"Post-digestive- nuggets" Erimitus
More Pics
The mind of God, Antarctica Joined: Jun 2009 |
| |
|
How do we counter a straw man arguement? Citizen: We should decriminalize marijuana.
Aunt Sally: No, any society with unrestricted access drugs loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification.
Citizen: ... | |
chaski
Stalker
| Dear Aunt Sally,
"They" tried to restrict alcohol, technically a "drug", and all it did was help create organized crime in the USA. The repercussion of which we suffer on a daily basis.
However, this topic (aka the decriminalize marijuana) has nothing whatever to do with "ethics".
It may or may not have to do with christian morality (even though the bible is silent on the topic of marijuana), but if your god is as powerful as the bible claims, he should be able to insert his influence to humans by way of some knowledge based input.... subtle knowledge based input that does not actually violate "free will".
Otherwise, you, Aunt Sally, are nothing more than a gullible dupe of your so called "conservative" beliefs.
However, since we are sitting down to Thanksgiving Dinner, a time when we should be sharing the bounty of our love and labor with each other with out judgment towards each other, would you like for me to pass you either another piece of apple pie with ice cream... or perhaps a glass go wine? |
Erimitus
| Dear Aunt Sally,
"They" tried to restrict alcohol, technically a "drug", and all it did was help create organized crime in the USA. The repercussion of which we suffer on a daily basis.
However, this topic (aka the decriminalize marijuana) has nothing whatever to do with "ethics".
It may or may not have to do with christian morality (even though the bible is silent on the topic of marijuana), but if your god is as powerful as the bible claims, he should be able to insert his influence to humans by way of some knowledge based input.... subtle knowledge based input that does not actually violate "free will".
Otherwise, you, Aunt Sally, are nothing more than a gullible dupe of your so called "conservative" beliefs.
However, since we are sitting down to Thanksgiving Dinner, a time when we should be sharing the bounty of our love and labor with each other with out judgment towards each other, would you like for me to pass you either another piece of apple pie with ice cream... or perhaps a glass go wine? (or perhaps a joint)
A straw man argument is, if I understand correctly, a diversion.
Citizen: Marijuana should be decriminalized.
Aunt Sally: There is a high crime rate in every place where marijuana has been decriminalized. Therefore legal marijuana causes crime.
Citizen: Every city with a high crime rate has a McDonalds, therefore McDonalds causes crime.
Note: Citizen has not offered any support for his position. His proposition should have a because and then his reasoning. Aunt Sally's argument is, of course, fallacious. |
Erimitus
| Citizen: We should decriminalize marijuana.
Aunt Sally: No, any society with unrestricted access drugs loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification.
Note: Citizen never said anything about unrestricted access to drugs. Aunt Sally is arguing against a proposition that was not presented.
How do we counter an argument like that? |
Komentenmelodie
| Straw man???
Is this just a debate on the various sides or legalizing maradge Juana?? |
Erimitus
| @Komentenmelodie Said
Straw man???
Is this just a debate on the various sides or legalizing maradge Juana??
No, we are discussing logical fallacies. Marijuana is only an example of something that could be argued for or against. It could have just as well been beer or guns. |
Komentenmelodie
| I am against the legalization of it except for severe medical purposes. I also think & I have seen it that there are more than enough lazy people in some workplaces without adding that into it. And in any case the stuff may well be there already irrelevant of the laws!!! |
chaski
Stalker
| @Erimitus Said
Citizen: We should decriminalize marijuana.
Aunt Sally: No, any society with unrestricted access drugs loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification.
Note: Citizen never said anything about unrestricted access to drugs. Aunt Sally is arguing against a proposition that was not presented.
How do we counter an argument like that?
Ok....
Aunt Sally, I 100% agree with you. Of course the "decriminalization" of marijuana would necessarily have a variety of restrictions ranging from age limits to quantity to location of purchase as well as restrictions on sale much like the sale of alcohol.
Still you make a great point... oh by the way, I need to top-off my drink, can I get you another glass of wine? |
Erimitus
| @chaski Said
Ok....
Aunt Sally, I 100% agree with you. Of course the "decriminalization" of marijuana would necessarily have a variety of restrictions ranging from age limits to quantity to location of purchase as well as restrictions on sale much like the sale of alcohol.
Still you make a great point... oh by the way, I need to top-off my drink, can I get you another glass of wine?
>Chuckle< |
cole
| Dear Aunt Sally,
I miss watching you on Worzel Gummidge. It was one of my favourite tv shows as a kid.
Now to the question at hand. Look at the damage Alcohol does, the many man hours lost in productivity due to people being ill/hungover after a heavy night on the sauce. Look at the medical cost the world over due to alcohol dependency. I would argue that this drug does far more damage than potentially any other drug in the world not just in medical terms to the dependent but also associated crime (DUI, murder while intoxicated, theft etc)
Smoking/Tobacco/Nicotine, again another widely abused drug that has massive implications around medical costs. A leading killer alone in UK with estimated 105k related deaths in 2015 Cancer Research UK
Both these drugs are responsible for more deaths than any other drug yet both are readily available. It has also been shown the medical marijuana has therapeutic uses for a variety of illnesses and has been used for thousands of years by a variety of cultures. |
Eaglebauer Moderator | The answer is by pointing out that it is a straw man argument and is only replacing the proposition put forth in the original contention with something unrelated to the argument.
It's not an a*****e move to tell someone they're using a straw man argument...it's an a*****e move to use one. |
Erimitus
| @Eaglebauer Said
The answer is by pointing out that it is a straw man argument and is only replacing the proposition put forth in the original contention with something unrelated to the argument.
It's not an a*****e move to tell someone they're using a straw man argument...it's an a*****e move to use one.
Citizen: We should decriminalize marijuana.
Aunt Sally: No, any society with unrestricted access drugs loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification.
Citizen: I did not say unrestricted access to drugs.
Aunt Sally: So now you are saying I am senile!
Citizen: No I did not say that.
Aunt Sally: Well you are just talking gibberish. You are too stupid to understand.
Citizen: (Q. what would be an appropriate response?) |
mrmhead
| Proposition: We should have tougher gun laws
(straw man) Argument: It is our 2nd amendment right to own firearms. YOU ARE NOT TAKING OUR GUNS AWAY!!! |
Eaglebauer Moderator | @Erimitus Said
Citizen: We should decriminalize marijuana.
Aunt Sally: No, any society with unrestricted access drugs loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification.
Citizen: I did not say unrestricted access to drugs.
Aunt Sally: So now you are saying I am senile!
Citizen: No I did not say that.
Aunt Sally: Well you are just talking gibberish. You are too stupid to understand.
Citizen: (Q. what would be an appropriate response?)
Citizen: No, I'm speaking about a specific issue and you're an a*****e for putting words in my mouth. Also, you have the aroma of a baboon with halitosis and explosive diarrhea. |
cole
| @mrmhead Said
Proposition: We should have tougher gun laws
(straw man) Argument: It is our 2nd amendment right to own firearms. YOU ARE NOT TAKING OUR GUNS AWAY!!! Isn't the full text something along the lines of a Right to bear arms to form militia armies? One surely must argue that there is not a need to form militias which were to protect against colonial English troops or marauding native Americans. Doesn't therefore give anyone a right to hold guns for other reasons or really just because they can.
Did anyone check that it's maybe just the right to have bare arms, you know so you can all top up your tans?
But yes looking at the straw man argument the proposer doesn't suggest taking guns away |
|