• mildlyusedbrain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    It is - it’s a super affirmative position. It takes an extreme position within the sphere it’s trying to criticize to make an exaggerated point to attack. It’s literally a classic strawman.

    Your follow up is in the same vein. Its empty rhetoric

    • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      That’s called Reductio Ad Absurdum and is a valid, classic form of argumentation. If you take their premises to their logical conclusion, the result is absurd, so their premises must be false.

      You don’t get to arbitrarily limit where a premise gets applied in order to pick and choose which conclusions to stand by. It isn’t a strawman to show that someone’s premises lead to conclusions that they would disagree with, that’s literally the point.