![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
One of the many irritations of Arguments on the Internet is the tendency to take a slogan to 11, then argue that. (More formally, a strawman argument.) Two examples.
In Atlanta recently, the police intervened and stopped a carjacking. The victim was an Atlanta councilman who had voted to "defund the police." The argument was that the councilman was a hypocrite. Here's the thing - people voting to "defund the police" aren't actually for abolishing police. They're for taking some of the money we give to police and using it in other programs to reduce crime. (Like, getting homeless people off of the street or treating drug addicts.)
The other example is the current argument over whether the COVID-19 virus came from a Chinese lab. First, saying it came from a lab does not mean it was man-made. It could have been a natural virus being studied in a lab. Second, there is simply no evidence that the virus escaped from a lab. Now, "no evidence" does NOT mean "it didn't happen." It just means, "no evidence that it did." Looking for evidence is reasonable - jumping to the conclusion that "China did it!" is not.
In Atlanta recently, the police intervened and stopped a carjacking. The victim was an Atlanta councilman who had voted to "defund the police." The argument was that the councilman was a hypocrite. Here's the thing - people voting to "defund the police" aren't actually for abolishing police. They're for taking some of the money we give to police and using it in other programs to reduce crime. (Like, getting homeless people off of the street or treating drug addicts.)
The other example is the current argument over whether the COVID-19 virus came from a Chinese lab. First, saying it came from a lab does not mean it was man-made. It could have been a natural virus being studied in a lab. Second, there is simply no evidence that the virus escaped from a lab. Now, "no evidence" does NOT mean "it didn't happen." It just means, "no evidence that it did." Looking for evidence is reasonable - jumping to the conclusion that "China did it!" is not.
