EPTOr am I still just a 1k post count noob?
Arguing on Teamliquid - Page 2
| Blogs > Bippzy |
|
AnachronisticAnarchy
United States2957 Posts
Or am I still just a 1k post count noob? | ||
|
Bippzy
United States1466 Posts
On August 10 2012 09:32 BajaBlood wrote: Although this is a very-well written post, I don't think it will by itself have a major impact on the quality of posting, because the people that aren't already arguing in a reasonable manner seem to me to be the least likely to change their habits in the face of new information. Sorry, couldn't resist Great post, hope others take it to heart. Haha yeah, but I just wanted to lay it out there, to say that I tried. On August 10 2012 09:40 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote: What reputation have I built up for myself? Or am I still just a 1k post count noob? Haha sorry bro but I haven't heard of you, here's an autograph *wink* | ||
|
Aerisky
United States12129 Posts
 Regarding the nationality thing, as you know it might vary from person to person. For some reason I have noticed a lot of posters from France/Netherlands being very abrasive, for instance, but not any from Germany. Eventually I just decided that it's the posts I end up seeing--I'm sure there are plenty of bad/good posters from every nation and I ultimately mostly disregarded the country tag in terms of preconceived notions and whatnot (I'm sure you don't hold any either, I'm just saying). | ||
|
ggrrg
Bulgaria2716 Posts
However, you also made one of the worst mistakes one can do: generalizing. You made a baseless claim supported solely by anecdotal evidence. While you claim that you have experienced that German posters are condescending, I can just as well claim that German posters seem to be more intelligent on average than any other group on TL, which results in their posts often being perceived as condescending by the uneducated masses. I could just as well add that I have confirmed this fact on countless occassions since I've been on TL. Furthemore, since I am a veteran on TL compared to you my observations hold more merit than yours... and so on and so forth... Do not generalize based on nationality! Do not use stereotypes! | ||
|
LlamaNamedOsama
United States1900 Posts
On August 10 2012 06:10 micronesia wrote: When I learned the same thing, it included a warrant, which is the reason why whatever you are discussing is important. It might not always be necessary to point it out explicitly, as this isn't an essay. The OP seems to be applying a helper-english essay framework to general argumentation, which is fine (after all, theses are ultimately core arguments of written works), but yeah, the actual standard structure of an argument is Claim (what you're arguing), Warrant (why what you're arguing is true), and Impact (why it matters). The "although" of the OP is just a teaching guide to help students focus on more substantial theses that actually respond to possible opposing claims, rather than going with the easy/obvious/blandly descriptive thesis, and in an actual structured argument, it would normally be where you signpost the argument that you are responding to. I disagree with the OP's burden of proof claim - while not a criminal court, the standard function of argumentation demands that every legitimate argument at the very least contain a claim, warrant, and impact - the burden of proof challenge is the demand that a person has not met the sufficient warrant for their claim, and it is always the burden of the arguer to support every claim that they make. It is true, though, that this sort of challenge is a weaker argument than simply providing a counterargument, since you're simply needling the opponent's claim rather than developing the substance of your own. In fact, "no warrant" responses are pretty much the weakest responses possible in a debate. | ||
|
Bippzy
United States1466 Posts
On August 10 2012 11:12 ggrrg wrote: You raise a lot of valid points that would improve discussions - absolutely no question about that. However, you also made one of the worst mistakes one can do: generalizing. You made a baseless claim supported solely by anecdotal evidence. While you claim that you have experienced that German posters are condescending, I can just as well claim that German posters seem to be more intelligent on average than any other group on TL, which results in their posts often being perceived as condescending by the uneducated masses. I could just as well add that I have confirmed this fact on countless occassions since I've been on TL. Furthemore, since I am a veteran on TL compared to you my observations hold more merit than yours... and so on and so forth... Do not generalize based on nationality! Do not use stereotypes! You win. I come across wrong in that section and have added an addendum addressing your point. I was just using it as an example, not saying it was a concrete rule. Read the op again. On August 10 2012 11:14 LlamaNamedOsama wrote: The OP seems to be applying a helper-english essay framework to general argumentation, which is fine (after all, theses are ultimately core arguments of written works), but yeah, the actual standard structure of an argument is Claim (what you're arguing), Warrant (why what you're