Sun May 26, 2013, 08:00 AM

This can't be posted too often on a discussion web site, "The Ten Commandment of Rational Debate".

58 replies, 8146 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

58 replies	Author	Time	Post
This can't be posted too often on a discussion web site, "The Ten Commandment of Rational Debate". (Original post)	canoeist52	May 2013	OP
Good post.	kentuck	May 2013	#1
Lots of Internet posters leave the NOT out of that list,	MineralMan	May 2013	#2
Good advice.	Arkansas Granny	May 2013	#3
If these were adhered to, internet-wide...	annabanana	May 2013	#4
What about	Progressive dog	May 2013	#5
number 6 alone	skydive forever	May 2013	#6
What TV news shows?	pangaia	May 2013	#14
Burden of proof reversal	shawn703	May 2013	#7
Well, there goes DU	krispos42	May 2013	#8
I've seen the pit bull and guns arguments...	Dr Hobbitstein	May 2013	#16
The fried-chicken topic got so bad...	krispos42	May 2013	#28
I read through a lot of DU2 Fried Chicken posts earlier today...	Dr Hobbitstein	May 2013	#30
It might have been before my time as well.	krispos42	May 2013	#53
What's wrong with corn flake fried chicken?	dkf	May 2013	#51
I think only people that eat raw kittens like CFFC.	krispos42	May 2013	#54
Great list, but the author needs to drop the "s" in premises in #10.	SunSeeker	May 2013	#9
Great list, but #1 is slightly off.	ZombieHorde	May 2013	#10
I think it can also be misconstrued another way	booley	May 2013	#35
Good point. nt	ZombieHorde	May 2013	#36
Thamk you very much.	Stryder	May 2013	#11
Similar in some ways to the "argument pyramid"	JBoy	May 2013	#12
Great pyramid chart. This is my facebook political posting rule as well - top three only.	canoeist52	May 2013	#26
Everybody should study logic.	retired rooster	May 2013	#13
A List Of Fallacious Arguments	N_E_1 for Tennis	May 2013	#15
Thanks for the list.	SalviaBlue	May 2013	#17
Commandment 11	sulphurdunn	May 2013	#18
Thou shalt not claim . .	FairWinds	May 2013	#19
#10 has an error	SpankMe	May 2013	#20
DU would then have roughly 100 posts per year nt	Dreamer Tatum	May 2013	#21
LOL. Yup. And other boards would have even less.	SunSeeker	May 2013	#39
Nice collection of sensible statements	SpankMe	May 2013	#22
Pithy stuff. Thanks for this	Populist_Prole	May 2013	#23
Great post. Thank you.	cheapdate	May 2013	#24
one caveat.. use this list AT YOUR OWN PERIL in an argument with your spouse n/t	yodermon	May 2013	#25
My spouse has two rules of argument. One, there should never be an argument because she is, by	rhett o rick	May 2013	#37
K&R	G_j	May 2013	#27
The top two represent the worst of what can be seen from some posters: 1) ad hominem attacks and	AnotherMcIntosh	May 2013	#29
Yes, lots of those posts all the time. Nt	stevenleser	May 2013	#47
You know who else had lots of rules?	Nevernose	May 2013	#31
And you're demonstrating the fallacy, absurdus associationus. nm	rhett o rick	May 2013	#38
Godwins law, aka argumentum ad hitlerum (there is really such a thing)	stevenleser	May 2013	#48
Yes, but I only use it when I am desperate. nm	rhett o rick	May 2013	#52
Stolen for prosterity	ismnotwasm	May 2013	#32
I just wish that people would stop using the phrase "This begs the question"	Silver Swan	May 2013	#33
But #4 does not describe "begging the question" either.	longship	May 2013	#34
And the ignore list is your friend	nadinbrzezinski	May 2013	#40
11: Correcting a spelling error does not indicate superior knowledge or expertise.	lindysalsagal	May 2013	#41
Ah, feels like Meta.	freshwest	May 2013	#42
Doesn't it now?	kentauros	May 2013	#44
LOL! But playing dumb is your best defense with some people.	freshwest	May 2013	#45
I wouldn't say I'm "playing dumb" though.	kentauros	May 2013	#46
Yes!	freshwest	May 2013	#49
Nice list. I had better keep an eye on myself.	defacto7	May 2013	#43
how many fk up at the first one	Rise Rebel Resist	May 2013	#50
Everyone here would rather eat a raw turd than abide by those rules.	Savannahmann	May 2013	#55
Following these rules would most likely kill	sufrommich	May 2013	#56
Kick. A recent OP seemed to violate most of these. nt	stevenleser	May 2013	#57
Kick	stevenleser	May 2013	#58

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:05 AM

kentuck (100,941 posts)

1. Good post.

Thanks.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:07 AM

MineralMan (136,702 posts)

2. Lots of Internet posters leave the NOT out of that list,

and use it as a guide for discussion.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:11 AM

Arkansas Granny (29,037 posts)

3. Good advice.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:22 AM

annabanana (52,791 posts)

4. If these were adhered to, internet-wide...

The internet would be a quiet, quiet place.

