The Worst Argument In The World • Hacker News Board

Re: The Worst Argument In The World

#31

Post by radu_floricica » Tue, Aug 28, 2012, 6:52 AM UTC

breckinloggins wrote: post #13

The article could use some more neutral and left-leaning "Worst argument in the world (TWAITW)" examples. I'm fairly neutral politically, and the piece sounded left-biased to me. Note that I'm not stating my opinion here; the author even apologizes for it in the article. Perhaps he is simply at a loss for examples? We could help. Here's a neutral one (from the comments): - "George Washington was a traitor !" (should…

I think it's on purpose. LessWrong does not aim to be an academic discussion forum, but a practical real life provider of thinking tools. Using real-life, emotionally charged examples is probably part of the training.

Re: The Worst Argument In The World

#32

Post by wololo » Tue, Aug 28, 2012, 6:56 AM UTC

breckinloggins wrote: post #25

jvm wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ha, and here I thought it was too libertarian leaning so I must really be off the deep end. Maybe the author should have stuck to non-political examples since the examples are really not the point of the article, though I know all the fun ones are political.

Which is why it's so funny, given that the very article on the same blog he linked to in his apology [1] is why we're even having this conversation! [1] http://lesswrong.com/lw/gw/politics_is_the_mindkiller/

Re: The Worst Argument In The World

#33

Post by slurgfest » Tue, Aug 28, 2012, 6:58 AM UTC

breckinloggins wrote: post #13

The article could use some more neutral and left-leaning "Worst argument in the world (TWAITW)" examples. I'm fairly neutral politically, and the piece sounded left-biased to me. Note that I'm not stating my opinion here; the author even apologizes for it in the article. Perhaps he is simply at a loss for examples? We could help. Here's a neutral one (from the comments): - "George Washington was a traitor !" (should…

Wow - evolution has been directly observed and is the overwhelming consensus among biologists, if not among fundamentalists whose theology is threatened by it... yet you have carefully impugned its existence by referencing "fantastic parts," as if evolution were a matter of unicorns or Roswell or something.

Go learn about Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, then come and lecture us on how evolution isn't really a fact.

I will never understand why basic facts of biology are supposedly left-wing.

Re: The Worst Argument In The World

#34

Post by Xcelerate » Tue, Aug 28, 2012, 7:01 AM UTC

I have to disagree with his first example. He says "X is in a category whose archetypal member has certain features".

The first example is "Abortion is murder". He then says, "If you define murder as 'killing another human being', then abortion is technically murder."

The problem is that in this case, his "if" applies to roughly 56% of the US population, as they define murder that way. In other words, he needs to select a category that has a unanimous agreement about its features instead of selecting a category that has a myriad of definitions and then choosing his own favorite definition and its corresponding archetypes.

Re: The Worst Argument In The World

#35

Post by slurgfest » Tue, Aug 28, 2012, 7:06 AM UTC

tokenadult wrote: post #2

I read the interesting submitted article and its comments right after it was submitted here on Hacker News. The worst argument in the world (a general FORM of argument) is described this way in the submitted article: "I declare the Worst Argument In The World to be this: 'X is in a category whose archetypal member has certain features. Therefore, we should judge X as if it also had those features, even though it does…

This idea pretends that all arguments turn on factual assertions - never framing or non sequiturs - and don't have any meaningful social context.

For example, in a public argument, if you get too far drawn into proof that you don't STILL beat your wife, you will inadvertently establish in the minds of the audience that you used to do so; moreover, your excess of protest may actually be taken as evidence that you do beat your wife.

If someone poses such framing you are really remiss not to address the framing or refuse to dignify such a malicious and dishonest line of argument with response.

Re: The Worst Argument In The World

#36

Post by roflcopter420 » Tue, Aug 28, 2012, 7:11 AM UTC

d4n3 wrote: post #30

breckinloggins wrote: post #13

The article could use some more neutral and left-leaning "Worst argument in the world (TWAITW)" examples. I'm fairly neutral politically, and the piece sounded left-biased to me. Note that I'm not stating my opinion here; the author even apologizes for it in the article. Perhaps he is simply at a loss for examples? We could help. Here's a neutral one (from the comments): - "George Washington was a traitor !" (should…

> but the creationist has a point that some of the more fantastic parts of evolution are harder to directly observe in the same way as, say, gravity. Honest question: which parts?

If we came from monkeys, why are the monkeys still there??

Re: The Worst Argument In The World

#37

Post by sakai » Tue, Aug 28, 2012, 7:12 AM UTC

I hate to say this, but I found this article absolutely terrible.

All of these "Martin Luther King IS ...", "George Washington WAS ...", etc. statements (form: Noun TO BE Adj.), really remind me of the arguments in favor of E-Prime and its associated benefits: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Prime. The author likely intended this, of course, but reinforces exactly the same kind of thinking and tone in nearly every other sentence! (Do a quick scan for the verb to be)

Some might call E-Prime a fairly extreme philosophy / didactic tool, to be sure ;), but one shouldn't overlook that this article undermined its very own core point ("don't make a certain class of categorical / binary Aristotelian statements") through its very language (e.g., the phrase 'Now, because most arguments are rapid-fire debate-club style, sometimes it's still useful to say "Affirmative action isn't racist!"').

Re: The Worst Argument In The World

#38

Post by losethos » Tue, Aug 28, 2012, 7:12 AM UTC

You get what you pray for. God says, "Kill the niggers, India-niggers first."

Re: The Worst Argument In The World

#39

Post by slurgfest » Tue, Aug 28, 2012, 7:13 AM UTC

angrycoder wrote: post #29

breckinloggins wrote: post #13

The article could use some more neutral and left-leaning "Worst argument in the world (TWAITW)" examples. I'm fairly neutral politically, and the piece sounded left-biased to me. Note that I'm not stating my opinion here; the author even apologizes for it in the article. Perhaps he is simply at a loss for examples? We could help. Here's a neutral one (from the comments): - "George Washington was a traitor !" (should…

I have two issues with your comment: 1) It is a blog post not a scientific study or an article in the newspaper. 2) Everyone knows republicans can't read.

You certainly aren't helping anyone on HN except Republicans with vapid remarks like 'republicans can't read'.

Re: The Worst Argument In The World

#40

Post by Xcelerate » Tue, Aug 28, 2012, 7:13 AM UTC

roflcopter420 wrote: post #36

d4n3 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but the creationist has a point that some of the more fantastic parts of evolution are harder to directly observe in the same way as, say, gravity. Honest question: which parts?

If we came from monkeys, why are the monkeys still there??

Humans and monkeys came from a common ancestor. The evolved independently from that point.