arguing is true), and Impact (why it matters). The "although" of the OP is just a teaching guide to help students focus on more substantial theses that actually respond to possible opposing claims, rather than going with the easy/obvious/blandly descriptive thesis, and in an actual structured argument, it would normally be where you signpost the argument that you are responding to. I disagree with the OP's burden of proof claim - while not a criminal court, the standard function of argumentation demands that every legitimate argument at the very least contain a claim, warrant, and impact - the burden of proof challenge is the demand that a person has not met the sufficient warrant for their claim, and it is always the burden of the arguer to support every claim that they make. It is true, though, that this sort of challenge is a weaker argument than simply providing a counterargument, since you're simply needling the opponent's claim rather than developing the substance of your own. In fact, "no warrant" responses are pretty much the weakest responses possible in a debate. You are much more educated on this topic than me, I'll admit that. When I set out to write this, most of these higher level thoughts never even crossed my mind. From the perspective of claim, warrant, and impact, I do understand why you can disagree with the burden of proof claim. But, as you pointed, the types of arguments with burden of proof do not have a warrant generally. Thanks for posting! I have much to think about, but I believe it may be that impact is irrelevant in a forum thread because the topic is already assumed to matter if there is a thread about. But claim and warrant, definitely. | ||
|
Dodgin
Canada39254 Posts
The same poster can go from "fuck painuser" in one thread to "STORM TOSS BOOM BOOM" in another(referring to parting :D) Tempted to go through Waxangel's posts to see if he ever posted " fuck painuser " because he's the only poster I have seen say " STORM TOSS BOOM BOOM " that I can remember. Anyway, on topic. I've had a mostly very positive experience on tl.net when arguing with another poster. Of course you also get the kind of people that are unreasonable, but I spend enough time here to be able to recognize their names and skip over their posts. If more posters followed your suggestions it would get even better around here, so hopefully people who argue in the manner you demonstrated will read this! On the topic of generalizing users based on country, I myself don't generalize based on country but by someones post count or if they have a special icon. I will usually only read someone's post in a big thread if it is a name I recognize, or they have a certain number of posts which makes me believe their post is worth reading. Usually this number for me is 1000, I know I shouldn't be skipping over low-post count users' posts but I do it anyway to save time and because I feel that those who contribute more to tl.net are the ones that I should be paying attention to. | ||
|
Rollin
Australia1552 Posts
.EDIT: Brohoof! /) | ||
|
jdseemoreglass
United States3773 Posts
When you find that rare poster who knows the obvious counter and knows you know the obvious counter and thus decides to respond with a compelling, unexpected argument, then you know you've hit upon gold. | ||
|
LlamaNamedOsama
United States1900 Posts
On August 10 2012 13:06 Bippzy wrote: You win. I come across wrong in that section and have added an addendum addressing your point. I was just using it as an example, not saying it was a concrete rule. Read the op again. You are much more educated on this topic than me, I'll admit that. When I set out to write this, most of these higher level thoughts never even crossed my mind. From the perspective of claim, warrant, and impact, I do understand why you can disagree with the burden of proof claim. But, as you pointed, the types of arguments with burden of proof do not have a warrant generally. Thanks for posting! I have much to think about, but I believe it may be that impact is irrelevant in a forum thread because the topic is already assumed to matter if there is a thread about. But claim and warrant, definitely. Impacts are always necessary for a sufficient argument, forum or not ^.^ - "why does it matter" doesn't just mean that both debaters care about the topic they're arguing about (otherwise it would be a moot point, since they obviously cared enough to engage in the discussion in the first place); rather, it refers to the conclusion that is drawn from the argument. Most of the time, the argument is simple enough that the impact is a mirror reflection of the claim (eg: if someone argued "claim: people should exercise more - warrant: exercising improves their health so they can live longer - impact: therefore, people should exercise more"), but it also operates implicitly to connect the "conclusion" of an argument to a broader point. To use an example you mentioned in the OP, if people were debating the role of ravens in the terran arsenal, the argument that ravens are not viable in late-game can have several different possible impacts: a person might say "therefore Ravens should be buffed," or they might say "Terran lacks reliable tier 3 units and is underpowered!" | ||
| ||