And a lot more fun

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:28 AM

Progressive dog (6,213 posts)

5. What about

Thou shall not confuse opinion with fact.
Thou shall not confuse changing the subject with false dichotomy

Where can I contact this god of the internets and can I cite his commandments as part of my arguments?

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:41 AM

skydive forever (331 posts)

6. number 6 alone

Would shut down most TV news shows.

Reply to this post

Response to skydive forever (Reply #6)

Sun May 26, 2013, 09:51 AM

pangaia (24,324 posts)

14. What TV news shows?

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:46 AM

shawn703 (2,693 posts)

7. Burden of proof reversal

Seems to be a favorite tactic of people in religious circles.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 08:48 AM

krispos42 (48,844 posts)

8. Well, there goes DU

Especially about pit bulls, circumcision, guns, and corn flake fried chicken!

Reply to this post

Response to krispos42 (Reply #8)

Sun May 26, 2013, 10:17 AM

Dr Hobbitstein (6,568 posts)

16. I've seen the pit bull and guns arguments...

But I must've missed the corn flake fried chicken and circumcision ones.
Just read through a bit of them and realized you left a couple things off:
Breast Feeding and Olive Garden.

Reply to this post

Response to Dr Hobbitstein (Reply #16)

Sun May 26, 2013, 11:47 AM

krispos42 (48,844 posts)

28. The fried-chicken topic got so bad...

...Skinner had to ban the mention of fried chicken until the furor died down. Moderators on DU2 were, I understand, given "remove on sight" rules of engagement for fried-chicken threads, posts, and similar.

Circumcision seems to be an ongoing topic that draws attention, although I don't think it's gotten too bad as of late. The new juries and the "you can't post in the thread anymore after you've had a post removed" seem to quench the worst of the passions.

But a gun-toting woman eating corn-flake-breaded fried chicken in the Times Square Olive Garden while breastfeeding a circumcised pit bull and watching a space probe crash into the moon, after refusing to let the Target security guard check her bags, is sure to make the internet explode!

Reply to this post

Response to krispos42 (Reply #28)

Sun May 26, 2013, 12:13 PM

Dr Hobbitstein (6,568 posts)

30. I read through a lot of DU2 Fried Chicken posts earlier today...

And while some were funny, I don't get it. Was it one of those "no-true Scotsman" things? I've been a LONG TIME lurker on DU (since around 2002 or 2003 I think), but have only recently been posting. Back then, I only really saw political stuff, not too much OT discussion, so I missed out on the CFFC. I'd love to know a little history behind it.

Reply to this post

Response to Dr Hobbitstein (Reply #30)

Tue May 28, 2013, 07:22 AM

krispos42 (48,844 posts)

53. It might have been before my time as well.

I think the problem was the number of alerts generated, and that the mods had to sort through all of them and re-discuss everything all the time. I wasn't a mod at the time, though. I came into it later, just like you.

Reply to this post

Response to krispos42 (Reply #28)

Mon May 27, 2013, 02:36 AM

dkf (37,305 posts)

51. What's wrong with corn flake fried chicken?

Reply to this post

Response to dkf (Reply #51)

Tue May 28, 2013, 07:23 AM

krispos42 (48,844 posts)

54. I think only people that eat raw kittens like CFFC.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 09:03 AM

SunSeeker (44,151 posts)

9. Great list, but the author needs to drop the "s" in premises in #10.

Maybe #11 should be:

"Thou shalt not omit proofreading. (Teabagger sign folly)"

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 09:29 AM

ZombieHorde (29,047 posts)

10. Great list, but #1 is slightly off.

An ad hominem is more than just a personal attack. Just calling someone an asshole is not an ad hominem fallacy. The fallacy requires the personal attack to also be an attack against the argument.

"Rush Limbaugh is an asshole" is a personal attack, but not an ad hominem.

