Aquamarine_Kitty
Snowy Owl
Joined: 6 Oct 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 155
Location: Way northern California
18 Jul 2008, 8:53 pm
Doc_Daneeka wrote:
makuranososhi wrote:
It is incredibly frustrating to be attempting rational discourse and reasonable debate, to have personal experience thrown out as truth. What is true for one is not for another; the attempt to superimpose another's reality on my own is offensive and demeaning to my own experience and efforts... and I make a concerted effort to acknowledge room for new information, invite additional cogent information, and admit my own limitations in knowledge by couching statements as opinion wherever possible. There's been a trend lately of unsubstantiated arguments that has lessened my enjoyment of getting involved in certain threads; I almost long for the predictable vitriol of the PPR forum, as at least there was some content instead of mere opinion dressed as fact. This is an aggravating factor for me, a pet peeve if you will. In matters of faith, declarative 'I believe' statements are valid for the sake of discussion; when working with objective situational analysis, they are moot as they at best cover a minute fraction of the total body. To use a poker analogy, it is basing your hand selections in Hold 'Em on the last 10 hands played and not on the mathematical trends and rules with apply in overarching fashion in the matters of probability and chance. Short-sighted approaches drive me nuts.
M.
M.
Not to be rude, but I'm going to sum up your post in a single sentence. One that I really wish were better understood these days.
"Anyone who argues a point by restorting to anecdotes doesn't understand rational discourse."
Not "restorting" to anecdotes? What other method do you suggest?????
18 Jul 2008, 9:45 pm
I hate this kind of argument, very common nowadays:
If a=b then c
so, c=d
This drives me crazy (I will even shout the people "you stupid!")
But everybody else that listen that argument will find it very plausible...
Then I know that I´m in the wrong planet 
18 Jul 2008, 9:58 pm
Doc_Daneeka
Pileated woodpecker
Joined: 3 Jul 2007
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 195
Location: Toronto. But we call it Tarana.
19 Jul 2008, 12:49 am
Aquamarine_Kitty wrote:
Doc_Daneeka wrote:
makuranososhi wrote:
It is incredibly frustrating to be attempting rational discourse and reasonable debate, to have personal experience thrown out as truth. What is true for one is not for another; the attempt to superimpose another's reality on my own is offensive and demeaning to my own experience and efforts... and I make a concerted effort to acknowledge room for new information, invite additional cogent information, and admit my own limitations in knowledge by couching statements as opinion wherever possible. There's been a trend lately of unsubstantiated arguments that has lessened my enjoyment of getting involved in certain threads; I almost long for the predictable vitriol of the PPR forum, as at least there was some content instead of mere opinion dressed as fact. This is an aggravating factor for me, a pet peeve if you will. In matters of faith, declarative 'I believe' statements are valid for the sake of discussion; when working with objective situational analysis, they are moot as they at best cover a minute fraction of the total body. To use a poker analogy, it is basing your hand selections in Hold 'Em on the last 10 hands played and not on the mathematical trends and rules with apply in overarching fashion in the matters of probability and chance. Short-sighted approaches drive me nuts.
M.
M.
Not to be rude, but I'm going to sum up your post in a single sentence. One that I really wish were better understood these days.
"Anyone who argues a point by restorting to anecdotes doesn't understand rational discourse."
Not "restorting" to anecdotes? What other method do you suggest?????
Let's try an (admittedly extreme) hypothetical. Someone claims that the root of the Asdlklwppwql plant can cure headaches. As evidence, they offer claims by Alice, Bob, and Charlie that after eating this root, their headaches went away. In the absence of any actual data, these claims tell us nothing whatsoever other than that these three people say that their headaches went away.
Let's do a study, wherein we look at the effects of 1000 people who take this root for headaches and 1000 people who don't take it. We might well discover that Alice, Bob, and Charlie did indeed have a beneficial effect. On the other hand, Dave and Eve died immediately after ingesting it, and the other 995 people were hospitalised. In the control group, nothing weird happens at all.
In the absence of real data, for any anecdote you can come up with, your opponent can probably match it with an opposing one. The alternatives are to make a case based on logic, or better still, based on logic and real data, though this latter case isn't always possible.
19 Jul 2008, 12:56 am
19 Jul 2008, 9:55 am
19 Jul 2008, 10:04 am
19 Jul 2008, 10:08 am
19 Jul 2008, 2:19 pm
19 Jul 2008, 2:22 pm
19 Jul 2008, 2:24 pm
Oh s**t I think I do this ...
Not
19 Jul 2008, 2:25 pm
19 Jul 2008, 2:27 pm
19 Jul 2008, 2:36 pm
19 Jul 2008, 2:38 pm
lol 
21 Jul 2008, 9:41 am
ecky wrote:
What I dislike the most is listening to someone who knows they are being illogical, and yet insists on being right in a "way they can't explain".
That sounds very, very familiar (literally spoken!
) - my family and I had lots of discussions like that when I was younger (and nobody knew I was an aspie, so they just thought I was stubborn and didn't want to / couldn't understand, or something of that kind.) 
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| What makes you do stimming |
15 Nov 2024, 9:25 pm |
| What makes autistics happy and living good lives? |
14 Dec 2024, 5:50 am |
|
What to do when I feel no need for sleep?
in Bipolar, Tourettes, Schizophrenia, and other Psychological Conditions |
31 Jan 2025, 10:04 am |
|
i feel inhuman
in Bipolar, Tourettes, Schizophrenia, and other Psychological Conditions |
18 Jan 2025, 8:14 pm |
