| Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
June 2, 2015 - 4:50am
#1
A Skeptic's Handbook
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 StereophileAVTech Media Americas Inc., USA
All rights reserved
This one actually is the most common logical fallacy here on these fora, if I can be so bold, without mentioning any names (Michael)...
Personal Attack (Argumentum Ad Hominem, literally, "argument toward the man." Also called "Poisoning the Well"): Attacking or praising the people who make an argument, rather than discussing the argument itself. This practice is fallacious because the personal character of an individual is logically irrelevant to the truth or falseness of the argument itself. The statement "2+2=4" is true regardless if is stated by criminals, congressmen, or pastors. There are two subcategories:
(1) Abusive: To argue that proposals, assertions, or arguments must be false or dangerous because they originate with atheists, Christians, Muslims, communists, capitalists, the John Birch Society, Catholics, anti-Catholics, racists, anti-racists, feminists, misogynists (or any other group) is fallacious. This persuasion comes from irrational psychological transference rather than from an appeal to evidence or logic concerning the issue at hand. This is similar to the genetic fallacy, and only an anti-intellectual would argue otherwise.
(2) Circumstantial: To argue that an opponent should accept or reject an argument because of circumstances in his or her life. If one's adversary is a clergyman, suggesting that he should accept a particular argument because not to do so would be incompatible with the scriptures is such a fallacy. To argue that, because the reader is a Republican or Democrat, she must vote for a specific measure is likewise a circumstantial fallacy. The opponent's special circumstances have no control over the truth or untruth of a specific contention. The speaker or writer must find additional evidence beyond that to make a strong case. This is also similar to the genetic fallacy in some ways. If you are a college student who wants to learn rational thought, you simply must avoid circumstantial fallacies.
Cheers,
Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica
Thanks for posting this...reading this helped me crystalize my thinking around one or two particular issues and why I am so vehemently opposed to these issues. It is the lack of a foundational argument that bugs me as the methods above are being implemented to manipulate rather than persuade.
I like this.
logical fallacies are OK, but -while a popular exercise in debate- i find it hard to extrapolate their meaning from a debate about absolute truths in philosophy to something as private and self-indulging as audio.
i think it'd be fun to run some sort of online questionnaire to ask audiophiles "how much do you care about others' validation?", because personally i know what works for me, i dont expect it to work for anyone else, and that's all.
You know when I read through stuff like this (didn't read it all), I wonder how people can put so much time into words, when they could actually be "doing" the hobby of listening. Manipulate is something to do with the lips and keyboard (non-doers), successful listening is something to do with the ears, whole body, mind and system, first, then the expression of joy.
People who can't "practice" listening usually practice the art of internet trolling on many of these audiophile forums I have noticed. This thread is a good example of this and has the appropiate host in geoff kait who is involved with more fraud & scam, rip off reports and skeptic forums and threads than perhaps anyone in the hobby.
The weird part to me is Geoff has not mentioned, yet, one of his favorites "the backfire effect".
I wish you success with this thread Geoff, your certainly a great "practical application" example for us.
As for the most of us though, don't you think we'd rather be listening to music? I do, and am.
have a great weekend
michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/
Let me summarize your position for you. Blah, blah, blah, blah, and more blah.
Not sure what psychological issues drive you to feel as if you really must SOIL EVERY SINGLE THREAD with your angst and tears.
Cheerios,
Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica
I think instead of repeating my position you and the readers might want to look at Randi's
here's Randi and what he does
http://www.bing.com/search?q=the+amazing+randi&pc=Z161&form=ZGAIDF&install_date=20111120&iesrc=IE-SearchBox
here's geoff and what he does according to Randi
http://www.bing.com/search?q=geoff+kait+fraud&FORM=AWRE
I don't see any angst & tears by anyone but you geoff. It appears there might be some folks over the last 15 or so years who would love to contribute to your skeptic point of view, but all these guys seem to be skeptical of you first and foremost.
It's interesting that you are always here on these audio forums, but when asked to listen to music you say
Michael, Pretty sure you don't know who Randi even is otherwise you might be a little reluctant to use him in your smear campaign against me. Randi ran out of dowsers and spoon Benders to go after in his quest to trap folks who claimed some sort of paranormal power. Then he had the brilliant idea to go after Audiophiles, in particular Wellfed (Intelligent Chip), me on a whole bunch of issues like the Clever Clock and the Teleportation Tweak, as well as Michael Fremer of Stereophile magazine on the issue of expensive high end cables. As I recall there were five Randi newsletters with a section on yours truly.
I can certainly understand WHY Randi went after audiophiles. But Randi's lapdogs were a little bit over zealous in their quest to dig up the dirt. Kind of like you, now that I think about it. Are you trying to be The new Amazing Randi? The Amazing Michael? I like it. Has a good ring to it. So, let's summarize. Randi's a big liar, Rip of Report is a big liar and you my fluffy haired friend are a big liar.
Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica
Nt