Sophistry is fun, yo!

[mahnmut]

Ya know, I can never help but express my utter fascination with the utter prowess in the theory of ethics demonstated by Philosophy PhD'ers and the like. Somehow, even put in situations of extreme stress such as the frequent moments of mental diarrhea (or even physiological one), or when suddenly pushed out of bed early in the morning, they're always able to wrap up the simplest of issues in an elaborate garment and make it look so fashionable, sparkly, and, you know, sophisticated.

If we could all just sit down, have some soft drinks and endlessly indulge in semantics, rhetorics and sophistry instead of cutting, you know, to the heart of issues in a comprehensive, simple, practical and effective way, the world would've been a much better place. Amirite? :-P

Comments

[abomvubuso.livejournal.com]

And yet, it can be a powerful rhetorical tool, as it tends to have tremendous effect on the weak of mind (and those who dont care enough to indulge into useless word battles). I mean, how could you possibly catch a creature which writhes away like a slithery eel? You just cant. But its fun to try - for a time :)

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Strangely enough, most of the time I prefer to be thought of (by people I may never meet) as weak of mind, than to indulge in useless word battles; life is much too short.....However you are correct in that it CAN be fun :D

[abomvubuso.livejournal.com]

You may be thought of whatever they like - by people who dont know you. Those who do, will know that you're actually of the "dont care enough to indulge in useless word battles" type :)

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

PREACH IT!

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

Sort of....some might say that the logicians were getting to the root of the matter, using the tools available to them.

Jargon is jargon, however. But getting politics students to understand a 'formal argument' can sometimes be difficult.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

How about dropping the "students" aspect from the equation altogether and talking about "people". There are people who genuinely want to dig to the bottom of an issue so they could understand it and maybe find some solutions to it. And then there are those who just feel like doing a verbal gargle on whatever issue you throw at them, with little real result - because that's just the thing they can do best.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

True, and I agree with you: but strictly speaking folk like essius and anosognosia aren't actually trolling sophists. If they point to a flaw in reasoning it's because it's there. In the real world, we accept the small (or large) inconsistencies between our actions and our respective moral/ethical stances under the broad category of 'realpolitik'. Students of morals and ethics often regard realpolitik with horror as a form of consequentialism.

Trying to tell a politics student, or a politician that the end doesn't justify the means will lead to aforementioned politics bod scratching his/her head in a lack of true comprehension: as politics is, as we know, the art of the possible.

We'll learn 'em, and they'll learn us [sic], and all parties may, with luck, profit from the association.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

I never mentioned anything about trolling. Like I said, we do what we do best. It just comes from within, or, in some cases, from outside, after having taken all the baggage of academia.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

I know you didn't mention trolling. I did. You merely mentioned sophistry. I included the notions of jargon and trolling, being somewhat familiar with rhetoric, which has little to do with ethics or morality, excepting in presentation via language.

I prefer natural language discussions: if it can't be explained without jargon, then there's not much point making an argument appealing to even otherwise informed and educated folk. This can make explaining some ideas in economics next-to-impossible, but never mind: we all have our crosses to bear. :)

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

Why is this circling around jargon? Do you by 'jargon' just mean 'ordinary people's language'?

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

Nah, by 'jargon' I mean the indefensible part of essius's prolixity.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

Brb much get a dictionary.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

Not even a 'HaHa'. Dammit, I must be slipping.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

Ugh, tell me about it. If there's one category of debaters who would be able to draw people out of their skin just by going on and on and on, it is those. It's like you're talking to a machine of random sentence generator type. Here. Choose a sentence.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

Hehe. My favorite moment is when I start seeing a list of prominent philosophers unraveling on my screen, with a brief summary of their respective set of beliefs and concepts. It's then that I literally start jizzing in my pants.

[kardashev.livejournal.com]

I personally like to avoid discussions based on ethics myself, even though Stanford University is pretty big on this. Especially as it relates to law.