Its pretty common tho For exemple, when you argue with people about immigration, if you bring up that in your city,immigrants are hard worker ann not troublemakers, there is always this one persone who say ''yeah ? Well what about this case happened years ago in another city ? This is the proof they are ALL violent'' Counter this argument and they will move the goal post all the time making it impossible to argue. Stuff like that
Whataboutism, formerly known as red herring lol. The most effective technique in my experience most often is something between the 1 and 2 - to ask them to clarify: how is the red herring relevant to the original topic, and when they answer - obviously with a fallacy - ask further, how is this fallacy relevant to the original topic. this way you keep the original topic constantly in the conversation and seemingly hear the other person's mind but without actually giving them the ground to distract the conversation, meanwhile it allows you to strengthen your own argument to the original topic.
Legit the only way I've ever won an argument (aside from making the opponent cry and say "go away" because i directly pointed out each and every fallacy in their argument)
1:40 Yes, we have to distinguish whether it is whataboutism or the attempt to look at the both sides of a coin... but that can be a problem. For instance, atheist can say that it is silly to believe in God without a good reason and his opponent says "what about a belief that there is no God?" atheist say "nuh-uh, that is a different topic! " and believer says "no, we are still talking about existence of God and our belief". The way i see it, believer is right and it is the same topic... but many atheists would argue that there are two different beliefs, so they are two different topics.
Isn’t accusing someone of whataboutism often used to deflect of your own shortcomings? Often I don’t get what is so bad about whataboutism . A crime of one country doesn’t cancel out the crime of another country. Both should go to trial. No exception.
Couldn't you have used a real example? As in, the actual words someone might use? I'm a bit slow, but it seemed that you just said, "you can argue against it with a pincer like this: when they say the whataboutism, remember your original point and use it to pincer them." You didn't properly explain, from what it seems to me.
are you german ? also please don't call it "X formerly Twitter", nobody calls it X and my neurons are triggered negatively whenever I hear somebody say this
I've actually never heard about 'whataboutism' but I see what you said and it sounds quite agreeable to me.
Its pretty common tho
For exemple, when you argue with people about immigration, if you bring up that in your city,immigrants are hard worker ann not troublemakers, there is always this one persone who say ''yeah ? Well what about this case happened years ago in another city ? This is the proof they are ALL violent''
Counter this argument and they will move the goal post all the time making it impossible to argue.
Stuff like that
@@fabiocontraolyeah, but what about when they don't say that
this channel is actually a hidden gem
Whataboutism, formerly known as red herring lol.
The most effective technique in my experience most often is something between the 1 and 2 - to ask them to clarify: how is the red herring relevant to the original topic, and when they answer - obviously with a fallacy - ask further, how is this fallacy relevant to the original topic. this way you keep the original topic constantly in the conversation and seemingly hear the other person's mind but without actually giving them the ground to distract the conversation, meanwhile it allows you to strengthen your own argument to the original topic.
Seems like RUclips recommended me a good channel for a change, subbed.
It would be nice to hear your thoughts about Gish gallop as well
your videos are very infortmative, you definitely need to be pushed out to more people
You should provide an example of something that can be mistaken for whataboutism.
Legit the only way I've ever won an argument (aside from making the opponent cry and say "go away" because i directly pointed out each and every fallacy in their argument)
1:40 Yes, we have to distinguish whether it is whataboutism or the attempt to look at the both sides of a coin... but that can be a problem. For instance, atheist can say that it is silly to believe in God without a good reason and his opponent says "what about a belief that there is no God?" atheist say "nuh-uh, that is a different topic! " and believer says "no, we are still talking about existence of God and our belief".
The way i see it, believer is right and it is the same topic... but many atheists would argue that there are two different beliefs, so they are two different topics.
But what about other unfair conversation techniques?????
Nice
Isn’t accusing someone of whataboutism often used to deflect of your own shortcomings?
Often I don’t get what is so bad about whataboutism .
A crime of one country doesn’t cancel out the crime of another country.
Both should go to trial. No exception.
Couldn't you have used a real example? As in, the actual words someone might use? I'm a bit slow, but it seemed that you just said, "you can argue against it with a pincer like this: when they say the whataboutism, remember your original point and use it to pincer them." You didn't properly explain, from what it seems to me.
rich quack
are you german ?
also please don't call it "X formerly Twitter", nobody calls it X and my neurons are triggered negatively whenever I hear somebody say this
XwX
He sounds german at least
Twix
@@ИапГоревич Raider
That’s a good example of whataboutism!