure; sometimes we do use words as arbitrary references, whose semantics cannot be inferred from their form, no?

Maursault 5y ago
My hypocrisy does not affect the soundness of my argument. I may be a hypocrite, it doesn't mean that I'm wrong. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

boppo1 5y ago

You know, I'm extremely frustrated with "wokeness" and its attendant ideologies, but I agree with almost everything you said. I think the problem is that "woke" ideology employs a lot of deliberately slippery language and rhetorical flourishes that make it difficult to argue with. It employs motte and bailey strategies everywhere. I recently lost a friendship with someone who converted to wokeness. I say 'convert' because he was religious in his fervor. We were discussing a particular Netflix series fondly when he stopped and told me that he musn't get tied up enjoying it too much, because he knows it's just a ploy to get him to forget all the other ways that white people and white society "deliberately designed" to cause him to hate himself for being non-white. "My anger allows me to think clearly. By making me forget it, this show is how a white supremacist society gives me a few breadcrumbs to just be happy for a moment. So even though it has some positive representations of my people, it really is just more white supremacy designed to make me hate myself." I tried to tell him, as gently and empathetically as I could, that I was quite sure that, at least in this particular case, Netflix was not trying to get him to hate himself and he could maybe allow himself to enjoy the show. He told me that I was blinded by my white fragility. I don't know how to argue with this, or what to call it. But his system of belief increasingly touched every topic in every conversation we had until he finally stopped talking to me for being white (although he framed it that I had "chosen the side of white supremacy").

leephillips 5y ago
Reminds me of friends who got under the thrall of a[n explicitly] religious cult. You can’t reason them out of it, because their faculties of reason have been short-circuited by the linguistic circularity of the cult. You can’t appeal to what should be their reluctance to cause distress to the people who care about them, because their hearts belong to the cult now. You just need to wait and see if they snap out of it. They often do, and it’s surprising. Perhaps cult deprogramming techniques can help woke people. I don’t know anything about them, but it’s worth looking in to .