(March 8, 2015 at 5:35 am)robvalue Wrote: I was going to mention something that sort of falls into this category.
The only time I'd personally use a fallacy or be "dishonest" would be as a way of mirroring and highlighting what my opponent is doing.
Take the popular shitty apologetic "argument" where they get you to admit to solipsism, then claim it doesn't apply to them because they get their information direct from God. It's a slimy dishonest tactic, it's not an argument, it's intended to confuse the opponent.
So to deal with it, when they ask me, "Could you be wrong about everything you think you know?" I would say, "I'm happy to answer that question right after you do." And whatever answer they give, yes or no, I'll give the same answer. That way they can't undermine my position without admitting to the problems with their own position. If they won't answer the question, then neither will I.
The oldest of tactics , you cant lose a game of Tic-Tac-Toe if you force your opponent to move first !
Doc
