Neither have anyone elses! No one seems to know where or why or by whom oral fallacies originated, or what specific problem they were addressing.Quote:
None of your posts have addressed the actual issue of written vs oral fallacies
Trolls can intentionally use fallacies to discourage people in ways that can't happen in a spoken debate.Quote:
You claimed that oral vs written is different, particularly in the regards to fallacies.
Argument by fast talking, changing the subject, personal charm, argument by question - these are mainly about spoken debate, yet can happen in written debate in such a different way that they don't seem to be easily recognized. For example, argument by oral fast talking could be the same as multiple posters piling on new posts every few minutes, as their one lone opponent is trying to answer just one of them. Personal charm could be involved when members of a multiple posting gang are having a love fest among themselves. Could be very influential to an passerby reader.Quote:
Do you have any evidence, such as a fallacy that can only occur in one oral rather then written?
A troll can take only a few fallacies and multiply them to an extent that really fouls up a message board, far more than an oral debator could foul up one oral debate, let alone a series of them. One oral debate can't really "leak over into other discussions" the way written debates can and do. A troll can use ad hominem and needling alone to create a paranoid environment all through an entire message board.Quote:
How does a discussion on trolls even relate to the issue of oral vs written fallacies?
The on-going structure of a message board is completely different than any oral debate structure. When that's combined with the nameless, and faceless posters of a message board, it's a completely different ballgame. People can behave in entirely different ways depending on whether they are in front of a live audience, with their real name attached to their real face, or if they are sitting at home with their name, face and most of their personality completely hidden. But there's good reason the writer of my link referred to written debate as a "beautiful forum for ideas." Written debate takes the hindrance of the name and face away, and it takes away the hindrance of quick wit, which doesn't always equal intelligence. When people take time to think, to spend 24 or 48 hours allowing something to turn over in their mind before they post about it, they are often going to come up with something more profound than most oral debates have.