JDMTheGreat Posted March 28, 2018 Posted March 28, 2018 As I've studied more and more philosophy I find myself drawn further into the inner workings of sophistry. I understand it's really just about winning an argument at any cost, it's thought that's where lawyers first started. So my question is can it be used for good? Like a weapon used in self defense because it could win arguments. Or is it in the same camp as waging war in that no matter how Noble the idea it's not a good thing to do because it will lead to further acts of evil, steps down the dark road so to say. I'm still not sure what I think on it feedback would be great.
MercurySunlight Posted March 28, 2018 Posted March 28, 2018 If we're the one on the receiving end, I think it pushes us to think and strengthen our arguments and/or position on any particular topic. Adversity can make us sharper and stronger in the long run. It can drive us to explore new paths we might not have explored without the gauntlets sophistry throws down to block forward progress. I've participated in forums where all opposition was driven out. It became boring when the participants finished their back slapping and high fives. Agree that in our own hands, it can become a weapon. I suppose it could be viewed as a temporary tool. Slippery slope.
Dylan Lawrence Moore Posted March 28, 2018 Posted March 28, 2018 If you identify someone being a sophist with you, don't be reasonable in return. You lose by default. I break down why in this video:
JDMTheGreat Posted March 28, 2018 Author Posted March 28, 2018 So could sophistry be part of a tool set for a group of critics that are in service to the larger community by constantly looking for weaknesses in others arguments? People aware of the issue if a slippery slope and are vigilant about it should be able to stay upright so to say.
ofd Posted March 28, 2018 Posted March 28, 2018 Can you give us an example where you used sophistry succesfully?
JDMTheGreat Posted March 28, 2018 Author Posted March 28, 2018 I'm still in more theoretical realm right now but in every day conversation I find it very easy to use, and maybe it's just the people I'm around but there doesn't seem to be very many ill effects, but I also notice all sorts of people will use sophist tactics in every day conversation. It's whole point is to be as convincing as possible it doesn't care if that's emotional it logical or any other way really.
JDMTheGreat Posted March 29, 2018 Author Posted March 29, 2018 21 hours ago, Dylan Lawrence Moore said: If you identify someone being a sophist with you, don't be reasonable in return. You lose by default. I break down why in this video: That's great to hear, but I don't find myself being to reasonable I think I may have the other problem where since I've started studying and recognising sophistry I find it very easy to use and even have caught myself unconsciously using it. It works and again I'm probably just around people who are open to the ideas I have about a free market society and a low to no government country. But I'm far more interested in wondering if it can be a tool for good people or will it lead to the dark side a slippery slope as mentioned before.
RichardY Posted March 29, 2018 Posted March 29, 2018 "Man is the measure of all things." The purpose of the argument is to compare to an external standard of truth. Sophistry to satiate desire.
RichardY Posted April 4, 2018 Posted April 4, 2018 Be interesting to hear what people think about Conscientiouness as way of being in the world. There are a few videos of Jordan Peterson referring to conscientiousness as a key personality trait being unexpected and that Intelligence not being correlated with Industriousness and Orderliness as being weird, suggested something to do with how different people process information. The problem with Conscientiousness - Jordan Peterson YOUTUBE What I mean by that is how is the I constructed; whether that perhaps maybe relative to others, or despite/independent of others. The former being imo low conscientiousness and the other high conscientiousness, Chaos and Order respectively. maybe technique to go from one to another. Fairly few number of archetypal characters, Loki & Thor, Kane & Abel, Sith & Jedi. Although often the low conscientious ones get made out to be the bad guy. Though not always the case: "let that be your last battlefield." (a Star Trek episode), Peter Pan & Cpt Hook. "I am Legend" a story I recently listened to on audible, has the protagonist Robert Neville (High Conscientiousness) facing off against the vampires, in the end though, dieing and recognising his faults. His last thought being I am Legend. I think sophistry has it limits, unless perhaps you are appealing more to a wider base. Could try the Jedi Mind trick thing though, or maybe something similar to "No country for Old men". I think low conscientiousness is more in line with Habit, High Conscientiousness Willpower. To master both though would be incredible. Having listened to Trumps book "The Art of the Deal", I would infer he has skills in both. There might be a downside in being Very High in Conscientiousness, Blindsided/Stubborn. Very Low Conscientiousness, Fragmented personality.
barn Posted April 4, 2018 Posted April 4, 2018 Hi thinkers and alike, Big homework, not for the faint hearted... (I wish to become more than a faint hearted individual... sooner, the better...) If it's just 1% true that "ideas have people" and NOT the other way around, much of the approaches (rooted in individualism) are in vain. Couple that with transcendental values and you are looking at a way longer conversation that a mere lifetime can offer you... So, yeah... sophistry is always going to be a temporary phenomenon.
ofd Posted April 4, 2018 Posted April 4, 2018 Quote I'm still in more theoretical realm right now but in every day conversation I find it very easy to use What are some areas where you want to use it?
Siegfried von Walheim Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 In many ways we are who we act. I have always valued straight-forwardness and honesty growing up and as you might imagine, considering that, I really suck at deliberate lying and mischaracterizing of others. However given the eye-for-an-eye nature of survival in politics and all things connected to its tentacles it is necessary some of us (like Stefpai, Jordan Peterson, or Cernovich) get good at getting low-down and dirty since it is necessary to win over the low IQ types that are more darwinistic and mammalian than the bookish or high IQ types. As a rule I treat like for like but I do not deliberately engage when I know it's not going to be a "fair fight" as it brings out some of the worst in me (to use sophistry on one hand or be tempted with force in the other) and I'd rather keep my hands clean when I am not literally in a fight (as compared to a private or public or semi-public debate).
Will 001 Posted April 5, 2018 Posted April 5, 2018 On 3/28/2018 at 8:30 AM, JDMTheGreat said: So my question is can it be used for good? Yes. How about Trump winning the presidency as an example? He used appeals to emotion, personal attacks, the social proof fallacy, charisma, and humor to name a few strategies.
Recommended Posts