User Tag List

View Poll Results: Is the source or the argument more important to discerning the truth?

Voters
36. You may not vote on this poll
  • The source is paramount.

    1 2.78%
  • The source is a bit more important than the argument.

    2 5.56%
  • The source and the argument are equally important.

    10 27.78%
  • The argument is more important than the source.

    14 38.89%
  • The argument is paramount.

    9 25.00%
First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 96

  1. #21
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    source? why would anyone care about source?
    Only perhaps if I'm too lazy to care about it, I'll just be like "yeah, it seems like he knows what he's talking about, but I don't, so that doesn't mean much".

    Definitely the structure of the argument.

    More than anything, though, the motivation behind the argument. If the motivation is invalid to begin with, then the argument can be good and I still won't give it too much credit.

  2. #22
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xisnotx View Post
    source? why would anyone care about source?
    Only perhaps if I'm too lazy to care about it, I'll just be like "yeah, it seems like he knows what he's talking about, but I don't, so that doesn't mean much".

    Definitely the structure of the argument.

    More than anything, though, the motivation behind the argument. If the motivation is invalid to begin with, then the argument can be good and I still won't give it too much credit.
    Who would you want to be your lawyer if you somehow get into trouble - one who knows what they are doing and wins all the time, or one who always loses? Which one do you think is going to make the better argument for you?

  3. #23
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xisnotx View Post
    More than anything, though, the motivation behind the argument. If the motivation is invalid to begin with, then the argument can be good and I still won't give it too much credit.
    Isn't this part of what is meant by "source?"

    I agree with @Nicodemus that outside of the realms of mathematics and logic, where form is a guarantor of truth, ethos becomes a much more important factor in argumentation.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  4. #24
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sprinkles View Post
    Who would you want to be your lawyer if you somehow get into trouble - one who knows what they are doing and wins all the time, or one who always loses? Which one do you think is going to make the better argument for you?
    you're begging the question.

  5. #25
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xisnotx View Post
    you're begging the question.
    I am? Explain how.

    I'm asking a question. I never made an argument there to beg the question in.

    It's not an argument or rhetorical question. I'm actually asking you that question because I'd like to know.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    intp
    Posts
    214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sprinkles View Post
    What's a reasonable amount of scrutiny? And who said that anyone was wrong?

    Are you saying for example that you'd trust a company which has been in trouble many times for fraud and faulty products when they say 'this new product is 100% safe this time! we guarantee it!'

    Are you telling me that you aren't even a LITTLE more likely to check someone more thoroughly if they have a track record of lying, manipulating, being malicious, inventing data and taking things out of context as opposed to a source you already trust? If you are telling me that, I don't believe you.
    Not at all. I am as guilty of anyone else of judging the source over the idea. All I'm saying is that it is a poor practice, because good ideas can be overlooked and bad ones accepted when, if looked at objectively, this might not happen.

  7. #27
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dala View Post
    Not at all. I am as guilty of anyone else of judging the source over the idea. All I'm saying is that it is a poor practice, because good ideas can be overlooked and bad ones accepted when, if looked at objectively, this might not happen.
    Well I agree it should be avoided when possible which is why in my first post, I said that the source isn't pertinent in a perfect world. If everyone were honest and spoke of what they know, then source would be irrelevant.

    Source should be irrelevant in practice. In reality though it often does matter to us, in spite of how much it "shouldn't".

    Edit: and on that note, I voted that the argument is more important than the source. In a world where all sources were equal I'd pick the argument as paramount, but we don't actually have that world so I see my choice as the more accurate one.

  8. #28
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Isn't this part of what is meant by "source?"

    I agree with @Nicodemus that outside of the realms of mathematics and logic, where form is a guarantor of truth, ethos becomes a much more important factor in argumentation.
    I guess you could say so. From the op I got the sense that "source" meant more the "person". If by "source" it's meant "the motivation"...then yeah. It's ambiguous.

    Just to clear my position...paramount is the reason behind the argument..(not "logic reason") rather, reason as to why it's worthy of discussion. Are you interested in proving a point? Proving yourself right? Demonstrating your skills in debate? Then I have no want to talk to you.

    Or you actually interested in improving or promoting values/situations that you think are ideal? Are you more interested in the results? Then we can talk. From there, that'll lead to an evaluation of ideals and a plan of action. Right/wrong, logical/illogical doesn't come into it as much. It's not even an argument anymore, more a plan with points jockeying for priority.

    Lastly, the actual person or the institution he represents...Americanists, Religionists, Technologists, Realists, Westernists, Africanists...I have very little patience for.

  9. #29
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sprinkles View Post
    I am? Explain how.

    I'm asking a question. I never made an argument there to beg the question in.

    It's not an argument or rhetorical question. I'm actually asking you that question because I'd like to know.
    You're giving me a question with an obvious answer as if that'll prove the illogicalness of my previous answer.
    You're basically switching my reasoning from one context to another, and proving it false in the other context, and then concluding it's false in the first.

    To answer your question. The lawyer that wins.
    But it has nothing to do with what I was saying.

    If he knows what he's talking about, and I don't, then he gets credit.

  10. #30
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xisnotx View Post
    You're giving me a question with an obvious answer as if that'll prove the illogicalness of my previous answer.
    You're basically switching my reasoning from one context to another, and proving it false in the other context, and then concluding it's false in the first.

    To answer your question. The lawyer that wins.
    But it has nothing to do with what I was saying.

    If he knows what he's talking about, and I don't, then he gets credit.
    You're analyzing my motivations for doing something which is looking at me 'the source' and trying to figure out what you think I'm doing rather than answering the question.

    I think it was a pretty simple question, and I had no intent of switching anything or refuting any logic with it. I just was looking for a straight answer out of curiosity. you read something into it which was not there.

Similar Threads

  1. [ISTJ] Could the ISTJ be considered a Rational personality?
    By Delta223 in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 03-05-2013, 06:27 PM
  2. The Argument Of Rain
    By Liason in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 06-02-2010, 09:07 PM
  3. Australia is considering the approval of female genital mutilation
    By Lex Talionis in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 99
    Last Post: 05-30-2010, 08:30 PM
  4. 'The Bible is no longer considered part of the conversation'
    By Sniffles in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 172
    Last Post: 04-17-2009, 08:36 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO