Fighting the Feilds of Strawmen

Today, we face a field rife with enemies. Hordes and hordes of them, each of them with a secret plan, an evil motive which need to be stopped before they invade our houses, take over the country, or plunge the world into chaos.
Like zombies, they mass together and invade us in hordes. They can be found everywhere, preying on our minds.
Beware of: the Straw man fallacy.

Get your pitchforks and torches folks! Distroying this one will be easy!

We must resist and fight this menace. Left unchecked, it takes our minds and makes it so that we cannot think. Thankfully, there is an anecdote, like a zombie, it flees when sunlight is shined on them.

The straw man fallacy occurs when the arguer sets up or assumes a simplified position which his opponent holds. Rushing upon the position with weapon raised high, the arguer hacks and chops the argument ‘til it lies destroyed on the floor.

I remember watching one congressman giving a speech on the floor of congress during the debates on Healthcare. He was distorting the Republican’s version of healthcare to the point where he was making a fool of himself.

“This is the Republican’s plan” he ranted. “DON’T GET SICK!” And if you do get sick, DIE QUICKLY!”
He repeated his point a few times (for laughs I hope, because he wasn’t doing himself any favors if he was serious) and then he sat down.
Can we move forward with such arguments? Can we come to agreement when one side is demonizing and simplifying the other side?
It’s satisfying to totally destroy someone’s argument. Sometimes, we want that so badly, that we misrepresent the other person’s side. Setting up a straw man, and blowing it up. Sure, it’s easy—that is why we see it all the time.
We are intelligent people. Sometimes the world isn’t simple and the arguments aren’t easy to refute. But we must not stoop to use straw men. Instead of giving a show of acting heroically and slashing the straw figures of our enemies, or, worse, become captured by the hordes of straw, let us do battle on a different side of the field, the field where the real people meet, where hearts are engaged and truth is discovered.

Debate Advice

Two days ago, a chapter of my life closed--the chapter of Team Policy debate. Last Wednesday regionals finished with an awards ceremony, and I went home with a box full of useless papers. I learned many, many lessons on argumentation and debate. Namely, the best debaters are not that different from the average debaters, and something else which escapes me.

Everyone should try debate. When I left debate camp last summer, I could feel the difference in my thinking. It was more analytical, sharper, and clearer. No, it wasn't perfect. I had a season of debate to hone it.

When I first saw a debate, I was overwhelmed. Here was my peers rolling words like 'solvencey' and 'inherency' off their lips like normal teens would use 'cool' or 'hip.' It took me several years from seeing that first debate to finally debate for myself. Debate is scary. The only way you will be able to do it is to jump right in, fully commit, and do it. Debate is a skill that you learn by doing.

I have been doing many tournaments lately. This is why I haven't been writing as much as I should.

Through the many debate tournaments, I learned some things through experience. They may help some people, other may just say "Duh... Dan, you were just supposed to know that." But if it helps you in your debate career, then this isn't a post wasted.

• Debates are won in the constructives. Why? Because that is where the arguments are made. The rebuttals only rebut and impact. Make your arguments powerful in the contructives.
• Debate is a competition with few rules. The ancient Greeks had few rules in their boxing matches. If I recall, the only rule was don't poke your opponent's eyes out. The only rules I know of in Debate is this: wear a suit, don't swear, don't kill your opponents, and talk about the resolution, and the judge is in charge. The rest is simply guidelines and ethics to win. (but the guidelines and ethics are so important, make them your rules to win.)
• the goal of debate is to convince the judge. Often, only one judge will be in the round. If one team can read the body language of that judge to figure out what kind of person they are, they will have an advantage over the other team because they can focus their arguments. Is the judge not flowing the arguments? Then you better make your arguments simple and concrete so that the arguments stay in their head. Does the judge seem laid back? Then go ahead and pull a few jokes. In short, do what you need to do to persuade that one individual.
• Use simple cards. The best cards in debate are ones which come from a credible source explaining why the reality is a certain way. Your top cards should be the cards which use simple language and which creates pictures in the listener's head. Better still is cards which uses original language or humor. These are the cards which remain in the judges head and they will understand.
• Yes, we are a bunch of nerds, but we still have glitches in logical thinking. Watch for logical fallacies in arguments. This makes your rebuttals easier. Instead of explaining and creating a clunky argument, point out the fallacies. You don't have to explain that the EPA is a credible organization, that is silly, simply point out the Ad Homium fallacy. They attacked the person instead of the arguments the person addressed.
• Have fun. This may sound like crass advice, but it is true. If you don't have fun, you will become burned out. You will miss the joy of arguing and you won't learn as much. Try to have fun in every round. I brought a smile to many judges and opponent's faces when I said at the end of the round:  "and remember judge, vote green, Jackson/Green."

Happy Tax Day!

In celebration of Tax Day, I wanted to share this video with you. I don't know if I agree with all of the solutions they propose, because I don't know that much about the pros and cons of a flat tax. but they present an interesting solution to the bloated tax system.

Hard-Knock Journalism

A  list of Journalism pointers, learned through the school of hard knocks.

