[MD] Knockouts

[ian glendinning]

Mike, Matt, Scott,

Ha, I wish I'd read that before my latest reply to Scott. Introducing
new points to argue against, rather than the ones I've actually put
up. Sounds familiar. :-)

Anyway, Scott'll be glad to hear,  I don't consider that a "knockout"
or a "win" of any kind. The point is not to win, but to agree - to
accomodate dynamic difference without losing the differences between
parties. (Read my recent posts on Mary Parker-Follett, which Dilbert
clearly hasn't.)

I think you'll find Dilbert's Hitler allusion is to deliberately point
out ironically the misguidedness of his (humourous) suggestion. (Which
brings us back to humour in a "free" society again ....)

Ian

On 2/8/06, Michael Hamilton <thethemichael at gmail.com> wrote:
> This is from the blog of Scott Adams, cretor of Dilbert
> (http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2005/12/index.html)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> The problem with debates on the Internet is that there's no objective
> way to judge who won – no equivalent of a knockout. In fact, there's
> not even a word that means knockout when you're talking about an
> exchange of ideas. But there should be. I recommend using the word
> "knockout."
>
> I always consider myself a winner by knockout whenever someone
> distorts my point to something ridiculous and then argues against the
> ridiculous thing. That seems like an acknowledgement that my real
> point is unassailable. Why else would someone need to invent a whole
> new point to argue against?
>
> Knockout!
>
> Likewise, when anyone brings into the debate Hitler, or the slippery
> slope, or guilt by association arguments, I consider that a victory by
> knockout too. And if someone ignores a simple and direct question,
> that's the cleanest victory there is.
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> This is a useful subject to consider, and I think Adams is pretty much
> on the mark, with the exception of Hitler. Considering that
> Hitler-ishness is something that only happens in the past strikes me
> as dangerous. However, we should obviously scrutinise any analogies to
> Hitler very carefully before recognising them as relevantly similar.
>
> Regards,
> Mike
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>