NIXON, that straw man, AGAIN

[Markekohut]

Also called " The Aunt Sally" argument in the UK.  
One classic use of it, say some, is Nixon's CHECKERS speech..." I won't give our dog back"....

folk etymology sez the origin of the phrase 
May be men who stood outside courthouses with straw in their shoes indicating their willingness
To testify as wanted.........

Latterly, two kinds of misarguing have been identified: Kinda total misrepresentation and selective 
Misrepresentation: taking a part of an argument and slamming THAT as the whole case. Been found pervasive in public talk of politicians, sez some polyscientist. 


Sent from my iPad

On Mar 27, 2014, at 4:24 PM, malignd at aol.com wrote:

> Thank you for this.
>  This is called a straw man argument.
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Markekohut <markekohut at yahoo.com>
> To: Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net>
> Cc: P-list List <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Thu, Mar 27, 2014 11:48 am
> Subject: Re: Saunders on TRP
> 
> Seconded. 
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> On Mar 27, 2014, at 10:50 AM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
> 
> > The essence of most crappy arguments designed to dismiss or discredit what 
> someone says is by misrepresenting it.  This is called a straw man argument. The 
> quote below is the only place where Saunders mentions the word Buddhist. He in 
> no way says or implies that Pynchon is a Buddhist but that  he, GS, perceives 
> writing  which includes the" infinity of forms" that " the world is capable of 
> producing" to have " something... about this approach" that is Buddhist. To say 
> a writing style has traits which one perceives as Buddhist is far from claiming 
> the writer is a Buddhist and his point is completely different. His point has to 
> do with the openness and diversity of forms that gives Pynchon's work a sense of 
> really reflecting the perceived complexity and diversity of life experience in 
> the world. The rest of what amalice tries to put in GS's mouth( angels, 
> conversion)  is just gluing wings to the straw man.
> > 
> > "In Pynchon, anything is fair game—if it is in the world, it can go in the 
> book. To me there is something Buddhist about this approach, which     seems to 
> say that since the world is capable of producing an infinity of forms, the novel 
> must be capable of accommodating an infinite  number of forms. All aesthetic 
> concerns (style, form, structure) answer this purpose: Let in the world. "     
> George Saunders
> > 
> > As far as gushy and not deep or critical, this is not a critique, a review, or 
> an essay. It is a very brief statement of qualities that GS finds unique and 
> engaging and transformative. In other words what we have here is a short 
> description of why he likes Pynchon's work, and really nothing more. 
> > 
> > On Mar 27, 2014, at 8:41 AM, alice malice wrote:
> >> ... But what he 
> >> has to say is useless beceasue he's wrong.
> >> 
> >> The notion that Pynchon is a Buddhist or some such
> >> nonsense, or that he is somehow aloof or beyond the western problems
> >> his characters wrestle with, that he is an angel who wrestles with
> >> angels and defeats them by some kind of Eastern conversion seems to
> >> miss the point.
> >> 
> >> As Elvis sez, We're caught in a trap....
> >> -
> >> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
> > 
> > -
> > Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
> -
> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20140327/7e9501ce/attachment.html>