View Poll Results: Does Putin Have a Point in his Op-Ed?

Voters
43. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes he does

    17 39.53%
  • He's mostly right, but not on everything

    6 13.95%
  • Kinda...not always

    7 16.28%
  • Not really

    9 20.93%
  • No, stay out of our affairs!

    4 9.30%
Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112
Results 111 to 112 of 112

Thread: Does Putin Have a Point in his Op-Ed? [W:83]

  1. #111
    Whoa, daddy!
    MadLib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,225

    Re: Does Putin Have a Point in his Op-Ed? [W:83]

    Quote Originally Posted by ashurbanipal View Post
    I will never be convinced to accept that there's a valid use of the tu quoque. If there's something wrong with his argument, we can see it without reference to who is making it. That strikes me as one of those rare clear and distinct ideas that, once understood, is absolutely understood to be true.
    When assessing points made by politicians, there's never just the argument at play. Realpolitik and the art of manipulating are far more important to most world leaders than making an honest argument. If you design an argument in the right way, it can seem appealing but really can be harmful to those who follow it.

    As I said, Putin's dishonesty and hypocrisy don't make his argument illogical, but they should at least encourage you not to take what they say at face value.
    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Hah. If someone put me in their sig, I'd never know. I have sigs off.

  2. #112
    Guru
    ashurbanipal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    4,867

    Re: Does Putin Have a Point in his Op-Ed? [W:83]

    Quote Originally Posted by Madlib
    When assessing points made by politicians, there's never just the argument at play. Realpolitik and the art of manipulating are far more important to most world leaders than making an honest argument. If you design an argument in the right way, it can seem appealing but really can be harmful to those who follow it.

    As I said, Putin's dishonesty and hypocrisy don't make his argument illogical, but they should at least encourage you not to take what they say at face value.
    Well, I'm encouraged by my training in logic not to take it at face value anyway. I agree it's all too easy to manipulate people. The only defense is to stick as rigorously as possible to the proper evaluation of arguments. One pillar of such evaluation is that we should avoid fallacious replies. Putin may or may not have a good argument. We can figure out whether he does without reference to who he is. Plenty of people have had to learn this lesson the hard way.

    What you seem to have in mind is something like this: just because he says it, we shouldn't accept that it's factual. I agree. Questioning whether a premise is factual or not is part of the proper evaluation of an argument. Given what's at stake, the usual considerations about how to take testimony apply in scads here. But again, this is all just a matter of course as far as I'm concerned. It has nothing to do with who Putin is (consider, for example, that if Putin had argued that it's good for people to have fun once in a while, or something else relatively uncontroversial, we could pass over it without much comment).

Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •