Arguing on GT

Platapus · 11-25-13, 07:31 PM

Here is a graphic about arguing on the Internets Tubes

Before responding to someone, we need to consider where in this pyramid our response falls into.

I personally think that Refutation and Counterargument should be reversed. But in any case we should strive to be in the top three.

If someone posts in the bottom four, we don't have to respond. How else will they learn?

Tchocky · 11-25-13, 07:37 PM

Guilty of responding to tone rather than argument.

More satisfying that way

nikimcbee · 11-25-13, 07:45 PM

Sweet, says nothing about changing the subject.

TarJak · 11-25-13, 07:58 PM

Derailment here we come.

Ducimus · 11-25-13, 08:17 PM

edit:
I say Meh, because I think there are very few people here capable of having an open discussion. Most of us state our firm opinions, then go on to support those opinions ad nauseum, going back and forth, back and forth like a verbal game of ping pong. I do not claim exception.

Buddahaid · 11-25-13, 08:23 PM

You're an ass hat!

Oh wait I got that backwards. Sorry.

nikimcbee · 11-25-13, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TarJak

Derailment here we come.

I love you man...

(note, in a purely platonic sense, not carnal!)

nikimcbee · 11-25-13, 08:35 PM

I can't believe no one has posted this yet?

in for the win.

Buddahaid · 11-25-13, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikimcbee

I can't believe no one has posted this yet?

in for the win.

I withdraw.

Wolferz · 11-26-13, 10:49 AM

We'll be back for your other ball later.

Penguin · 11-27-13, 11:07 AM

I disagree with Platapus, because he is a donkey hat, who is certainly no expert on Argumentation Theory.
Besides the accusatory tone of his post the opposite is true.
The graphic focuses only on one theory, others are not mentioned. Technical points seem more important than for example the point of substance of an argument .
As Mercier/Sperber argue in their 2011 paper "Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory" the "function of reasoning is argumentative". As they state that persons with proper argumentative skills are often not after the truth, but only after arguments which support their opinion. The motivation of reasoning, a very important point, they also mention some excellent points about the confirmation bias.

soopaman2 · 12-02-13, 03:02 PM

Platypus, your post is an outright lie.

You have no proof (references, bibliography, jury statements, trial transcripts, witness statements, etc of any of those things happening.

Your pyramid is crap and I utterly refute all you posted.

To be thorough I will throw in some name calling and a strawman argument.

You are a poopy pants, and I hope you get the flu on Christmas eve.

And what about the peanuts, yeah you failed to mention how the peanuts fall into this! Since you forgot peanuts, everything you said is null and void!!

GOTCHA!

(good post, all jokes aside, I can see quite a few of my favorite tactics .

)

Cybermat47 · 11-25-13, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikimcbee

(note, in a purely platonic sense, not carnal!)

Well... thank god for that

Sailor Steve · 11-25-13, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cybermat47

Well... thank god for that

Why? You got something against puppy love?

Cybermat47 · 11-25-13, 09:07 PM

11-25-13, 07:31 PM	#1
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,388 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	Arguing on GT Here is a graphic about arguing on the Internets Tubes Before responding to someone, we need to consider where in this pyramid our response falls into. I personally think that Refutation and Counterargument should be reversed. But in any case we should strive to be in the top three. If someone posts in the bottom four, we don't have to respond. How else will they learn? __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

11-25-13, 07:37 PM	#2
Tchocky Navy Seal Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 5,874 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	Guilty of responding to tone rather than argument. More satisfying that way __________________ [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

11-25-13, 07:45 PM	#3
nikimcbee Fleet Admiral Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Patroling the Slot. Posts: 17,952 Downloads: 90 Uploads: 0	Sweet, says nothing about changing the subject. __________________

11-25-13, 08:23 PM	#6
Buddahaid Shark above Space Chicken Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 9,332 Downloads: 162 Uploads: 0	You're an ass hat! Oh wait I got that backwards. Sorry. __________________ "However vast the darkness, we must provide our own light." Stanley Kubrick "Tomorrow belongs to those who can hear it coming." David Bowie

11-25-13, 08:35 PM	#8
nikimcbee Fleet Admiral Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Patroling the Slot. Posts: 17,952 Downloads: 90 Uploads: 0	I can't believe no one has posted this yet? in for the win. __________________

11-25-13, 07:58 PM	#4
TarJak Fleet Admiral Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,052 Downloads: 150 Uploads: 8	Derailment here we come.

11-25-13, 08:17 PM	#5
Ducimus Rear Admiral Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 12,987 Downloads: 67 Uploads: 2	edit: I say Meh, because I think there are very few people here capable of having an open discussion. Most of us state our firm opinions, then go on to support those opinions ad nauseum, going back and forth, back and forth like a verbal game of ping pong. I do not claim exception.

11-26-13, 10:49 AM	#10
Wolferz Navy Seal Join Date: May 2007 Location: On a mighty quest for the Stick of Truth Posts: 5,963 Downloads: 52 Uploads: 0	We'll be back for your other ball later. __________________ Tomorrow never comes Last edited by Wolferz; 11-26-13 at 01:48 PM.

11-27-13, 11:07 AM	#11
Penguin Ocean Warrior Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Rheinische Republik Posts: 3,322 Downloads: 92 Uploads: 0	I disagree with Platapus, because he is a donkey hat, who is certainly no expert on Argumentation Theory. Besides the accusatory tone of his post the opposite is true. The graphic focuses only on one theory, others are not mentioned. Technical points seem more important than for example the point of substance of an argument . As Mercier/Sperber argue in their 2011 paper "Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory" the "function of reasoning is argumentative". As they state that persons with proper argumentative skills are often not after the truth, but only after arguments which support their opinion. The motivation of reasoning, a very important point, they also mention some excellent points about the confirmation bias.

12-02-13, 03:02 PM	#12
soopaman2 Der Alte Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: New Jersey, USA Posts: 3,316 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 0	Platypus, your post is an outright lie. You have no proof (references, bibliography, jury statements, trial transcripts, witness statements, etc of any of those things happening. Your pyramid is crap and I utterly refute all you posted. To be thorough I will throw in some name calling and a strawman argument. You are a poopy pants, and I hope you get the flu on Christmas eve. And what about the peanuts, yeah you failed to mention how the peanuts fall into this! Since you forgot peanuts, everything you said is null and void!! GOTCHA! (good post, all jokes aside, I can see quite a few of my favorite tactics . ) __________________ If Hitler invaded Hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons. -Winston Churchill- The most fascinating man in the world.

11-25-13, 09:07 PM	#15
Cybermat47 Willing Webfooted Beast Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Australia Posts: 5,408 Downloads: 300 Uploads: 23	__________________ Historical TWoS Gameplay Guide: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=2572620 Historical FotRSU Gameplay Guide: https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/sho....php?p=2713394