One of my FB "friends" (actually a relative) posted this on FB:
quote:
I want to introduce you to one of the most useful words in the English language. This word is the simple three-letter conjunction AND. Much of the polarization in our society is due to people failing to use that simple word. Let me give you some examples:
The treatment of George Floyd was disgraceful and worthy of severe punishment AND the looting and rioting is also disgraceful and the worthy of punishment.
People are misrepresenting COVID-19 to make it seem worse that it is AND people are misrepresenting COVID-19 to minimize it.
President Trump has done some vary good things in the areas of religious freedom around the world and prison reform AND he says several offensive or demonstrably untrue statements every week.
There is a well-documented liberal bias in the media AND the “alternative media” gives us a bunch of half-baked conspiracy theories and should never be trusted.
I could go on, but if you can’t look at each of these sentences and affirm the truths on both sides, you’re part of the problem.
This post infuriates me, and don't intend to respond in any way. However, my thoughts would be:
1) Murder and clear racism is despicable and happens way too much in the U.S. While of course looting and rioting (peaceful protests are legal) are wrong, this isn't an "AND" relationship.
2. 100,000 deaths? Highly contagious? Ravaging the elderly and those with comorbidities? Unpredictability of symptoms or no symptoms? No treatment or vaccine? Overwhelming our ICUs, ventilators and PPE? That's misrepresenting it as being worse than it is?
3. Really???
4. This "well-documented bias" is conservative propaganda. (I still blame the NYT, certainly considered liberal, for Hillary's loss with their relentless reporting of her emails - when in the end she did nothing wrong and nothing any different from Ivanka Trump. We haven't heard much about the latter, have we?)
I was thinking clever Wordcrafters would be able to come up with a much snappier retort. Any tries? (If good enough, I might post it!)This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kalleh,
May 30, 2020, 21:32
BobHale
How about
"There are people who use words to communicate intelligent, well-reasoned positions AND there are people who use words to communicate specious, clearly fallacious positions."
1. False equivalence (The "apples and oranges" fallacy) 2. Baseless assertion (Stating facts is not "misrepresenting". Stating lies is.) 3. Strawman argument ("Don't look at that, look at this.") 4. Ipse dixit (Well documented only by those who want it to be true） 5. Ad hominem argument. (Attack the messenger if you don't like the message.)
.This message has been edited. Last edited by: BobHale,
"No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money." Samuel Johnson.
June 02, 2020, 12:17
bethree5
Excellent snappy answers from Bob, he pretty much covered it.
Nathan Robinson has a thought-provoking essay on the first proposition.
June 03, 2020, 01:10
BobHale
An excellent article though I still think my analysis was more succinct.
"No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money." Samuel Johnson.
Love your response, Bob! I wish I could add it anonymously. Unfortunately, the original poster is my brother. He got 10 likes, and one from one of my sisters (not the other, who tends more toward my political views). He also got three stupid comments, all say it was well done.