3 ms·

Many people don't believe that the truth or falsehood of a logical argument rests on the identity of the person making the argument. If you want to convince th

Many people don't believe that the truth or falsehood of a logical argument rests on the identity of the person making the argument. If you want to convince them of something, it's best to point out flaws in the argument, not try to discredit the person making the argument by calling them names.

Brian_K_White 4y ago
And yet I still don't see a refutation of the claim that this particular complaint usually comes from a particular demographic. If an observation is true, then the observation is true, and is a valid data point to consider along with any others. A logical argument can be perfectly true and still invalid if it is the result of motivated cherry picking and framing to support an agenda or incentive. As a master logician lecturer, we can assume you already knew that, which makes this comment curious.
- scarmig 4y ago
  > A logical argument can be perfectly true and still invalid if it is the result of motivated cherry picking and framing to support an agenda or incentive. The approach to take here, then, would be to critique the part of the letter that is invalid and cherry picked. Perhaps universities have a broader scope than education and research, and focusing on the pursuit of truth doesn't allow it to fulfill its broader responsibilities. If that's your point, make it, instead of saying that certain personal traits of an arguer inherently makes their argument wrong. A world where arguments are primarily about which identities are good and bad is a world where you just have insults being thrown back and forth about who's a "white man reply guy" and who's an "autistic enby about to saw his genitals off." I'd prefer a different one.
  - ttpphd 4y ago
    I wrote a specific criticism (it's a mistake to believe the status quo is apolitical) AND I noticed who it is that this criticism usually applies to. Your brain got short circuited and you instead tried to make it personal against me and my approach to critique.
- AlbertCory 4y ago
  > perfectly true and still invalid LOL. In other words, it's only "valid" if it supports your POV? Because you just admitted that "true" isn't part of the criteria.
  - Brian_K_White 4y ago
    Are you 5 years old that you don't yet know how "true and yet still invalid" works that you think it's so funny?
    - AlbertCory 4y ago
      No, please tell us all how "true and yet still invalid" works. Because it's funny that you think that's actually a serious thing to say. Is this something from Foucault or what?
      - Brian_K_White 4y ago
        So, yes then.
        AlbertCory 4y ago
        a personal insult; flagged
        AlbertCory 4y ago
        So sad, you're not going to tell us all how "true and yet still invalid" works? Makes sense: it'll probably be embarrassing for you. As for being 5: maybe if you were that age and didn't know who Foucault was, you should revert to that.
noasaservice 4y ago
When talking of identity politics, the identity of the speaker is included with the content. It definitely is a variant of an ad hominem logical fallacy (they are X demographic so they must know and represent all X). But critical thinking goes out the window with identity politics. And if you identify as white (or others identify you as white), you're just wrong. There's even insults of that type: Karen, Chad, Josh. Doubly so if you are or identify as male.
- ttpphd 4y ago
  This is very self pitying
ttpphd 4y ago
You are confused. Your brain went fight or flight as soon as you heard someone talking about white men, and you didn't stop to think about whether any of this is responsive to what I wrote. I didn't call anyone names. I in fact did point out a flaw in the argument. The flaw is thinking that the status quo is apolitical. The people I talked about on my comment (a real, literal group of people who exist and whose behavior can be empirically observed and analyzed). I commented on them. I am not talking to them.

Brian_K_White 4y ago

And yet I still don't see a refutation of the claim that this particular complaint usually comes from a particular demographic. If an observation is true, then the observation is true, and is a valid data point to consider along with any others. A logical argument can be perfectly true and still invalid if it is the result of motivated cherry picking and framing to support an agenda or incentive. As a master logician lecturer, we can assume you already knew that, which makes this comment curious.

scarmig 4y ago
> A logical argument can be perfectly true and still invalid if it is the result of motivated cherry picking and framing to support an agenda or incentive. The approach to take here, then, would be to critique the part of the letter that is invalid and cherry picked. Perhaps universities have a broader scope than education and research, and focusing on the pursuit of truth doesn't allow it to fulfill its broader responsibilities. If that's your point, make it, instead of saying that certain personal traits of an arguer inherently makes their argument wrong. A world where arguments are primarily about which identities are good and bad is a world where you just have insults being thrown back and forth about who's a "white man reply guy" and who's an "autistic enby about to saw his genitals off." I'd prefer a different one.
- ttpphd 4y ago
  I wrote a specific criticism (it's a mistake to believe the status quo is apolitical) AND I noticed who it is that this criticism usually applies to. Your brain got short circuited and you instead tried to make it personal against me and my approach to critique.
AlbertCory 4y ago
> perfectly true and still invalid LOL. In other words, it's only "valid" if it supports your POV? Because you just admitted that "true" isn't part of the criteria.
- Brian_K_White 4y ago
  Are you 5 years old that you don't yet know how "true and yet still invalid" works that you think it's so funny?
  - AlbertCory 4y ago
    No, please tell us all how "true and yet still invalid" works. Because it's funny that you think that's actually a serious thing to say. Is this something from Foucault or what?
    - Brian_K_White 4y ago
      So, yes then.
      - AlbertCory 4y ago
        a personal insult; flagged
      - AlbertCory 4y ago
        So sad, you're not going to tell us all how "true and yet still invalid" works? Makes sense: it'll probably be embarrassing for you. As for being 5: maybe if you were that age and didn't know who Foucault was, you should revert to that.

noasaservice 4y ago

When talking of identity politics, the identity of the speaker is included with the content. It definitely is a variant of an ad hominem logical fallacy (they are X demographic so they must know and represent all X). But critical thinking goes out the window with identity politics. And if you identify as white (or others identify you as white), you're just wrong. There's even insults of that type: Karen, Chad, Josh. Doubly so if you are or identify as male.

ttpphd 4y ago
This is very self pitying

ttpphd 4y ago

You are confused. Your brain went fight or flight as soon as you heard someone talking about white men, and you didn't stop to think about whether any of this is responsive to what I wrote. I didn't call anyone names. I in fact did point out a flaw in the argument. The flaw is thinking that the status quo is apolitical. The people I talked about on my comment (a real, literal group of people who exist and whose behavior can be empirically observed and analyzed). I commented on them. I am not talking to them.