oh, its not gone, just moved see h t t p : //w ww . go ogle . com / supp ort / forum / p / yout ube / thre ad ?ti d = 1924253d 6f6ab631&hl = e n (close gaps)
Good Vid. I found a lot of this in debate society at school and some of those techniques in the second half could be very effective, but often knowingly used when the main premise was weak. For example, if I was on the Question Evolution campaign, misrepresentations, sleight of hand and house of cards style arguments would be the flavour of the day.
Great job. A solid presentation on debate and persuasion tactics. Useful and informative. I just hope creationists get something out of it, once they see their debate tactics analyzed. Did you catch the last one by DarkMatter? His video and this video match nicely.
I´ve often argued with religious peepz...when you explain how something if scientifically proven to be right which is in contradiction to their beliefs, they often say "Oh, it maybe is proven scientifically , but that doesn´t make it right"...you can´t discuss with people like that, who don´t even understand the scientifc method.
@zarkoff45 You could, but to what information would you think is fallacious? I say a video full of information is fallacious, you say my comment, "the video is fallacious" would be fallacious? That does not make sense on your part.
@Schneboll "That does not make sense on your part."
That was a fallacious comment. It's not the amount of information that matters, it's the accuracy. You only have to be wrong about the one thing -- that the video is fallacious to have your comment be fallacious.
Aristotelian argumentation is lost on the religious. Since they start their journey at point A with a logical fallacy they cannot achieve B without accepting that.
And that acceptance would destroy their argument entirely.
@emptywithoutbrain thanks, I've spent a bit of time arguing with these types.
An argument without tangible evidence isn't an argument - its just emotional pleading. This is why the religious are more than happy to evangelise than use reason or logic.
Epicureanism/materialism destroys any avenue of approach they might have.
If only they had the sense to look at themselves and their own ideals, and how bizarre it all looks in this modern age.
How unfortunate that reason alone isn't enough :/ But sometimes it takes a consciouse effort not to fall into the emotional decision trap, so if people are unaware of it they can't really avoid it.
When some one uses lots of superfluous expressions of confirmation ("of course", "obviously", and so on) it raises my suspicion. Always makes me think "If it is so obvious then why do you have to keep reminding me that it is obvious."
@alcedes78 assertion is what religion is all about. Since religions are all dominator cultures they think they can "wing it" just by sheer weight of numbers and the text of some old book.
They think that because we have allowed them that special space in our society. And that is never questioned.
oh, its not gone, just moved see h t t p : //w ww . go ogle . com / supp ort / forum / p / yout ube / thre ad ?ti d = 1924253d 6f6ab631&hl = e n (close gaps)
Green01123Gold 1 month ago
what has happened to the like button
Green01123Gold 1 month ago
@Green01123Gold why whats happened to it?
emptywithoutbrain 1 month ago
@emptywithoutbrain since yesterday the like/dislike option isn't there anymore. on any videos
Green01123Gold 1 month ago
Good Vid. I found a lot of this in debate society at school and some of those techniques in the second half could be very effective, but often knowingly used when the main premise was weak. For example, if I was on the Question Evolution campaign, misrepresentations, sleight of hand and house of cards style arguments would be the flavour of the day.
Hey wait a minute, they beat me to it... :)
ElPresidenteTel 7 months ago
I had to learn this in English.
AdmiralCasey18 7 months ago
Great job. A solid presentation on debate and persuasion tactics. Useful and informative. I just hope creationists get something out of it, once they see their debate tactics analyzed. Did you catch the last one by DarkMatter? His video and this video match nicely.
ONESPECIES 7 months ago
@ONESPECIES thank you very much Onespecies mate. :P much apprecieated
emptywithoutbrain 7 months ago
I liked the lesson of the school of argumentation.
Especially the maneuver-names slide-of-hand, castle-of-cards etc. were fascinating to me.
Is there some form of argument tactics book that lists these methods with those names and explains how they work?
Or are those terms used in debate clubs?
Or did you make them up (which would be even more cool).
HaploidCell 7 months ago
@HaploidCell Ta very much. The argument names were from a book called Critical thinker By Stella Cottrell
emptywithoutbrain 7 months ago
I learned a lot from this video!
TheRightDecision 7 months ago
@TheRightDecision thanks good ta hear :)
emptywithoutbrain 7 months ago
I´ve often argued with religious peepz...when you explain how something if scientifically proven to be right which is in contradiction to their beliefs, they often say "Oh, it maybe is proven scientifically , but that doesn´t make it right"...you can´t discuss with people like that, who don´t even understand the scientifc method.
NKA23 7 months ago
2 + 2 does = 5 for extraordinary large values of two :3
OppositionDept 7 months ago
Educational video. Going to watch out for these tactics in the future.
Schneboll 7 months ago
@Schneboll "Going to watch out for these tactics"
See any of those tactics here:
watch?v=6a_NpaRVB_o
zarkoff45 7 months ago
@zarkoff45 "How dprjones is just like a religious person."
How dprjones is just like a apologist." would be a better title to the video, I've seen it before. Also the video is fallacious :P
Schneboll 7 months ago
@Schneboll "Also the video is fallacious :P"
But in what way is it fallacious. I could just as easily say your comment is fallacious with no reason given.
zarkoff45 7 months ago
@zarkoff45 You could, but to what information would you think is fallacious? I say a video full of information is fallacious, you say my comment, "the video is fallacious" would be fallacious? That does not make sense on your part.
Schneboll 7 months ago
@Schneboll "That does not make sense on your part."
That was a fallacious comment. It's not the amount of information that matters, it's the accuracy. You only have to be wrong about the one thing -- that the video is fallacious to have your comment be fallacious.
You fail.
zarkoff45 7 months ago
@zarkoff45 Oooh, hehe you're a pretty good troll. You almost made me rage there.
Schneboll 7 months ago
Aristotelian argumentation is lost on the religious. Since they start their journey at point A with a logical fallacy they cannot achieve B without accepting that.
And that acceptance would destroy their argument entirely.
QED.
smartarse001 7 months ago
@smartarse001 Well pointed out smartarse :)
emptywithoutbrain 7 months ago
@emptywithoutbrain thanks, I've spent a bit of time arguing with these types.
An argument without tangible evidence isn't an argument - its just emotional pleading. This is why the religious are more than happy to evangelise than use reason or logic.
Epicureanism/materialism destroys any avenue of approach they might have.
If only they had the sense to look at themselves and their own ideals, and how bizarre it all looks in this modern age.
Thanks!
smartarse001 7 months ago
How unfortunate that reason alone isn't enough :/ But sometimes it takes a consciouse effort not to fall into the emotional decision trap, so if people are unaware of it they can't really avoid it.
TheMundaneMadcap 7 months ago
When some one uses lots of superfluous expressions of confirmation ("of course", "obviously", and so on) it raises my suspicion. Always makes me think "If it is so obvious then why do you have to keep reminding me that it is obvious."
alcedes78 7 months ago
@alcedes78 couldn't be more right. They attempt to manipulate their audience and try to make their position seem unreasonable to not approve with
emptywithoutbrain 7 months ago
@alcedes78 assertion is what religion is all about. Since religions are all dominator cultures they think they can "wing it" just by sheer weight of numbers and the text of some old book.
They think that because we have allowed them that special space in our society. And that is never questioned.
If you talk to god you are praying.
If he talks back your schizophrenic.
Its laughable.
smartarse001 7 months ago