"We all know Limbaugh is an asshole, so we don't even need to consider his stance on X" is an ad hominem.

That's a crappy example, but I didn't get much sleep, so please cut me some slack.

Reply to this post

Response to ZombieHorde (Reply #10)

Sun May 26, 2013, 02:58 PM

booley (3,851 posts)

35. I think it can also be misconstrued another way

That if someone make s a poorly argued and cherry picked argument, that you can't accuse that person of being decieftful or intellectually lazy.

Take the rampant republican hypocrisy.

Hypocrisy on say, the IRS or investigating reporters doesn't necessarily mean there are no valid points.

But that hypocrisy would suggest that the arguer may not be making a valid point and should be given extra scrutiny.

Just my opinion though.

Reply to this post

Response to booley (Reply #35)

Sun May 26, 2013, 02:59 PM

ZombieHorde (29,047 posts)

36. Good point. nt

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 09:33 AM

Stryder (450 posts)

11. Thamk you very much.

I have a few FB buddies that can't seem to make a post without violating at least 4 of these.Especially #8,when regurgitating something from one the many pulled it out of their ass websites.
This will come in very handy.Now I can just reply with a number.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 09:35 AM

JBoy (8,020 posts)

12. Similar in some ways to the "argument pyramid"

Don't argue something if you can't do it in one of the top 3 levels

Reply to this post

Response to JBoy (Reply #12)

Sun May 26, 2013, 11:43 AM

canoeist52 (2,282 posts)

26. Great pyramid chart. This is my facebook political posting rule as well - top three only.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 09:39 AM

retired rooster (114 posts)

13. Everybody should study logic.

It's amazing how a little information about logic can expose pure b.s.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 09:56 AM

N_E_1 for Tennis (5,417 posts)

15. A List Of Fallacious Arguments

Interesting website explaining even more arguments.

http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html

This is the DU member formerly known as N_E_1 for Tennis.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 10:20 AM

SalviaBlue (2,676 posts)

17. Thanks for the list.

rec.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 10:29 AM

sulphurdunn (6,891 posts)

18. Commandment 11

Though shalt not introduce irrelevant information and claim it is relevant in order to divert attention from the original topic. (Red Herring Fallacy)

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 10:54 AM

FairWinds (1,717 posts)

19. Thou shalt not claim . .

that all opinions are of equal worth, that an uninformed - out the wazoo - opinion is as legitimate as a well-researched analysis.
It is not.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 11:03 AM

SpankMe (2,255 posts)

20. #10 has an error

"Premises" should be "premise".

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 11:07 AM

Dreamer Tatum (10,925 posts)

21. DU would then have roughly 100 posts per year nt

Reply to this post

Response to Dreamer Tatum (Reply #21)

Sun May 26, 2013, 09:19 PM

SunSeeker (44,151 posts)

39. LOL. Yup. And other boards would have even less.

Oops. Did I just violate #2?

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 11:07 AM

SpankMe (2,255 posts)

22. Nice collection of sensible statements

But, we're guilty of a few of these on our side, too. We should stay aware of these when posting.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 11:18 AM

Populist_Prole (5,364 posts)

23. Pithy stuff. Thanks for this

I see, hear, endure cons doing many of these when they argue.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 11:25 AM

cheapdate (3,811 posts)

24. Great post. Thank you.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 11:36 AM

yodermon (6,142 posts)

25. one caveat.. use this list AT YOUR OWN PERIL in an argument with your spouse n/t

Reply to this post

Response to yodermon (Reply #25)

Sun May 26, 2013, 03:07 PM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

37. My spouse has two rules of argument. One, there should never be an argument because she is, by

default, always correct. Two, should she ever be wrong.....wait, there is only one rule.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 11:45 AM

G_j (40,193 posts)

27. K&R

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 12:00 PM

AnotherMcIntosh (11,064 posts)

29. The top two represent the worst of what can be seen from some posters: 1) ad hominem attacks and

2) creating fictional statements and positions which they falsely attribute to others.

Reply to this post

Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #29)

Mon May 27, 2013, 12:37 AM

stevenleser (32,886 posts)

47. Yes, lots of those posts all the time. Nt

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 12:17 PM

Nevernose (13,081 posts)

31. You know who else had lots of rules?

Hitler and Stalin!

