|
|
|
|
|
|
by phnofive
1948 days ago
|
|
|
I don’t think an author can ‘not even wrong’ intentionally - if it is intentional, then it would be something like a Gish gallop, which Sandifer describes another SSC essay as. I don’t necessarily agree, but I understand why she’d think so. |
|
|
A good example comes from Cialdini's "Influence". He describes a study where they had someone come up to somebody using a library copier and ask to use it. Compliance went up significantly if the asker gave a reason, even if that reason was, "because I need to make some copies." That statement obviously ads no new information; the circularity makes it invalid as an argument. But it's effective persuasion. It's not even wrong, because it doesn't rise to the level of trying to make a decent argument.
Another clear example is America's foremost bullshiter, Trump. He clearly doesn't care about being right. His goal is not to make an intellectually coherent argument. He cares about influence. Like Siskind, his goal is manipulation, not the shedding of light.