• A poker face should also be called a journalist's face.
• Being interviewed is as scary as hell. It's a stranger listening to every word you say and any of it may be taken and printed in a place your mom, your neighbor and your neighbor's parrot will read it. A journalist must constantly remember that fact.
• Better pictures and interviews take place when the interviewee is relaxed.
• A journalist must soffen the interviewee's defenses and get them to open up at the begining of the interview.
• During an interview, a journalist must be honest, impartial, probing and reassuring. This is a contradiction. This is why they call interviewing an art.
• "Talking to a reporter is a matter of trust"~My Editor
• Always fact check

Question of Journalist's Death Answered

Roger Shermon, the famous Civil War general, once remarked "war is hell." This was slammed into me today by the news story today. It's a collision of Journalism, civilian deaths, and difficult decisions. A word of caution, it's a graphic set of videos.

Here is the story as Al Jazeera told it:



CNN had a different take on this story told here. Thankfully, it add balance to this situation. On a side note, it's interesting to see how they each presented a different set of facts to paint the situation how they wanted you to see it.

I really don't have much analysis about this situation, except that war is much, much more complicated than what I used to think was. I knew it was complicated before, but it is something about actually seeing it that brings it all into focus.

I would love to hear your comments on this situation. Please comment below.

Checking My Spiritual Signs

Recently, I have been asking myself the question, “So how are you, Dan, spiritually?”
“I’m saved, right?” I would answer to myself while running through all the sins I committed in the last two weeks in another part of my head “So everything must be fine.”
The question kept nagging me nonetheless and finally, another question came up: How do we determine how our spiritual well being? What do we look for?
Looking at this issue, I figure three methods of determining our spiritual state. Two of them lead to potential downfall and I have fallen into that kind of thinking at one point or another. Do we base it off how many times we didn’t sin, how many spiritual thrills this week, or something else?
If we are going to be good Christians, than we have to be good and not bad, i.e. sin. Although God doesn’t count it, we must keep a running tally in our head of the good and bad act we committed to determine where we are spiritually. Sinning more than usual? Hmmm, then you need work.
A legalist never really accepts the continual grace of God. For he must work not to break rules, and if he does break them, he thinks that God must surely be as hard on him as he on himself. “Sorry God, I screwed up again today. Forgive me, please. I don’t want to sin anymore. Thank you, amen”
We then have to try again, to do better. Then there is the focus on rules. The legalistic Christian will avoid the big sins by setting up a defense of rules, and then if they break those rules, a further wall of sub-rules to prevent them from breaking the first rules. When it is all done, a maze of rules binds the Christian in.
Rules, sin, legalism, and effort—the continual focus of looking at your sins is discouraging. Run from that. It creates emo Christians.
Another way a Christian may determine his spiritual health is to feel how he is doing. If the Christian determines his spiritual health by the “thrills” he gets, than that is equally corrosive.
When I was about eight or so, I remember hearing contemporary Christian music for the first time. I felt like really praising my Savior when that music of the spirit came on. I would raise my arms, and let the music be my praise to God. It had a beat and electric guitars and cool singers.
But when I listened to secular music for the first time (I had slow socialization growth), I caught myself raising my arms and singing whatever out. Jerking my hand down, I remember thinking, “Dan. What are you doing? This stuff isn’t of the spirit.”
The feel goodness can be often based on the externalities. Your spiritual health is based more on the quality of the worship band, or the charisma of the pastor or other feel good techniques than what is believed and taught. This is shallow.
The spiritual experience isn’t something I want to totally dismiss from the Christian experience; it is an important and wonderful part of Christianity. In addition, the rules and guidelines are important as well. The point I want to make is that they cannot be what we judge to determine who is a strong Christian.
So what determines spiritual health? Could it be the transformation? We were one way, and now that we have changed, the spiritual growth is determined by how much we are indifferent to the temptations of this world? What is the impact of that?
It also means we need to be improving, but that thought is a slippery slope into legalism if we focus on the rules.
No, Spiritual growth is determined on how much our eyes are on Jesus, how much we think about him, spend time with him, and desire him. It is a relationship of trust. If we look on him, through the failures of the flesh, and the dry spiritual times, we will grow.
No relationship is simply based only on ether rules or feelings. So to be very elementary about this, we have to ask the question, what does it mean to have a good relationship? Several things. To have a deepening relationship with someone means that you want to get to know them: how they react in certain situations, what they like and dislike, etc. I may be sticking my foot in my mouth, but the Bible says very little on the nuances of God’s character. We know the broad, generalizations, but we don’t know how God will orchestrate our life. We must spend time with him; talk with him to find that out for ourselves. We really cannot do this by hearing others talk about him.
You have probably experienced that awkward moment when you meet a close friend of your friend. Beaming, they inform you “Oh Dan has told me so much about you. It feels like I already know you!” But do they really? They might know a few of your quirks and they may make an educated guess about how you will react in certain situations, but they don’t really know you. They need to talk to you to hear your voice and spend time with you to discover your subtleties. The same goes with Christ.
Do you think that Jesus Christ can simply be reduced into a pile of cause and effect formulas? He is the most complex personality in the universe. Can we not try to discover that? Let’s stop examining our spirituality and instead focus on our Creator with worship—then and only then our spirituality is in the right place.