Logic and Rhetoric: Misadventure in the Search for Truth at Free Republic (posted Nov. 6, 2001)

Essay by self | 6 November 01 | AndyJackson

[AndyJackson]

I will not apologise for the length of this. The author's writing is really that bad,(even worse, in fact). Some have attacked me because this man is apparently conservative (though he argues like a liberal) and is anti-abortion. The problem is that in all of this gassing there is nothing of substance. I would rather the folks on my side of the table shoot straighter. Then the enemy is at risk and not me.

[drstevej]

Many of the kinds of errors that are committed are well known examples here on Free Republic...

What in the hell does this mean? Is this English? What is the purpose of your [comment ommited] analysis and why do we care?

[Illbay]

You hit the nail right on the head. This has been an increasing problem since people "found" FR when it came out of obscurity a couple of years ago.

The quality of the rhetoric is appalling now, and we have to sift through much chaff to find the wheat.

It used to be that Vanity posts were MERCILESSLY pilloried, and there was about one article from the powers-that-be per week admonishing against worthless Vanities (yours is NOT one of those, BTW).

In fact, people were regularly run off just for posting stupid nonsense, and it was so strictly enforced that many dealt with thusly would log on one last time under a pseudonym, and announce an "alternative" website had been set up. (The ONLY one of these that was in any way successful, BTW, was Lucianne.Com, and I think even it has fallen on hard times).

I consider, with all due respect, that this dates from the time when FR first began accepting regular donations. The Management felt--understandably--that people who "pay" for access ought to be given the benefit of the doubt. And later that seemed to extend to most of FReeperdom in general, even some who were rather outrageous (the idiotic Libertines being a great example of that, lately taking over the "Most Obnoxious" Award from the Buchananites.

[Illbay]

Aw, c'mon! With all the poorly written, poorly spelled and near-senseless vanities that are a daily feature of FR these days, you pick on THIS GUY'S post?

[drstevej]

Why add one more?

[mrsmith]

IMHO a post containing a false dichotomy should be automatically deleted from Free Republic.
If someone wants to make a point, let them work at it.

[meyer]

The post is too long. :^)

[LJLucido]

Could you elaborate a bit on the Polynesian girls?

[tortoise]

I have to agree with at least the spirit of the original poster. Many days it seems the vast majority of posts here are littered with rhetorical and logical fallacies. There are a fair number of people on this site that argue with the logical and intellectual integrity of the idiots over on DU.

It does a lot more for ones reputation in the long run if one is reasoned and logical. I would implore anyone who doesn't already know, to study the numerous lists of logical and rhetorical fallacies on the internet and follow them in your own posting so that we look intellectually sound at the very least. I'd be happy if everyone simply used correct first order logic, never mind the rest.

[AndyJackson]

What in the hell does this mean...

Guilty as charged. I had rewritten it in my text editor, but working between that and the posting window is cumbersome and I messed up getting it across.

too long...

There is a point. This author wrote the worst piece of illogic I have yet seen on FreeRepublic. It is astonishing that so many fallacies can be cramed into so few words.

[LJLucido]

You make some excellent points, BTW. Any writer that had you as his editor would really have to keep on his toes.

[No!]

Having BEEN to Tahiti, you caught my attention, then...

wasted it away...

Your undertaking is a WASTE of time!

[Rudder]

I've seen worse, and your effort to make your point is diluted by being too long-winded. An apology to yourself is in order for that error.

[MinuteGal]

Andy, this is a brilliant and meaty essay. It should be required reading. I took a specialty education course years ago in the basics and essence of propaganda. There are about 10 really simple, basic techniques employed by expert propagandists, i.e., the use of "Glittering Generalities", the "Bandwagon Ploy", the Self-Effacement Technique", etc. The author you are quoting here employs each one of these tools skillfully, but not skillfully enough to fool readers trained in the art of detecting hidden propaganda, including yourself.......This post is a refreshing change from a lot of the fluff and one-liners we constantly read on the internet. It should be read, re-read and studied. All FR readers must arm themselves against the liberal and traitorous media NOW and educate others. As many Americans as possible must be able to detect the most carefully-hidden propaganda nuances spouting forth on TV and in the writing media. Why? Because we haven't seen anything yet!....We're all soldiers now and must arm ourselves with more intense knowledge that amusing fluff pieces don't provide. Posts like this give us the necessary implements....Andy, this was the right post for the right time. It must have taken a lot of work, but it's invaluable. Thank you for your energy and perception.

Leni

[billhilly]

Mizz Juanita, is this really you? Did you come back so soon? After all, you were only in your early nineties when you passed. I know, I know, "There are things to be learned, and we only have a little time."

[AndyJackson]

An apology to yourself is in order for that error.

I pointedly refused, already, to apologise for the fact that one author can commit so many errors of argumentation in such a short piece of prose writing. Further, I have seen writing almost this bad from the left, but I have never seen anything so atrocious that suckered in so many people from the right. How he works to sucker folks in is very very subtle. You have to watch in action, closely, word by shifty word and phrase by inverted phrase.

[Mike Darancette]

Methinks that you worked too hard in proving that the referenced post was drivel. By inserting the implied word in the title; What Separates The U.S. From The [OTHER] Terrorist Nations Of The World? the moral relativism is obvious at first glance.

We might not be able to find or name the fallacies found in such posts with as much accuracy as you do but we ain't stoopid either.

That said, thanks for the effort.

[Rudder]

You have to watch in action, closely, word by shifty word and phrase by inverted phrase.

I'll try to avoid that. Obviously, it was a painful experience for you, and I'll learn from your mistakes.

[Enlightiator]

ROFLMAO, Andy. Your intellectual banter was witty, pointed, and plain ol' funny. Together with the original author, I consider this a classic case of intellectual penis wars...;)

[MinuteGal]

bttt