4 ms·
I find it fascinating how robust ideologies are. They have to contain countless responses to thousands of ways of questioning their coherence. In this example,
by kubb 2y ago
I find it fascinating how robust ideologies are. They have to contain countless responses to thousands of ways of questioning their coherence.
In this example, to the concern about a power imbalance there was an immediate, trained response of „it can’t be done” - there’s simply no way to diminish the concentration of wealth.
It’s fantastic because you acknowledge that the imbalance is there and that it’s problematic - that can’t be argued. So instead you argue that it’s inevitable.
Intricate web of beliefs. Stable and resilient to any challenge.
- cle 2y agoThis phenomenon applies to any widely held ideology: if it weren't robust to challenges, it wouldn't remain widely adopted (for some subtle definition of "robust"). Ironically, dismissing an argument with an ad hominem--like calling it a "trained response"--is also a mechanism that makes ideologies resilient.
- kubb 2y agoYou might be under the impression that I'm trying to argue myself (you mention "dismissing an argument") and employ an ad hominem as a rhetorical tool. Not so! I'm well aware that discussion or debate isn't an effective way of having a person question their ideology. Ironically, by ascribing this dark pattern to me you could also be seen as employing an ad hominem, because it casts me as a dishonest, disrespectful person. Alas, I am a human full of contradictions and vices. If it helps you maintain your mental composure, do feel comforted by my perceived malice :)
- sympil 2y agoI don’t believe this qualifies as an ad hominem. The person was not attacking the individual but rather making an observation about the dynamics of ideological thinking.
- cle 2y agoThe ad hominem is assuming that the person suffers from mindless ideological thinking, and that they're parroting something they heard instead of using their brain. To paraphrase, "yeah well you're just a dumb ideologue...aren't they fascinating?".
- neilwilson 2y agoIt is fascinating. Particularly as I explained the mechanism by which it can be done. Did you miss that bit? What I find interesting is how rigid the "tax the rich" belief is, even when the obvious problem with it is pointed out. Almost like the people who believe it in really want to LARP as Robin Hood and won't hear any objections to the contrary.