Strawman Matrix (no, not Agent Smith)

discussing "strawman vs equivocation"

Category:

Education

Tags:

• strawman
• equivocation

[cowboycoco]

Maybe the intellectual dishonesty claim is a little unbased but I think James also points to "toddler" reasoning. Maybe that's a false dichotomy but it seems he's saying either Craig is stupid about this issue or he is dishonest. I think that's fair given that, when presented with counter claims like this, we don't see concessions from Craig, instead we see re-assertion and even scoffing at the counter claim. If your going to scoff at your detractors, than James' response, I feel, is justified.

[jericomovie]

@cowboycoco

I agree that it may be a false dichotomy, but James never presented it that way. He simply sad Craig was being stupid *and* dishonest. Only one of those accusations are justified.

As for scoffing, even if James made mention of it, James would be justified only in being upset about it, not in making accusations of dishonesty.

[miquael]

why not Agent Smith?

[jericomovie]

@miquael

I get enough flack from people thinking I'm smug, conceited or arrogant as it is.

[Tcrowaf]

too... much... smugness... can't... gahhhhhhhhhhh!

[jericomovie]

@Tcrowaf

can't help you.

[EtherHunt]

For some fucking reason I thought you were talking about the crediltors in commerce legal esoteric theory. that will make you rich beyond your imagination if you are able to master it. which brings up its own fallacy since they dress like bums but then again thats not a result of lack of money as much as it is lack of taste. regardless. talk about equivocation. ahahah you seem kinda bright ha. you should look into creditors in commerce. really interesting. have an open mind tho.

[CasperTheMeanieGhost]

@CasperTheMeanieGhost I would also add as a 3rd point that ANYTHING that experiences a change in reality requires a cause.if the universe began to exist then THAT is a change in reality and requires a cause.

[CasperTheMeanieGhost]

@DasAmericanAtheist "kalam argues for ex nihilo and he`s addressing recombination"

No he`s not.premise 1 IS about ex nihilo.thats why Craig attempts to validate premise 1 by appealing to ...

1) It is practically self evident that "nothing" by definition cannot do anything.

2) We never see things coming into existence uncaused so that any objection to premise 1 shoulders a burden of proof.

U are strawmanning Craig.

[ilik3pi3]

It's pronounced 'Own-age' :D

[gedgetips]

The strawman gets a lot of action on YT, but I also notice this often in my workplace where no mention of the straw dude arises, but ppl focus upon criticizing their own interpretation which is only one aspect of the position. Strawmen can be hard to counter since the critic will go for what he can most easily dismiss and the very effort to defend this one possible problem can undermine the original position as many others then focus upon this one problematic aspect.

[gedgetips]

@trick0171 Yes, strawmen tend to get too much attention as such, versus considering the argument itself and the applications criticized. So long as the interpretation is clear enough it can be useful to disambiguate a position into someone to criticize if this is a position held by some and practiced by many, however much it may not be the main thing meant by another. Whatever we say can TEND to apply so we are liable to think in terms of "strawmen" versus highly evolved positions.

[ElasticGiraffe]

I think "equivocation" has a fairly innocent connotation, like it's a simple confusion due to ambiguous language, but "straw man" usually has a sinister connotation, as if it implies that someone knowingly misrepresents another person's position. When we're walking the fuzzy line between ontological "things" and epistemological "things," which is not at all a settled issue (cf. realism vs. anti-realism), it's not fair to jump on an educated person on the other side and accuse them of dishonesty.