"Red Herrings" & PS

[the_mother_thing]

Out of respect, I didn't want to detract from another thread topic with this, and I didn't take the specific comment aimed at me personally, so I am not angry or on a 'high horse', so to speak. And this is not intended to be directed at that person either. But this allegation has been directed at me on here in the past, and I thought - in the interest of trying to enable understanding - it worth clarifying at least MY perspective on it. I won't speak for anyone else.

And for clarity, per Wikipedia:

A red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important issue. It may be either a logical fallacy or a literary device that leads readers or audiences towards a false conclusion.

FTR, if I introduce a scenario or comparison in a conversation about something, it is NOT intended to detract from or alter paths on the discussion in any way; rather, it is done to support a perspective, a thought process, much like one might post a link to a study or article that supports their position. And in some cases, the point and comparison I make is to specifically call out blatant or perceived hypocrisies. This is a pet peeve of mine, and it frustrates me (not to the point of losing sleep, mind you). My reason for doing so is not to deflect focus, but to hopefully elicit a reasonable or valid explanation and understanding of why something stated is not hypocritical.

Just because someone says something "is", does not make it fact or right - myself included.

That is all.

 

[Matata]

Jenn, linking this here as it lists logical fallacies (including Red Herring) typically used in discussion as well as the benefit/disadvantage of their use. Perhaps it will clarify for you the reasons some don't appreciate their use in discussion.
https://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html

 

[the_mother_thing]

Jenn, linking this here as it lists logical fallacies (including Red Herring) typically used in discussion as well as the benefit/disadvantage of their use. Perhaps it will clarify for you the reasons some don't appreciate their use in discussion.
https://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html

I appreciate the read, Matata; thank you.

It's not my goal to cause others any sort of 'intellectual frustration' in discussions; however, I also don't view discussions in hangout quite as formal or rigidly as 'debates to be won'; rather, they're just discussions ... opportunities to exchange ideas, share opinions, and learn from or at the very least understand others' views. If I wasn't open to those things, I wouldn't bother participating.

At the risk of possibly committing argumentum ad verecundiam, perhaps those who suffer intellectual frustration missed this, which I really couldn't put any better:

Intolerant snobs insist everyone is, and posts, just like them.
Not everyone wants/needs/cares to be a "properly-speaking intellectual" all the time.
Shame on you who want to silence those you consider inferior to you.

People vary.
Some don't have a stick up their @ss.
Some posters may want to lighten up and have some fun.
Some may resent the oppressive insistence that we all pause before hitting the post button to proofread our post for adequate intellectual content.

I welcome everyone posting whatever they want, within TOS of PS.
AFAIC, even low-IQ folks are as welcome here at PS as the geniuses with several advanced degrees from the top universities, and conversational manners befitting posh high afternoon tea at The Ritz, London.

What's next, an IQ test and credential verification before being granted posting privileges in the most rarified intellectual forum on the Internet?

I'm detecting the foul odor of intolerance and superiority.

 

[ruby59]

Jenn, linking this here as it lists logical fallacies (including Red Herring) typically used in discussion as well as the benefit/disadvantage of their use. Perhaps it will clarify for you the reasons some don't appreciate their use in discussion.
https://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html

I appreciate the read, Matata; thank you.

It's not my goal to cause others any sort of 'intellectual frustration' in discussions; however, I also don't view discussions in hangout quite as formal or rigidly as 'debates to be won'; rather, they're just discussions ... opportunities to exchange ideas, share opinions, and learn from or at the very least understand others' views. If I wasn't open to those things, I wouldn't bother participating.

At the risk of possibly committing argumentum ad verecundiam, perhaps those who suffer intellectual frustration missed this, which I really couldn't put any better:

Intolerant snobs insist everyone is, and posts, just like them.
Not everyone wants/needs/cares to be a "properly-speaking intellectual" all the time.
Shame on you who want to silence those you consider inferior to you.

People vary.
Some don't have a stick up their @ss.
Some posters may want to lighten up and have some fun.
Some may resent the oppressive insistence that we all pause before hitting the post button to proofread our post for adequate intellectual content.

I welcome everyone posting whatever they want, within TOS of PS.
AFAIC, even low-IQ folks are as welcome here at PS as the geniuses with several advanced degrees from the top universities, and conversational manners befitting posh high afternoon tea at The Ritz, London.

What's next, an IQ test and credential verification before being granted posting privileges in the most rarified intellectual forum on the Internet?

I'm detecting the foul odor of intolerance and superiority.

I need to start reading Kenny's posts more carefully. He makes a lot of sense.