Reply to this post

Response to Nevernose (Reply #31)

Sun May 26, 2013, 03:08 PM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

38. And you're demonstrating the fallacy, absurdus associationus. nm

Reply to this post

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #38)

Mon May 27, 2013, 12:38 AM

stevenleser (32,886 posts)

48. Godwins law, aka argumentum ad hitlerum (there is really such a thing)

Reply to this post

Response to stevenleser (Reply #48)

Mon May 27, 2013, 09:05 AM

rhett o rick (55,981 posts)

52. Yes, but I only use it when I am desperate. nm

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 12:17 PM

ismnotwasm (40,010 posts)

32. Stolen for prosterity

I love this, and thank you

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 02:00 PM

Silver Swan (1,081 posts)

33. I just wish that people would stop using the phrase "This begs the question"

when they really mean, "This raises the question."

Reply to this post

Response to Silver Swan (Reply #33)

Sun May 26, 2013, 02:18 PM

longship (40,416 posts)

34. But #4 does not describe "begging the question" either.

Begging the question is specifically to presume the truth of the conclusion within the premise.

When one makes an argument, one must presume that ones premise is true. Falsifying the premise defeats an argument but does not necessarily defeat the conclusion; it only defeats the specific argument. The conclusion may still be true. That is decidedly not an example of "begging the question".

I would restate #4 as:
Thou shalt not assume the truth of your conclusion in your premise. ("Begging the Question"

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 09:27 PM

nadinbrzezinski (154,021 posts)

40. And the ignore list is your friend

Thanks, just saved that list

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2013, 09:39 PM

lindysalsagal (14,680 posts)

41. 11: Correcting a spelling error does not indicate superior knowledge or expertise.

It usually means the corrector has missed the point, entirely. And is annoying the hell out of everyone else.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Mon May 27, 2013, 12:08 AM

freshwest (53,661 posts)

42. Ah, feels like Meta.

Reply to this post

Response to freshwest (Reply #42)

Mon May 27, 2013, 12:18 AM

kentauros (29,414 posts)

44. Doesn't it now?

I'm so glad I never took a class in logic. That way, I can simply say, "Sorry, I don't understand what that is" and keep going

Reply to this post

Response to kentauros (Reply #44)

Mon May 27, 2013, 12:30 AM

freshwest (53,661 posts)

45. LOL! But playing dumb is your best defense with some people.

I took Logic, etc. classes in college, and was a natural for circuit logic at work. I consider neither require brainiacs.

As far as what 'is' is, I think the GOP has made Clinton perfectly coherent on that score.

Since they lie for a living, not just when upset, they have lost reality. The best reason to tell the truth to the best of one's ability, is the chance of discovery.

The GOP has been living in an alternative media reality so long, nothing is real anymore.

They remind me of Kate traveling with Petruchio, the discussion of the Sun and the Moon. You cannot win with them.

Reply to this post

Response to freshwest (Reply #45)

Mon May 27, 2013, 12:35 AM

kentauros (29,414 posts)

46. I wouldn't say I'm "playing dumb" though.

Some of the things in that list just went over my head. Maybe I'm too tired, but I know even when I'm not, some of that "logical argument" stuff simply doesn't make sense to me.

I prefer the simplest method of all: stick to the point!

Reply to this post

Response to kentauros (Reply #46)

Mon May 27, 2013, 12:39 AM

freshwest (53,661 posts)

49. Yes!

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Mon May 27, 2013, 12:13 AM

defacto7 (13,485 posts)

43. Nice list. I had better keep an eye on myself.

It also brings me to my signature. I hope I live up to it. I think it is sums up a lot of error in argumentation.

See below ↓

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Mon May 27, 2013, 12:44 AM

Rise Rebel Resist (88 posts)

50. how many fk up at the first one

(by point out did I too just break said rule?)

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Tue May 28, 2013, 07:29 AM

Savannahmann (3,891 posts)

55. Everyone here would rather eat a raw turd than abide by those rules.

On occasion, that would even include me.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Tue May 28, 2013, 07:59 AM

sufrommich (22,871 posts)

56. Following these rules would most likely kill

any online discussion group. I know most of us like to pretend we would prefer calm,rational discussions, but the most popular OPs on DU are never filled with polite discussion,nor is that true of any other online discussion web sites I've seen.

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Tue May 28, 2013, 03:38 PM

stevenleser (32,886 posts)

57. Kick. A recent OP seemed to violate most of these. nt

Reply to this post

Response to canoeist52 (Original post)

Thu May 30, 2013, 09:30 AM

stevenleser (32,886 posts)

58. Kick

Reply to this post

General Discussion (Forum)