Difference between revisions of "Throwing spaghetti"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (post-move update) |
Dredmorbius (talk | contribs) (→About: Added: Gish Gallop.) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
* [[rhetorical deception]], in that it encourages others to believe that the speaker has a valid case, given the large number of arguments the speaker presents. The fact that none of these arguments are actually valid may easily go unnoticed. | * [[rhetorical deception]], in that it encourages others to believe that the speaker has a valid case, given the large number of arguments the speaker presents. The fact that none of these arguments are actually valid may easily go unnoticed. | ||
* [[discussion trolling]], in that it derails a discussion with irrelevant arguments (i.e. arguments which consistently turn out to be invalid, and therefore an indication that the speaker is not working honestly towards a common understanding). | * [[discussion trolling]], in that it derails a discussion with irrelevant arguments (i.e. arguments which consistently turn out to be invalid, and therefore an indication that the speaker is not working honestly towards a common understanding). | ||
| + | * [[Gish gallop]]. From [http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_gallop RationalWiki]: "named after creationist Duane Gish, is the debating technique of drowning the opponent in such a torrent of half-truths, lies, and straw-man arguments that the opponent cannot possibly answer every falsehood in real time. The term was coined by Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education. Sam Harris describes the technique as 'starting 10 fires in 10 minutes.'" | ||
Revision as of 16:34, 25 December 2013
About
Throwing spaghetti is a rhetorical technique in which a large number of counter-arguments are issued in the hope that one or more of them will be seen as valid -- in other words, "throwing spaghetti at the wall until something sticks". It is made possible by reducing the amount of effort which goes into each argument, i.e. not checking for valid logic, previous refutation, or factuality; each argument just has to sound plausible enough not to be rejected prima facie (i.e. rejected as self-evidently wrong).
This technique is consistent with the view of arguments as soldiers, and inconsistent with the goals of rational discourse.
Spaghetti-throwing is arguably a form of:
- rhetorical deception, in that it encourages others to believe that the speaker has a valid case, given the large number of arguments the speaker presents. The fact that none of these arguments are actually valid may easily go unnoticed.
- discussion trolling, in that it derails a discussion with irrelevant arguments (i.e. arguments which consistently turn out to be invalid, and therefore an indication that the speaker is not working honestly towards a common understanding).
- Gish gallop. From RationalWiki: "named after creationist Duane Gish, is the debating technique of drowning the opponent in such a torrent of half-truths, lies, and straw-man arguments that the opponent cannot possibly answer every falsehood in real time. The term was coined by Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education. Sam Harris describes the technique as 'starting 10 fires in 10 minutes.'"