There’s a variation to this that seems to say something like:
“You obviously can’t understand the viewpoint of someone who’s been mugged by an albino panhandler while skateboarding in Tahiti because you’ve never been mugged by an albino panhandler while skateboarding in Tahiti.”
I call this The “If You Were Me You’d Think Like Me” Argument.
A related, but slightly different one:
“You didn’t like Fight Club? Then go watch Bio-Dome, you taste-lacking idiot.”
Or,
“Well unlike you, I liked Tomb Raider, but then I wasn’t expecting it to be Citizen Kane.”
You too? I was terrified when he took my skateboard. Must be a crime wave there.
OOh! I just thought of another one! (BTW: Great suggestions, folks. Hopefully this thread’ll be useful in the future.)
I call this one The Fallacy of the Excluded Loser:
“You’re only saying that because I’m a new poster with a low post-count. I don’t belong to the clique! I’m not part of your little group! You all have a hivemind and I’m an independant thinker!”
Fenris
Using the Label Gun
Calling someone or some idea a label instead of making any sort of point or offering proof.
i.e.
That is just more PC crap! (insert roll eyes smile)
You Nazi!
Throwing a lable on something does not win an arguement.
The double-edged sword of:
“You only like <popular thing> because you’re jumping on the bandwagon.”
vs.
“You only dislike <popular thing> because you’re trying to be cool.”
You can adjust as necessary for unpopular things.
Just for fun I’d like to categorize a few of the “auto-lose” scenarios more generally:
THE BACKFILL DEFENSE
From Fenris:
It was just an experiment
I was only joking
From CrankyAsAnOldMan:
Difficult life events are to blame
From Green Bean:
It’s just a rant
From imapunha:
Run away and lie
LASHING OUT/MARTYRDOM
(lumped together since they seem to often act in conjunction with each other)
From Fenris:
It’s the mods’ fault
It’s your fault
Get a life
Fallacy of the excluded loser
From Trion:
You are too PC
I will pray for you, rude bastards
From Ethilrist:
Others have been supported, but I haven’t
From Arden Ranger:
The secret clique
LOGICAL HOLES
From Fenris:
Appeal to invisible authority
From Waverly:
Hoaxes invalidate science
Appeal to ignorance
From tdn:
All or nothing
TUNNEL VISION
From Legomancer:
Statistics are invalid because they don’t match with my experience
From Legomancer:
My sources are unbiased, yours are biased
From Slip Mahoney:
I saw it, you didn’t
From Trion:
If you were me, you’d think like me
There were some I wasn’t sure of… 
##: Selectivity of cites: “Yes, your World Health Organization and UN sponsored scientific studies are all well and good, but take a look at what The Society for Advanced Bigotry reports…”
##: The slipperiest of slopes: “If convicted felons aren’t allowed to have anti-aircraft batteries for home protection, the next thing you know jack-booted thugs will be going door to door confiscating toaster ovens.”
##: Blast your cold, bleak world: “Belief in ESP, Alien visitation, miracles, etc. makes the world a warmer more interesting place. I pity you that you can’t open your heart enough to believe.”
##: Watch your step and please move to the extreme right or left: A new one that is quite bothering me as of late. A subset of the false dichotomy where the world is black and white, the answers easy, and anyone not sharing your view is the enemy.
##: Logic deafness: Ignoring posts containing valid points to discuss tangential points, pick the low hanging fruit of less damaging posts, or argue semantics.
I’ll add a category in addition to my sock-sorting above (no relation to the puppet type of sock, though it could be):
Reiteration Escalation
Ignore others’ arguments, restating your original argument with the exact same words
– using ALL CAPS, bold, italics, any or all at once in any combination in a sentence
–using lots of !!! and ???
throw in ad hominem as seasoning, and there you have it. Yum!
#:“Don’t know, don’t care. They’re outside the bounds of civilized discourse.”
#:“There may or may not be more to their reasoning, but what’s the point? The reasons I listed are deal-breakers.”
#:“I won’t even discuss the possibility of the consideration of the merest hint of the thought of compromise on any of those points.”
#: “It’s (something) that I’ve heard from ------ and those sorts for years.”
“You just need to take your head out of your anal cavity.”
“You OBVIOUSLY have poor reading comprehension skills, and are too stupid to understand the exceedingly vague statement I made, and someone of your low character and intellectual capacity should NOT be in your chosen occupation.”
“No it isn’t, you idiot. I’m right.” followed by “You don’t like my insult? Take it to the pit, while I continue to insult people who disagree with me.”
Waverly where the hell have you been? Selectivity (I especially have been fond of the links to Amazon.com sales pages for a book written by columnists), and the
‘let’s ignore the most cogent of all responses and questions, and pare up the offering by nimrod of the month’!! great ones.
(although, gee, I never seem to tire of those infinate ways to refer to pot/kettles :rolleyes: )
Thanks. Where have I been? With 300 and some odd posts in just under two months I’d say I’ve been all too visible around here. My verbosity and opinion are legion.
I’d stop short of calling myself an expert, but I’m fairly conversant in the tools of critical thinking and proper scientific technique. I’ve seen some of the best examples (and a few of the worst) during my short time here.
Now this is a funny thread! And if you don’t think so, then you have a defective sense of humor!
I’ve lost count of numbers, but I will nominate:
Argument by Occult Withholding: “My position only looks that way because there are many extremely complex and nuanced factors to it that I cannot discuss because of, A: there are things that simply aren’t allowed to be discussed here; B: the factors are so complex and nuanced that they can’t possibly be explained in anything less than an accreditted ten-year Ph.D. program; C: other factors that are similarly nuanced and complex.”
Thanks for pointing another one out, leander!
All your examples of this particular excuse are good, but let’s use the first one as an object example. In context, the orignial quote went
You’ve provided us with a series of perfect examples of the Out of context quotes are my friend excuse!
Fenris
Has argument by martyrdom been mentioned?
“Oh, God forbid I dare question the conventional wisdom…”
or
“They called Gallileo a fool as well…”
Basically it boils down to “I must be right because everyone else disagrees with me.”
Waterj2, you bastard! You stole my fallacy!
“They laughed at Galileo, they laughed at Columbus, they laughed at the Wright brothers, and now you’re laughing at me. That just proves how advanced my thinking is!”
“Yep, because no one believes me, because every scientist in the civilized world disagrees, that proves I’m right! You are all stuck in the Old Paradigm, and until you change your paradigm you’ll never see that I’m right. If only you changed your mind and agreed with me, you’d agree with me.”
While once in a blue moon I read a response that makes me think that perhaps the person has read the post in question and missed or misunderstood something, for the most part the Dopers know how to read.
Usually the “go back and read my post” translates as “My word on this subject is the absolute be all and end all of any discussion, so I’m going to stick my fingers in my ears and say NA NA NA NA NA whenever anyone else tries to raise a point or ask for more clarification.”
