4 ms·

Not just crypto bros, this kind of thing is rife in politics too. Brexit is full of it. People pick one article about one minor thing in one niche area of the e

Not just crypto bros, this kind of thing is rife in politics too. Brexit is full of it. People pick one article about one minor thing in one niche area of the economy and use it to 'prove' their entire agenda.

Aachen 3y ago
Not just politics. I remember this being a realisation as a teenager, noticing that if you bring five reasons, the person you're talking to will refute a random one in a funny way and now the audience will decide you were wrong. Danny was the person who was absolutely the best at this. I should have written one of them down, as I can't even reproduce it but he'd use some logical fallacy to make his case which is, for me at least, super hard to then have to dive into "but that's not how the universe works" without having a 20 minute discussion about life and losing the audience plus the person I'm talking to. Meanwhile, what he said was funny as hell. Sure, anyone who understood the situation would understand this isn't a good reason, but you had to think about it (at least a little) before realising that. The "owww" moment removed any thinking brain cells from the audience. It was more impressive than frustrating to be honest, even being on the losing side every time. These days, politics and PR frustrate me because the tactics are no longer among 16 year old classmates but about things that actually matter. The methods haven't changed, only the importance of the argument.
- rowanG077 3y ago
  Yes. That's why debating is almost entirely about how charismatic you are and your debate skills rather then whether your point has merit. There is a good reason science types are generally considered bad debaters. Even though their points mostly align with reality.
- testermelon 3y ago
  In short, for most people HOW you say it is far more important than WHAT you’re saying.
- indy 3y ago
  whose Danny?
  - Aachen 3y ago
    Mine!
- gumballindie 3y ago
  > These days, politics and PR frustrate me because the tactics are no longer among 16 year old classmates but about things that actually matter. That’s because the audience is usually at the stage of a 16 year old, even if they are older. The aim of politics and pr are easily manipulated folks. You know, those referred to as the “the market” or “the electorate”.
- jtode 3y ago
  There's a name for this: The Gish Gallop. It was not invented but was the specialty of one Duane T. Gish, a creationist who specialized in "winning" debates with unsuspecting academics for a while until the community decided to stop playing chess with a pigeon.
- HPsquared 3y ago
  They should really teach rhetoric more in schools, so people are a bit more immune to the common tricks of the trade.
hutzlibu 3y ago
And before politics we had religion. This persons house, who disagrees about the right dogma X was struck by lightning, see this proofs he disobeyed (the) god(s). And X is the law. (ignoring the other people also struck by the lightning, or those who did not got hit)
nologic01 3y ago
Conflicting political or economic agendas and strategies to promote them are of-course the bread and butter of humanity. But we grossly under-estimated how out-of-control this game will become when transposed into the unified digital space comprising social media, blogs and online news outlets (the so-called echo-chamber), combined with invasive data mining techniques of online behavior, sentiment analysis, click farms and now, drum roll... infinite amounts of LLM generated junk. It is remarkable that people don't appreciate how broken the design that supposedly signifies "modernity" and opportunity.

Aachen 3y ago

Not just politics. I remember this being a realisation as a teenager, noticing that if you bring five reasons, the person you're talking to will refute a random one in a funny way and now the audience will decide you were wrong. Danny was the person who was absolutely the best at this. I should have written one of them down, as I can't even reproduce it but he'd use some logical fallacy to make his case which is, for me at least, super hard to then have to dive into "but that's not how the universe works" without having a 20 minute discussion about life and losing the audience plus the person I'm talking to. Meanwhile, what he said was funny as hell. Sure, anyone who understood the situation would understand this isn't a good reason, but you had to think about it (at least a little) before realising that. The "owww" moment removed any thinking brain cells from the audience. It was more impressive than frustrating to be honest, even being on the losing side every time. These days, politics and PR frustrate me because the tactics are no longer among 16 year old classmates but about things that actually matter. The methods haven't changed, only the importance of the argument.

rowanG077 3y ago
Yes. That's why debating is almost entirely about how charismatic you are and your debate skills rather then whether your point has merit. There is a good reason science types are generally considered bad debaters. Even though their points mostly align with reality.
testermelon 3y ago
In short, for most people HOW you say it is far more important than WHAT you’re saying.
indy 3y ago
whose Danny?
- Aachen 3y ago
  Mine!
gumballindie 3y ago
> These days, politics and PR frustrate me because the tactics are no longer among 16 year old classmates but about things that actually matter. That’s because the audience is usually at the stage of a 16 year old, even if they are older. The aim of politics and pr are easily manipulated folks. You know, those referred to as the “the market” or “the electorate”.
jtode 3y ago
There's a name for this: The Gish Gallop. It was not invented but was the specialty of one Duane T. Gish, a creationist who specialized in "winning" debates with unsuspecting academics for a while until the community decided to stop playing chess with a pigeon.
HPsquared 3y ago
They should really teach rhetoric more in schools, so people are a bit more immune to the common tricks of the trade.

hutzlibu 3y ago

And before politics we had religion. This persons house, who disagrees about the right dogma X was struck by lightning, see this proofs he disobeyed (the) god(s). And X is the law. (ignoring the other people also struck by the lightning, or those who did not got hit)

nologic01 3y ago

Conflicting political or economic agendas and strategies to promote them are of-course the bread and butter of humanity. But we grossly under-estimated how out-of-control this game will become when transposed into the unified digital space comprising social media, blogs and online news outlets (the so-called echo-chamber), combined with invasive data mining techniques of online behavior, sentiment analysis, click farms and now, drum roll... infinite amounts of LLM generated junk. It is remarkable that people don't appreciate how broken the design that supposedly signifies "modernity" and opportunity.