4 ms·
I've seen it used as an excuse to change the subject. "Oh you wanted to say that X but you said Y, which is obviously wrong, so let me answer X instead" when Y
by ajuc 2y ago
I've seen it used as an excuse to change the subject.
"Oh you wanted to say that X but you said Y, which is obviously wrong, so let me answer X instead" when Y was a perfectly valid proposition. What is "steel" and what is "straw" is subjective and open to manipulation. Jordan Peterson does this a lot, it's infuriating to listen to him.
I like the alternative that does sth like the ideological turing test. It goes like this:
- Alice says what she believes
- Bob says what he thinks Alice said
- if Alice disagrees - repeat from the beginning
and then the other way. Eventually when both sides agree the other person understands their point - they can start the actual discussion.
- j45 2y agoI've never understood why people like Jordan Peterson aren't happy. Helps deliver a message a lot more. Whatever you do and say .. should give you some amount of peace to be at peace.
- paulryanrogers 2y agoPeterson has a public persona and schtick, based on what stuck after throwing things at the wall a while. Now he's cashing in on that. Diverging too far risks putting his earnings at risk, even if he doesn't consciously think that way. Pastors often fall into these ruts. They often want to help. The toolbox limits them, audience expectations limit them, their own financial needs depend upon telling people things that won't make them too uncomfortable, and their (ancient) world view has to harmonize with a (modern) world that doesn't fit.
- dpkirchner 2y agoI call this the stack overflow effect: I'm going to reply to what I wish you said, rather than what you actually said, because I'm a smarty.
- euroderf 2y agoBut I've heard this said about mathematicians (and mathematically-oriented people): First they translate what you say into their internal language. And then they reply to that.
- paulryanrogers 2y agoSadly only works when applied in good faith. Some respond with what they wanted to hear, or their own straw man shell of your argument. Afraid I'm guilty of this sometimes.
- ifyoubuildit 2y agoBut isn't that just a plain old straw man?
- dpkirchner 2y agoIt's similar, I think. It's a straw man with the goal of appearing smarter than the person asking the question rather than just making an argument.
- ajuc 2y agoRegular strawman is stealthily changing the thesis, this is doing it in the open and pretending you're doing it in good faith because you're so much smarter than the other guy.
- convolvatron 2y agoabsolutely. most pointless arguments happen because of substantive lack of understanding of the other persons position, or just a general failure to engage in good faith. attempting to present someone's position for them seems like a good way to make the situation worse.