[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 48 KB, 468x417, Orwell.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4544977 No.4544977[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

"Wow fagtron you sure convinced me with those hot opinions," by George Orwell:

http://www.netcharles.com/orwell/essays/lear-tolstoy-and-the-fool.htm

Interesting bit. All the modern 4chan debate techniques are on view: "my opponent is an asshole and therefore his argument is invalid," "popular doesn't mean good," "popular doesn't mean bad either," "what you said was nonsense because I choose to willfully misinterpret what you said," it's all there. Even the /pol/ derail!

>> No.4544993

>"popular doesn't mean good," "popular doesn't mean bad either,"

are you saying these aren't logical arguments?

fallacies are not unique to 4chan either, in fact they'
re probably a bit less prevalent here than IRL

>> No.4544995

>>4544993
>fallacies are ... probably a bit less prevalent here than IRL
Unintentional ones, sure, but intentional logical fallacies are all the rage here.

>> No.4545001

>>4544995
so you're referring to the 'debate techniques' that 4chan users utilize when not actually attempting a legitimate debate?

>> No.4545086

>>4544993

>are you saying these aren't logical arguments?

No, I'm not. I'm saying they come up in debates on 4chan.

Are you using
>"what you said was nonsense because I choose to willfully misinterpret what you said"
?

>> No.4545093

Wow, Orwell does a pretty good /pol/ derail:

>The distinction that really matters is not between violence and non-violence, but between having and not having the appetite for power. There are people who are convinced of the wickedness both of armies and of police forces, but who are nevertheless much more intolerant and inquisitorial in outlook than the normal person who believes that it is necessary to use violence in certain circumstances. They will not say to somebody else, "Do this, that and the other or you will go to prison", but they will, if they can, get inside his brain and dictate his thoughts for him in the minutest particulars. Creeds like pacifism and anarchism, which seem on the surface to imply a complete renunciation of power, rather encourage this habit of mind. For if you have embraced a creed which appears to be free from the ordinary dirtiness of politics — a creed from which you yourself cannot expect to draw any material advantage — surely that proves that you are in the right? And the more you are in the right, the more natural that everyone else should be bullied into thinking likewise.