It's also a straw man to imply that I've said that the Soros conspiracy theories are ONLY antisemitic. The most common ones are, and many have an antisemitic overlay, but then there are ones that aren't.
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @MarkHoofnagle and
There is a difference bt an inference and a straw man. And considering you seem to be convinced that trumps talk of Dems and caravans was automatically linked to soros and anti semitism and not just trumps typical BS. even though he never even mentioned soros, I don’t believe
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PrestonLewis8 @gorskon and
It's not causation. You may want to look at extremist formations while you study up on the history of antisemitism. For starters, look up stochastic terrorism. Also, this: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/10/squirrel-hill-shooting-trump-anti-semitism-america.html …
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @balupuppy @gorskon and
Interesting you bring up stochastic terrorism Bc that would further support the idea that this event probably had multiple things that incited it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PrestonLewis8 @balupuppy and
And lastly using slate as evidence doesn’t really help support your claim when you are trying to convince others this isn’t just partisan politics. Are we going to cite the jacobin and Fox News next?
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
“Slate” as evidence is a bullshit poisoning the well argument. That’s Dahlia Lithwick. You’d be hard pressed to find as respected a legal commentator and this fits a pattern of brusque dismissal of expertise. Here’s a piece by Ioffe. Don’t dismiss it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/outlook/2018/10/28/how-much-responsibility-does-trump-bear-synagogue-shooting-pittsburgh/#click=https://t.co/P7G4vqmqX8 …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
She is also deeply partisan. Being an expert in a certain field doesn’t mean you are above the partisan fray.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PrestonLewis8 @MarkHoofnagle and
And no if you are expecting me to bow down to appeals to authority that isn’t going to happen. Especially when what is presented is opinion pieces with vague evidence at best that seem more like they are searching for connections rather than actually providing them.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
These are people with experience with anti jewish pogroms, with experience under regimes like Putin that used rhetoric to incite violence against political opponents. We don’t have RCTs on political rhetoric and incitement of violence (impossible expectations)this is what we got.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MarkHoofnagle @PrestonLewis8 and
If your personal epistemology rejects human experience as invalid we can’t help you.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
I'm beginning to think that Preston is beyond evidence now. Appeal to authority is not necessarily a logical fallacy when the authority is a legitimate authority; sometimes it's a useful shorthand for what we know.
-
-
that is literally when it is the definition of a logical fallacy. When you start making arguments that someone is right Bc they have more expertise that is the definition of a fallacy. How much expertise is completely irrelevant wrt to whether it is a fallacy.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Your response goes to show that your understanding of skepticism is very shallow indeed.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.