Sorry Billy. You're adorable, but satire has needs. The National Review's Jonah Goldberg wants you to know that, while he remains a Doughy Pantload, he is not immune to hu-mon feelings, and he really did empathize with Jimmy Kimmel's harrowing story about his son's first day of life, with the heart defect and all the surgery, because Jonah Goldberg is a hu-mon father himself. Jonah Goldberg would never dream of calling Jimmy Kimmel a
Offhand, the only drawbacks to empathy that I can think of ,is when it is misplaced -- like the people who insist upon putting people clothes on their dog.
Goldberg is right. Hitler's problem isn't that he hated too much. It's that he loved too much. Probably had a "Make Love not War ( unless to protect der Volk)" bumper sticker on his Prius. His supporters no doubt put "Adolph Hitler reLOVEution" stickers on theirs. If he'd only hated a little more all this Holocaust business could have been avoided.
Or speculating about how sad poor, poor Melania must be, trapped in a loveless marriage with a serial sexual predator whose crimes she has always denied or enabled.
A fallacious appeal to pity is an argument that uses pity to distract from the real issue. For example, claiming an embezzler shouldn't go to prison because she's a single mother and uses a wheelchair, or that my co-worker deserves the last donut because he had a really crappy day. It's different from an appeal to compassion, where the emotion -- caring about the medical needs of children -- is entirely relevant to the issue.
Also, as I note, you're banned for terrible logic: you name one logical fallacy, misapply it, and then follow it with an absurd, patently false claim that liberals are all rich, with cherry-picked examples. The readers, owners, and writers at this blog are virtually all liberal in their politics, but not millionaires.The premise is patently false, and you know it.
You may wish to look at #5 of our commenting rules, which states the moderators can ban you for being irritating. As a PhD in Rhetoric, I find your misuse of basic logic extremely irritating, and you are not welcome here. (And no, that's not a fallacious appeal to an authority. That's a very specific claim about my qualifications in rhetoric.)
-- Dok Zoom, Yr Friendly Neighborhood Comments Moderator
Argument from Pity is a term I like to use when I see an Argument from Pity Which I do almost every time a "liberal" State shtupper opens his mouth.So it is really just a made up term you use to denigrate the opposing argument; not actually "logical", more "rhetorical". Which is fine, and probably wins you praise from your similarly-minded friends. Maybe they even think it is "sophisticated"? And you like that?Yeah, we could use a counter "Argument from Indifference" or (more fun, since, like yours, it imputes motive) "Argument from Cruelty". But that would kind of legitimize the entire train, wouldn't it? Look, you're probably a nice enough guy and we'd enjoy a beer, but really, once you are past the teens, this isn't a sound argument.
Ayn Rand is literary proof that the words of assholes, delivered with a suitably phallocentric spin, can not only generate more assholes but also spur them to aspire to government where they can form a anal singularity, sucking all goodness and human feeling into its gaping stink-maw and regurgitating trickle-down economic theory and healthcare cuts.
Offhand, the only drawbacks to empathy that I can think of ,is when it is misplaced -- like the people who insist upon putting people clothes on their dog.
Hey, I don't dress my dog up because I think he's cold. I dress my dog up because it's HILARIOUS. (And it irritates my husband.)
Goldberg is right. Hitler's problem isn't that he hated too much. It's that he loved too much. Probably had a "Make Love not War ( unless to protect der Volk)" bumper sticker on his Prius. His supporters no doubt put "Adolph Hitler reLOVEution" stickers on theirs. If he'd only hated a little more all this Holocaust business could have been avoided.
Or speculating about how sad poor, poor Melania must be, trapped in a loveless marriage with a serial sexual predator whose crimes she has always denied or enabled.
I still think the babby looks like Letterman.
Remember, this is the guy that in no uncertain terms called out the anti-vaxx clowns. I am sure he's used to irrational , hateful vitriol.
Way to pretend to miss the point!
So you're saying it isn't the Argument from Pity? If it isn't, pray. what is?
Argument from Pity is a term I like to use when I see an Argument from Pity Which I do almost every time a "liberal" State shtupper opens his mouth.
A fallacious appeal to pity is an argument that uses pity to distract from the real issue. For example, claiming an embezzler shouldn't go to prison because she's a single mother and uses a wheelchair, or that my co-worker deserves the last donut because he had a really crappy day. It's different from an appeal to compassion, where the emotion -- caring about the medical needs of children -- is entirely relevant to the issue.
Also, as I note, you're banned for terrible logic: you name one logical fallacy, misapply it, and then follow it with an absurd, patently false claim that liberals are all rich, with cherry-picked examples. The readers, owners, and writers at this blog are virtually all liberal in their politics, but not millionaires.The premise is patently false, and you know it.
You may wish to look at #5 of our commenting rules, which states the moderators can ban you for being irritating. As a PhD in Rhetoric, I find your misuse of basic logic extremely irritating, and you are not welcome here. (And no, that's not a fallacious appeal to an authority. That's a very specific claim about my qualifications in rhetoric.)
-- Dok Zoom, Yr Friendly Neighborhood Comments Moderator
So you both irritate your husband AND laugh at your dog. You know, for some reason I don't think I want to empathize with you.
That wouldn't be empathy, that would be anthropomorphism.
Goldberg has no idea that liberal fascism is an oxymoron either, yet that didn't stop him from writing an entire book on the subject.
Argument from Pity is a term I like to use when I see an Argument from Pity Which I do almost every time a "liberal" State shtupper opens his mouth.So it is really just a made up term you use to denigrate the opposing argument; not actually "logical", more "rhetorical". Which is fine, and probably wins you praise from your similarly-minded friends. Maybe they even think it is "sophisticated"? And you like that?Yeah, we could use a counter "Argument from Indifference" or (more fun, since, like yours, it imputes motive) "Argument from Cruelty". But that would kind of legitimize the entire train, wouldn't it? Look, you're probably a nice enough guy and we'd enjoy a beer, but really, once you are past the teens, this isn't a sound argument.
Ayn Rand is literary proof that the words of assholes, delivered with a suitably phallocentric spin, can not only generate more assholes but also spur them to aspire to government where they can form a anal singularity, sucking all goodness and human feeling into its gaping stink-maw and regurgitating trickle-down economic theory and healthcare cuts.
I'll thank you in advance to include a #triggerwarning for any future posts that include references to Jonah Goldberg reproducing.